Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stonebridge Rescind topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Templeton committee asks town meeting to rescind two Stone Bridge projects and free $83,337
Summary
The Community Preservation Committee voted to request a town meeting warrant article to rescind two long-unused Stone Bridge projects, which would revert $83,337.21 to the fund sources. The committee discussed the town's efforts to reopen the bridge as a roadway and limits on using CPA funds for road work.
The Templeton Community Preservation Committee voted unanimously to request a warrant article at town meeting to rescind two previously funded Stone Bridge projects and return $83,337.21 to the original funding sources.
Committee Chair John (chair name not provided) said an ad hoc committee led by Mark Muschetti has studied options to reopen the bridge and has received preliminary support from a rural bridge authority for a reduced-scope standard. That progress prompted the committee to recommend asking voters whether they want to rescind the two CPF (community preservation) projects dedicated to a walking bridge and related uses and instead free the money for other purposes.
The nut of the discussion was fiscal and legal eligibility: committee members repeatedly stressed that Community Preservation Act–style funds cannot be used for ordinary roadway reconstruction. The committee noted earlier advisory votes showing some residents wanted to keep the way open as a road, which changes how CPA-eligible projects could be used. "It might be prudent for us to ask the voters whether they wanna close these two accounts out," the chair said, explaining the process requires a town-meeting vote.
Committee members asked whether rescinding the projects would preclude future, properly scoped applications. Members were told rescinding would return the funds to their source buckets (open space, recreation, undesignated) and that new, more narrowly tailored projects could be proposed later if the town selects a different approach (for example, a historic-stone-bridge restoration if it meets state hydrologic standards). Bob, the town DPW director, and other staff will supply technical details to the select board and to town meeting voters in the article.
The committee approved the motion to request the warrant article by roll-call vote: Dennis (yes), George (yes), Mike (yes), Gary (yes), Candace (yes), Joanne (yes). The committee instructed staff to draft the article for the select board and to be prepared to answer questions at town meeting about what CPA funds can and cannot finance.
The committee also discussed next steps if the town chooses to pursue reopening the bridge to vehicular traffic, noting that the rural bridge authority had provided only preliminary sign-off for a reduced standard and that hydrologic and engineering constraints remain.
The committee will send a draft article to the select board and present information to town voters at the approved meeting.
