Residents and board members press for review of downtown parking‑sticker contract

Members of the Select Board and Finance Committee questioned the value and negotiation process for a multi‑year parking‑sticker contract that downtown stakeholders say was supposed to reduce costs.

The chair reopened a prior conversation about the sticker contract and said the committee had earlier added the item to its action list for review. Several members said outsourcing sticker sales and enforcement had not produced the promised savings and that contract terms (including a 90‑day average and minimums) could make the town pay more when ticketing declines.

One participant (identified in the meeting as Dean) raised an allegation that someone involved had an interest in the vendor. The claim prompted a suggestion to have legal staff do a “fine‑tooth‑comb” review of the contract and explore whether the town can renegotiate terms or, if necessary, seek remedies.

Kathy (speaker 7) urged a holistic look at the parking program, including enforcement staff costs, to compare total town spending before concluding on contract value. "When we put the sticks in, now we're getting parking enforcement on streets where we did not get parking enforcement before," she said, noting that enforcement coverage improved although the financial balance was unclear.

Staff said the first step is to ask the town’s legal counsel to review the contract and return with options for amendment or termination where feasible. The committee asked staff to seek a report on contract terms and to explore whether the town can negotiate a better deal or prepare alternatives to the current contractor before the contract expires.

What happens next: staff will ask legal to review the contract terms and come back with options to renegotiate, amend or otherwise reduce town exposure; the committee may consider competitive alternatives or contract amendments before the current five‑year term ends.