Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the River Road Resiliency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select Board debates whether to proceed with $427,000 River Road resiliency grant as staff capacity strains
Summary
The Climate Change Resiliency Committee urged the town to move forward with a $427,000 state grant to study options to protect River Road, while staff warned limited in‑house capacity and grant timing mean parts of the scope may be impractical this fiscal year. The board deferred a final decision for more detail and further review.
The Select Board heard competing recommendations over a $427,000 state grant aimed at an alternatives analysis for River Road resiliency.
Liz Callahan, chair of the town’s Climate Change Resiliency Committee, urged action and described the problem bluntly: "This is no longer a future problem. It's a present and escalating one." She told the board the grant — which the town has accepted — could buy engineering analysis, regulatory engagement and options that would position the town to respond more effectively to future storm or erosion events.
Town staff, however, cautioned that the work is frontloaded in the first grant year and that the town lacks sufficient in‑house capacity to manage the procurement, coordinate engineers, track deliverables and administer grant compliance within the current fiscal window. Staff outlined three options discussed with the grantor: withdraw from the grant, rescope tasks to fit the fiscal‑year dollars already allocated, or proceed and hire outside project management support. Callahan said the CCRC has recommended using up to 10% of grant administrative funds and the $60,000 match to hire a managing consultant (for example a regional planning commission) to run the project under town oversight.
Board members pressed staff on the risks of accepting the grant and failing to meet milestones, and on whether rescoping the grant would still meet the award’s intent. Staff reported the state will allow scope changes only if the revised work fits the original fiscal‑year dollar allocations; that constraint limits how much of the original scope can be moved into the second year. The board expressed concern about overstretching staff and potentially failing grant commitments.
Rather than take a vote, the board agreed to revisit the item at its next meeting to receive a more concrete proposal on what could be accomplished in year one, whether hiring a managing consultant is feasible within the allowable administrative funds, and how the town would manage procurement and oversight if it proceeds. No final decision was made at the meeting.
