SHERBORN IS A GREEN COMMUNITY!

I am very happy to announce that Sherborn has officially been designated a Green Community! We are now eligible to receive a grant in the amount of $137,450 to be used for energy efficiency improvements in Town facilities. The grant is subject to successful submission of an application indicating what the funds will be used for. Most of it will consist of projects that have been identified in the Energy Reduction Plan which was one of the five components of our application for designation.The other four criteria that we had to meet were to allow an alternative energy facility to be developed by right (accomplished by creating a solar photovoltaics overlay district at the Town landfill via a Zoning Bylaw amendment approved at Town Meeting in April), allow such a facility to be allowed through an expedited permitting process of 12 months or less (we provided for 6 months), to adopt a fuel efficient vehicle policy (ours was adopted by both the Board of Selectmen and the School Committee) and to adopt of the Stretch Energy Code (this optional building code section that requires a higher standard of energy efficiency was also adopted at Town Meeting in April).

In addition to the grant funds, the Town will receive a solar trash compactor with a recycling attachment, as well as four  street signs indicating that the town is a Green Community.

Perhaps the biggest benefit is that energy efficiency improvements made with the grant funds will results in lower energy costs in the future. This will save the Town additional money while also reducing carbon emissions that contribute to global climate change.

It should be noted that the source of funds for Green Community grants is not state tax revenues, but rather it is proceeds from the carbon credits purchased though auctions by emitters of carbon through the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in which Massachusetts participates along with other New England and Mid-Atlantic states.

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BYLAW AND FUNDING

Last week, Town Meeting voters approved both the new Stormwater Management Bylaw and funding up to $400,000 through the State Revolving Fund (SRF) at a 2% interest rate. The state loan had been approved subject to Town approval at Town Meeting and then at Town Election. Both of these are required elements of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Town Election is Tuesday, May 10.

The SRF funding will be used for a number of projects. These include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Mapping -- The existing Town-owned stormwater management system (i.e. catch basins, manholes, culverts, detention basins, leaching galleys, etc.) will be mapped in Geographic Information System format. In the process of creating these maps, an added benefit will be the creation of a new set of Assessor's Maps. 
• Inspections -- All elements of the Town system will be inspected to determine its condition and to identify possible illicit discharges.
• Sampling --  The water discharged from all outfalls will be sampled in both dry and wet conditions. This will help determine where additional treatment or system upgrades are necessary.
• Pollution Prevention --  A stormwater pollution prevention plan will be prepared for all regulated Town facilities including the Police and Fire Stations, CMD Garage, Town Hall, and Library.
• Operation and Maintenance -- An operation and maintenance plan for the stormwater system will be developed.
• Phosphorus Management -- Phosphorus has become a pollutant of increasing concern because it encourages excessive plant growth and results in an imbalance in surface water ecosystems. A plan to address phosphorus discharges will be prepared.
• Identify Grants -- Grants may be available to help offset the costs of the program and/or to fund improvements to the stormwater management system. Such grants will be identified as part of the program.

Protection of both surface and groundwater resources is critical to the future of Sherborn, and has therefore always been a high priority. This program is the next step in our ongoing effort to protect these resources.

STRETCH CODE INFO SESSION IN SHERBORN

Speaking of the Stretch Code (see post below), there will be a presentation about the Stretch Code on January 26, 2010 at 7:00 at Town Hall.  Mr. Michael Berry, Project Manager for the Massachusetts New Homes with Energy Star Program, will be present at the public forum to provide an overview of the new Stretch
Energy Code and answer questions from the public. More information will be posted as it becomes available. In the mean time, a "question and answer" document about the stretch code is available on the State web site and can be accessed here.

STRETCH CODE

No, this is not a new law attempting to prevent injuries by requiring that you stretch before exerting yourself! Rather, it is an optional part of the State Building Code that requires a greater degree of energy efficiency than the standard code. One major difference for new construction is that it requires a performance-based test rather than just a prescriptive list of items that must be done in order to pass the test. Since one of the requirements is a blower test to identify air leaks in the structure, additions and renovations would still be built according to prescriptive measures (and those measures will apply only to the addition or renovation).

