UPDATE: March 28, 2026 (Duxbury) — According to unofficial election results, Michael McGee and Brian Glennon II have won re-election to the Duxbury Selectboard by a wide margin. McGee earned 2,677 votes and Glennon 2,409 votes. Challenger Derek Bennett trailed behind with 1,487 votes.

Both overrides passed. The proposal to raise the levy limit by $1.89 million passed 2,128 to 1,859, a margin of 269 votes. Every district except for District 1 voted yes.

The Alden School Feasibility Study won 2,370 to 1,584. It won every district.

Write-in candidate Jim Lampert won the contest for both the 2-year and 5-year terms for the Planning Board. He has chosen to serve the 5-year term.

According to Town Clerk Susan Kelley, the 2-year term is “considered a failure to elect. The Selectboard and Planning Board, at a joint meeting, will appoint someone to fill the 2-year term.”

We will have to see if write-in candidate Deborah Frangesh (see background below) will apply for that position.

Aun Sukanich (2,755 votes) will join incumbent Matt Gambino (2,933 votes) on the School Committee. There were no challengers.

Everyone else won election to their uncontested seats.

Here’s how the vote changed from last year’s proposed $5.8 million operating override.

Subscribe now

March 28, 2026 (Duxbury) — With all votes in for Precincts 2 and 5 and current day votes in for Precincts 1, 3, 4, and 6, Selectboard members Brian Glennon II and Mike McGee have a strong lead in the vote.

Newcomer Derek Bennett had a strong base of support, but has yet to come close to mounting a significant challenge.

The debt exclusion for the Alden School Feasibility Study and 20% Preliminary Design is ahead by a significant margin.

The vote for the override is close, but it is leaning toward a yes vote, as Precinct 2, which is usually fiscally conservative, flipped and voted for the override.

An update to the story, including numbers, will be provided once all the votes are in and a spreadsheet sent out. Right now, the numbers are on a wall and hard to transcribe accurately.

The big cliffhanger right now is whether Deborah Frangesh, who lives right next to John Baldwin’s North Street development will win a write-in seat on the Planning Board. She needs at least 50 votes to gain a seat on the board. The other write-in candidate is Jim Lampert, the former chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals, who is expected to win.

March 21, 2026 (Duxbury) — Since no one has filled in papers to run for the Planning Board, my esteemed neighbor Jim Lampert has stepped up to run as a write-in candidate.

Residents wishing to vote for Lampert should write “James B. Lampert” in both the 2-year and 5-year slots.

That strategy makes sure that Lampert’s vote is not divided between the two positions. Unless someone else steps up, the other candidate will most likely be appointed by the Selectboard.

Lampert has an extensive volunteer history in Duxbury and will be able to step into the shoes of Duxbury’s own Johnny Depp lawyer Wayne Dennison, who is stepping down. Dennison ran as a write-in candidate in 2023.

Both Dennison and Lampert have national reputations as attorneys, and both have served as chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals, first Lampert, then Dennison.

Lampert is often able to spot logical flaws and errors in construction in local bylaws that others miss.

With those skills, Lampert has been able to protect the town from numerous mishaps.

At one time, he used to come to the floor of Town Meeting with corrections to bylaws. Since then, town committees have learned to bring him into the process earlier.

Lampert and his wife Mary “Pixie” Lampert are known for their long-time work on the Nuclear Advisory Committee as well. They each continue to spend many hours a week making sure the decommissioning of the Pilgrim Nuclear Plant in Plymouth is done safely.

Correction: The transcript from the Town Meeting said that Kendall Doble IV said that the override would be $15 per week per household, but the video shows that he actually said $1.15. He was only counting the feasibility study / preliminary design for a major renovation or rebuild of the Alden School. Doble acknowledges that the total cost of the override is $6.25 per week for an average household. If both overrides are approved, total taxes for next year will go up $1,210 or $23.26 per week per household. That’s 0.6% of the average family income for the year as of 2024, the latest figure available, but it’s about 1% of the average family income after taxes. Apologies.

March 18, 2026 (Duxbury) — “Yes for Duxbury” Treasurer Garren Hilow believes that bankruptcy is beautiful.

In an April 17, 2025 Instagram video, Hilow said that thanks to the US government, if entrepreneurs dug a multimillion dollar hole in the ground, they could just walk away from their debt.

I just had breakfast with a friend of mine who bought a business and bankrupted it. And they’re not taking his house. He was able to protect his wife’s assets, and he ran up over a million dollars of debt.

Yeah, the drawback is that your credit score goes down. And everyone gets all worried, “Oh, my credit score is going to go down.”

What do you need a credit score for? The only thing you need a credit score for is to buy stuff that you can’t afford. Like, you don’t need that. And like a credit score is not that important in the grand scheme of your life. And you get a free get out jail free card for digging a multimillion dollar hole in the ground. You just get to walk away. And there’s a little bit of time, strings attached. It will be hard for you to get a car loan.

OK, but you just had a chance to take from where you are now to generate intergenerational wealth on the backs of an insurance policy funded by the US government.

Duxbury Substack is awaiting a reply from Hilow and Yes for Duxbury President Kip Doble on how Hilow’s views on bankruptcy apply to the Town of Duxbury.

