Meetings Ahead

Town Hall is closed to the public. Meetings are being conducted remotely. Check the town’s website, www.eastham-ma.gov, for information on meeting schedule changes and how to view and take part remotely.

Tuesday, April 21

• Charter Review Committee, 5:30 p.m.

Conversation Starters

Beach Cleanup on Hold

The recreation dept. and chamber of commerce’s beach cleanup set for April 22 has been postponed to a date yet to be announced.

Let the Sun Shine In

Town Administrator Jacqui Beebe brightened the mood at the April 6 select board meeting with news that a company wants to build a 10-acre solar array close to the municipal sand pit. “It would give us new revenue of almost $700,000 a year,” she said. The town may have to issue a request for proposals, and the installation would need town meeting approval.

Beer and Wine OK’d for the Landing

The select board granted a seasonal beer and wine license to the new owners of the Landing, a convenience store near Campground Beach. The vote on April 6 was 4 to 1, with member Martin McDonald opposed.

“Historically, the Landing is kind of a gathering place for young people in the area,” he said. “I’m a little upset with the combination of two things,” he said, “the young people in the area and the ice cream bar.”

“Martin, I’m with you,” member Jamie Rivers said. “But this was already an establishment that had this type of set-up without issues, so I’m open to giving the new owners the same opportunity the previous owners had, so long as they stick to the same guidelines.”

Boards Vote on Warrant Articles

The select board and finance committee have very few areas of disagreement on warrant articles for the annual town meeting, now likely to be held in June.

The board and the committee are backing the Nauset Regional High School building project, the former unanimously. The draft finance committee letter does not include a vote. In an email reply, committee chairman Jerry Cerasale wrote, “We did not vote on article 8, the NRHS building project. We had a sense of the committee and waited to see what the draft paragraph might say and any future developments. So we’ll likely vote on April 28.”

In recommending a vote for the project, the committee’s draft letter notes that the school “does not meet current code and needs renovation.” If the member towns turn down the proposed project, a rejection that the letter states would be “fiscally imprudent,” they will lose the $36 million promised by the state toward the $132 million total cost. The committee added that if major repair were needed, the state would require that the entire existing building be brought up to code at a cost of about $97 million, borne by the towns alone. That’s $2 million more than what the four towns would pay for their share of the rebuilding project.

The committee has asked for an analysis of the incremental costs of the school choice program, which would allow a cost-benefit analysis and discussion during the four years of building construction. “If the towns decide to curtail the program,” the letter notes, the committee “believes that the district should consolidate school buildings, close the middle school and house middle school students in the brand-new school facility.”

The two groups unanimously recommended the creation and funding of an education, housing, and human services needs special purpose stabilization fund to support working families through subsidies for preschool and childcare services, school lunch, and an after-school elementary program. The new fund would also hold money to be tapped by the town’s affordable housing trust for workforce housing development.

“We are in competition with all our neighboring towns to attract younger individuals and families that can both work and live in our town,” the finance committee draft letter states.

Although the board is unanimously for a ban on commercial sale of single-use plastic water bottles by Sept. 21, 2021, the committee split 3 to 3 on the petitioned article. “Those opposed to Article 23,” the draft letter states, “believe that the Article should state that approval of neighboring towns be a condition precedent before Article 23 is endorsed.”

At its April 6 meeting, the select board didn’t disagree with that analysis. “Since it’s a petitioned article, we can’t change anything now,” Chair Aimee Eckman said. “If it passes and we’re the only town, we can always come back at town meeting and push that effective date out until the other towns pass it.”

The two bodies parted company decisively on a proposed general bylaw to commit the town to reducing greenhouse gas emissions from human activity to zero “at the earliest technically and economically feasible time.” The select board voted 4 to 1 in favor; the finance committee 0-6 against. “I feel like this is in line with our strategic plan,” board member Jamie Rivers said.

The finance committee letter did not address its position. “It’s true that it does no harm,” Town Administrator Jacqui Beebe said of the article, “but it doesn’t say anything very specific either. They did not know what to do with this particular animal.”

“It’s vague,” said board member Martin McDonald, who cast the lone vote against. He also voted no when the rest of the board backed a petitioned article requiring the town to push the governor and legislature to provide better security for spent nuclear fuel at the closed Pilgrim power station in Plymouth. The finance committee opposed the petition 1 to 5. —Ed Maroney