While the stretch code was initially intended to provide about 20% greater efficiency than the standard code, the standard code has also changed so the difference has been narrowed to some degree. It should also be noted that what is now the stretch code is scheduled to become the standard code by 2013. However, a new stretch code may also be created by that date that will maintain a margin of greater efficiency over the standard Building Code.

As noted in an earlier post, adopting of the stretch code is one of the required elements in order to be designated as a Green Community. Some have questioned how much extra it might cost to build in compliance with the stretch code. The real answer is that it will actually cost less to build according to the stretch code when energy savings are taken into account. The initial cost will be greater, but that difference will be made up relatively quickly and as energy costs rise, the payback time is reduced. Sixty four communities have adopted the stretch code as of November 19, 2010. Fifty three communities have been designated as Green Communities so far.

It should be noted that upon designation as a Green Community, the Town is notified of a dollar amount in grant funding for which it is eligible. It can use the funds to implement energy efficiency measures. The amount of the grant generally ranges between $125,000 and $175,000.

SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC FACILITY FOR SHERBORN?

In a previous post, I discussed the five criteria needed in order to become a designated "Green Community." Two of those criteria can be met with a single amendment to the Zoning Bylaw. The amendment would allow a solar photovoltaic electrical generation facility to locate by right (that is, without requiring a special permit) somewhere in Town and to do so with an "expedited permitting" process that would result in a permit within 12 months of application.

The type of facility that must be allowed needs to have a minimum capacity of 250 kilowatts. It is estimated that such a facility would require about an acre of land. Both the Energy Committee and Planning Board have been working on a warrant article that, if passed at Annual Town Meeting next April, would meet the 2 criteria.

The State has provided a model bylaw that contains most of the technical language that needs to be included in the bylaw. While decisions still need to be made about the exact proposal, what has been discussed is to designate the former landfill site (transfer station and recycling center) and/or the existing electrical transmission lines (and possibly some adjacent land) as an overlay district that would qualify as a site for such a facility. While the use would be allowed by right under the Zoning Bylaw, it would still be subject to site plan review by the Planning Board, all Conservation Commission regulations and any other Town requirements.

Such a bylaw would provide  an economic use for land that otherwise has little or no economic value. It could provide revenue to the Town through a ground lease(if located on a Town-owned site like the former landfill) and possibly through lower utility bills. In addition, qualifying as a Green Community would make the Town eligible for grants for other alternative energy or conservation projects, further reducing Town costs.

I will provide more information on this and other aspects of the effort to become a Green Community as it becomes available.

MORE ON OPEN MEETING LAW

In my earlier posting, I suggested that "posting" meeting notices is an obsolete and antiquated practice that reaches few people. I suggested that the practice should continue but that missing a posting should not be considered a "fatal flaw' in the process. I will now provide a real-life example of how such a requirement can inhibit the efficient functioning of government.

Last week, Thursday was a holiday (Veterans Day) so Town Hall was closed. Most Town offices (including the Town Clerk) are always closed on Friday. On Wednesday afternoon, a particular committee decided it wanted to postpone its meeting scheduled for that night to the following Tuesday evening. This was a full 6 days in advance. A second committee also came in to post a meeting for the following Monday (5 days in advance). However, the Assistant Town Clerk had left for the day at noon (due to limited hours) and the Town Clerk was busy and could not accept the postings. Therefore, at least 2 committees had to postpone their meetings until at least Wednesday evening so they could be posted on Monday and meet the 48-hour rule.

I fully understand the limitations of a part-time work force and the complicating factor of holidays. However, again there is a technological solution to this problem.

Now that Sherborn has an electronic monitor facing the window at the front entrance, why not allow postings to become fully automated? That is, a set of rules could be established and just as we currently fill out a form for the posting that is sent to the Town Clerk's office , why couldn't that posting go directly to the monitor? An auto-reply could confirm receipt of the notice as well as establish the day and time of receipt to ensure that it is received at least 48-hours in advance (excluding Saturdays and Sundays). The form on the Town Clerk's web site is already set up with required fields so that ensures completeness in the postings.

