Charlestown outlines breachway repair costs and debates staffing, drone program and equipment upgrades

Steve (Department head, GIS) updated the budget committee on emergency work at the town’s breachway, the grant‑funded engineering and outreach that preceded December’s storm damage, and a longer funding shortfall for a permanent repair.

He said a temporary repair was permitted and installed after the storms; that work preserved enough information from earlier design work paid for with a municipal resiliency program grant and allowed emergency fixes, but it is not a permanent solution. “The repair is a temporary repair. It's not designed to last necessarily,” Steve said.

The engineering overview matters because the town faces a large funding gap to finish a lasting repair and to dredge the channel. Steve described a roughly $4 million need to complete wall repair and dredging for a substantive project that addresses the channel and a full reconstruction on the west wall that could total about $10 million when capstones and specialized rockwork are included. He also noted a previously discussed federal funding possibility that shrank from $5.5 million to $1.1 million and is currently held up by a federal budget freeze; CRMC has earmarked $2 million for dredging in 2026.

Steve described how the pilot repair changed beach profiles and sediment transport; a delta formed and later shifted, creating a temporarily larger beach on the west side. He said the engineered core and capstone approach is necessary for long‑term stability because large, interconnected capstones and a properly built core slow flow and trap sand. He warned that repeated large storms could again move material and re‑expose vulnerabilities.

The committee also discussed the town’s drone and GIS capabilities. Steve said the drone program supports search‑and‑rescue and environmental monitoring and has been used in rescues and to produce imagery that helps win grant funding. The department runs multiple drones and keeps one ready for rapid call‑outs; batteries and firmware require active maintenance and readiness. Steve described operational limits: “If 1 crashes, we've got a backup. I always have the 1 here, and I always have the other 1 at my house. So I always have 1 at 02:00 in the morning.”

Members debated creating a new assistant position to back up GIS/drone duties. Steve said the budget proposal included a $58,000 full‑time line but he recommended a lower entry level or phased approach to begin the role at a lower cost. Committee discussion covered union contract placement (CPMA), probationary periods, town office space limits and whether to train a police officer for drone duties; some members warned against moving drone operations into the police unit because of public‑perception risks and operational priorities.

Capital equipment needs discussed included replacing an older flight platform (matrix) and upgrading an RTK receiver used for high‑accuracy surveys and accident reconstructions. Steve said the RTK/receiver market offers an alternative hemisphere product that would interoperate with existing handheld units at roughly $22,000, and the estimated professional‑services work for internal GIS applications was reduced in the budget from about $13,800 to $10,000.

The committee asked staff to return with options: lower‑cost or part‑time staffing alternatives, a clearer breakdown of equipment replacement timing and costs, and ideas for mutual‑aid agreements or cost‑recovery for calls from neighboring jurisdictions.

Ending: Councilors acknowledged the GIS/drone unit’s utility for emergency response and environmental monitoring and asked staff to refine cost and staffing options to present before the budget is finalized.