David Gould, the town’s director of Energy and Environment, and Michael Cahill, climate resiliency and sustainability planner, briefed the Select Board on Nov. 18 about active climate, energy and resiliency projects and possible funding approaches.

Gould said the division manages roughly 6,000 acres of open space and 35 miles of trails and has secured about $96 million in grants or leveraged funding since 2001. He described staffing (10 employees, including a grant‑funded energy advocate) and recent accomplishments, including energy conservation measures that saved approximately $25,192 in annual energy costs and reduced vehicle greenhouse gas emissions by 91 metric tons per year.

Cahill summarized the climate action adaptation plan and 62 identified actions across five focus areas (buildings/energy/infrastructure; health/safety/preparedness; natural systems; transportation; waste). He listed 22 active projects aligned to the plan, including a downtown resiliency project (engineering/design for ~3,000 linear feet), a flood‑insurance cost‑of‑risk economic simulator (CZM funding of $294,495 for 500 downtown properties), a tree‑planting pilot (DCR funding $65,000 to plant 21 trees in a heat‑island area), clean‑tech pilots and an EV charging expansion (14 existing public Level‑2 chargers; 12 additional chargers in Downtown pending). The division also reported obtaining ~$35,500 in state rebates for municipal EV fleet purchases and a $30,000 Eversource grant for a full fleet assessment covering 320 town vehicles.

On funding, staff outlined options: continued grant-seeking, land‑trust partnerships for land acquisition, and rethinking the environmental affairs fund (the fund has been leveraged to secure grant awards; since inception it has supported leveraged funding). The board discussed district improvement financing and other capital strategies for larger projects. Members asked for a prioritized project list with economic and payback analyses; staff committed to return with a prioritized list and supporting numbers in early January.

Select Board members expressed support for maintaining momentum on climate projects and suggested focusing on projects with measurable near‑term returns if large state or federal grants are uncertain.

No board action was taken; staff will return with additional analyses and a recommended prioritization.