May 26, 2026

“Motion by Ms. Dowd that the Select Board authorize moving forward with design of the four-lane reconstruction program estimated at roughly $13M. Second: Mr. Keane. Mr. Levy noted his preference for a four-lane plan, though opposes the additional aspects of the proposed concept. Ms. Frail stated that she believes next steps to be binary, to which Ms. King confirmed and added that the Department of Public Works needed an approval to embark on design. Approved 4-1, with Mr. Levy opposed..” (Motion: Dowd, second: Keane)

Read it in the official minutes, page 8 (PDF)

“Motion by Ms. Dowd that the Select Board vote to not appoint Zachary Wallack to serve as an Associate Member on the Zoning Board of Appeals for a term to expire on June 30, 2027. Mr. Levy asked if Ms. Dowd believed the applicant was uncivil. Ms. Dowd replied that she did not believe it proper to discuss the specifics of an individual's character in open session, to which Mr. Levy believed they were based on the nature of Ms. Dowd's remarks and her objection to the appointment. Mr. Dermody noted that he spoke to the applicant today and believed him qualified, and was unaware of the context that Ms. Dowd had referenced in her objection to the appointment. He stated that he was supportive of the appointment. Mr. Keane stated concerns with the appointment process and that a Board member's reservations about an appointment should be handled prior to open session and that a member's reservation should be respected by the member making said recommendation, as has been past practice. Mr. Levy disagreed with Mr. Keane's assessment that this process was established past practice. He noted that he believes his prior reservations were not handled in this manner. Ms. Frail noted her concern about having this sort of discussion in open session as it could serve as a chilling effect on committee recruitment and retention. She highlighted the need to protect the privacy of volunteers. Mr. Levy stated that he was not the member requesting this conversation be moved to the regular agenda, to which Ms. Frail noted that another member moved it to the regular agenda because they believed their reservations about the applicant were not adequately resolved. Mr. Levy voiced his concern that one member's reservations could effectively be a veto on appointments. Mr. Keane believed that this practice would be better described as a member's reservation being courteously observed and that this is a past practice of the Board during his tenure. Mr. Dermody voiced his disagreement with Mr. Keane's opinion. Second: Mr. Keane. Mr. Levy asked if there is a process concern as to how appointments are being handled. Mr. Keane stated that he was concerned that staff were not being included in the interview process and that it appeared the candidate was notified of his recommended appointment before the standard Town process by which staff notifies recommended appointees. Ms. Frail reiterated that the specific appointment was the focus of this discussion and that the appointment process could be discussed as a separate agenda item at a future meeting. Mr. Levy believed he had not heard a clear reason why the appointment was not being supported and voiced additional concern over the potential for members of the public to perceive the flagging process and veto without recourse. Ms. Frail reiterated that the past practice had been for the Board members to treat concerns brought by peers with courtesy and remove an applicant from consideration. She noted that in the past, nominations were temporary held while concerns were discussed between the Vice Chair and the member that flagged a concern. She further stated that she did not wish to discuss specific concerns over a specific applicant's character or fitness to serve in public. She concluded by restating the topic at hand being relative to the specific nomination as opposed to the appointment process. Mr. Levy stated that he did not believe the processes defined by the other members as past practices were relayed to him. Ms. Frail responded that she would be happy to have a conversation about process at a later meeting under a distinct agenda item. She noted that the two issues were the appointment at hand and the process by which the appointment was placed before the Board despite a concern raised by another Board member. Mr. Levy concluded that he has still not understood there to be a specific objection raised by his colleagues relative to the nomination before the Board. Approved 3-2, with Mr. Levy and Mr. Dermody opposed..” (Motion: Dowd, second: Keane)

Read it in the official minutes, page 10 (PDF)