Access for submitting postings could be restricted to designated staff, committee chairs, etc. Furthermore, the notices could still be reviewed by the Town Clerk's office to ensure compliance and if any notices were found to be not in compliance for whatever reason, then the meeting could be cancelled and rescheduled with the proper notice. Coupled with a web site posting, this scenario would not only allow more flexibility in scheduling meetings with no loss in public access, but would actually increase such access through the web site posting.

NEW OPEN MEETING LAW COMMENTS

You may be aware that the state has adopted a new Open Meetings Law that went into effect on July 1, 2010. Among the major changes in the new law are the following: (1) agendas (or items the Chairman reasonably believes will be discussed) must be included in the posting of a meeting whereas previously only the date, time and place was required; (2) such notices must still be posted 48 hours in advance, but now Saturdays are excluded from that time period (Sundays had already been excluded); (3) the notices of all such meetings in a town must be accessible by the public on a 24 hour, 7 day basis; and (4) meeting minutes must now include a list of all documents and other exhibits discussed at the meeting and these must be available for the public view in the future.

There are also some clarifications and definitions. I think the new rules are a good step forward in assuring openness and accountability in government.

My primary problem with the new rules relates to its treatment of technology. The rules remain rooted in centuries-old technology. The basis of it remains posting notices at Town Hall and publishing notices in the newspaper. These may have been effective when people made frequent trips to the town square and when reading a daily newspaper was a common component of life, but in era of sprawling suburbs, plummeting newspaper circulation and an Internet economy, these methods no longer reach most people.

I am not advocating for abandoning these practices, but I do suggest that inadvertently missing a deadline for these should not be a fatal flaw in the process if it can be demonstrated that other means of communication have been used advantageously. In an era in which there are now more households with a cell phone and no land line than there are with a land line and no cell phone, I would be willing to bet that more people could be reached via the Internet than through Town Hall postings and newspaper ads.

While the new law expands the use of technology slightly, its primary focus seems to be to restrict use of technology rather than to embrace it a means of EXPANDING access to government. For example, the guidelines clarify that email can be used for administrative matters (scheduling meetings, distributing information, etc.) but not for substantive discussion. This is a good thing as far as it goes. Private emails should not be used to discuss public business.

However, why not use technology in an open manner to allow greater and easier participation? That is, a public forum could be established that would be viewable by the public in which members of a public body could ask questions or make comments that could be responded to by other members, the applicant or other Town officials. As long as those participating are identified and the forum is viewable by the public, why not allow it?

In the case of public hearings, why not let members of the public participate in the forum? Applicants could post the details of their project including plans, reports, etc. Comments and reports by consultants and Town officials could also be posted. Members of the public body as well as members of the public would have easy access to all information about the project. A requirement would be that all persons participating must be identified and registered with, at a minimum, name, residential address and email address (and, as applicable, whether they are a member of the public body, the applicant’s team, a town official, abutter, etc.). Any comments so posted would become part of the public record of the hearing. This would allow residents to participate who are not able to attend the physical hearing due to illness, mobility issues or scheduling conflicts. In addition, such a system could facilitate and streamline the physical hearing.

The new law does provide for remote participation by public body members. However, this provision is not yet in effect as the Attorney General’s office is seeking public comment as a first step to establishing rules about this practice. One example of how this could be utilized is the case of a public hearing that has been closed and a board is deliberating a decision. If a member is out of town on the day of the vote, but can certify that he or she has reviewed a copy of the draft decision, why not allow that member to participate remotely via phone, video conference, or Internet. When most Boards meet only once or twice per month, it could avoid unnecessary delays.

In summary, the new Open Meeting Law is good step forward in assuring transparency and openness in government. However, the job is not finished and more needs to be done to bring government into the 21^st Century.