For the past month or so, Yes for Duxbury has been running a splashy campaign supporting the twin overrides Town of Duxbury proposed this year.

A $1.89 million operating override would permanently raise taxes on Duxbury residents. That $1.89 million compounds every year, adding another 2.5% to the levy limit. On top of that, the town plans to hold another override next year because town officials no longer want to operate within the confines of Proposition 2.5.

A second ballot questions calls for a $1.75 million debt exclusion for feasibility study and 20% preliminary design for a major renovation or complete rebuild of the Alden Elementary School. This building project could eventually saddle Duxbury taxpayers with up to $100 million in debt, even after Massachusetts School Building Authority reimbursements are taken into account.

Meanwhile, owners of the average Duxbury home are looking at a tax increase of about $820 in FY27 because debt payments from previous debt exclusions is about to hit everyone’s tax bills. If the overrides are approved, that bill will rise about $390 to $1,210.

The following look-up table provides residents with additional information on how much their taxes will increase next year, with or without an override.

These tax increases come on top of huge increases in water rates and $638,993 in other fees over the last year. Together, these increases amount to a stealth override.

Duxbury’s Debt Problems

Meanwhile in April 2025, the rating agency S&P warned the town that existing requirements to pay for PFAS remediation could lead to a credit downgrade.

Many communities throughout the U.S., including Duxbury, are facing higher water infrastructure costs to remediate perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS; forever chemicals) contaminants in the water supply. We view this as a waste-and-pollution environmental risk which could require significant borrowing to fully remediate, weakening the town's debt profile…

Downside scenario

We could lower the rating if budgetary performance deteriorated due to cost pressures or more permissive budgeting assumptions, leading to decreased reserves without a plan to restore them. We could also do so if Duxbury's direct debt significantly increases due to borrowing for PFAS remediation needs, pressuring governmental or enterprise fund performance.

S&P did not appear aware of the potential new Alden School.

A full-scale rebuild of the Alden School would also place a significant burden on taxpayers, especially when considered over the life of a project. The following table shows the burden on Duxbury taxpayers of a $100 million debt exclusion, subject to the assumptions described. It assumes a 35%-40% on a full rebuild about five years in the future that costs about $150-$167 million.

As discussed in a previous story, a carefully thought-through repair plan would cost an estimated $5-$10 million and have the following lifetime burden on taxpayers.

Failing to Pack the PAC

As part of their campaign strategy, the Yes for Duxbury campaign called for residents to “Pack the PAC” at last Saturday’s Town Meeting. Instead only 307 voters showed up to vote yes to the operating override. The vote was 307-73 in favor of the override.

Last year’s “Vote Yes Duxbury Override” campaign garnered 618 yes votes and 224 no votes.

That override later failed at the ballot box by a margin of 2,174 to 1,981 (52.4% to 47.7%).

The question is what happened to the “no” voters. Those contacted over the last few days have said that they plan to make their voices heard at the ballot box.

Many talked about their current financial situation — not being able to afford morning coffee, having both parents work two jobs — and said that simply cannot afford any more taxes.

At the Town Meeting on Saturday, however, the Yes for Duxbury Crowd shamed them for their unwillingness to pay more taxes to the Town of Duxbury.

“Shame on us if we're one of 15 [towns] that don't provide full day kindergarten and also trust the educators,” said Peter Quigley of 32 Long Point Lane. “They say this is the best investment we can make as a community in developing our children.
And I believe in our educators recommendations, advice, expertise, and please let's get off of this notion that that kindergarten is optional.”

Earlier this year, two members of the Finance Committee asked the superintendent why, if kindergarten was so important, the schools weren’t already paying for it already.

After all, in the school budget is 148.5% of the town’s state-mandated foundation budget, up from 110% of the foundation budget in 2008. For reference, in FY25, spending was 150.3% of the state’s foundation budget.

Kendall Doble IV, who moved to town from Hingham in 2022, said that for a typical household, the feasibility study / preliminary design would be only $1.15 a week. For the poor guy who wants to have a morning latte on the way to work, that’s 12 lattes a year.

Both overrides together, however, cost the average taxpayer $325 a year, or $6.25 a week. Altogether, for a guy whose finances are stretched to the bone and riding the bus into Boston at 6 am every day, that’s 65 lattes a year.

Others made questionable claims that will be discussed in a separate article.

From that same crowd, 186 stayed to vote to support the feasibility study / preliminary design that afternoon, which passed 93% to 7%.

“The case is clear and the record shows that your select boards over this past decade and the town administrators have been and will continue to be fiscally responsible to you the taxpayers,” said Selectboard member Fernando Guitart during the initial presentation.

Now, it’s off to the ballot boxes. Early voting at the Town Clerk’s office in Town Hall will extend through Wednesday, March 18.

Election day is Saturday, March 25 from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. in the Steele Building on St. George Street.

Subscribe now

Notable Followers of “Yes for Duxbury”

On Instagram, notable followers of the “Yes for Duxbury” Instagram account include the following Duxbury residents, staff members, and organization:

• Town Manager Rene Read

• Duxbury Public Schools Superintendent Danielle Klingaman

• The Alden School

• The Duxbury Senior Center, now renamed “The Center”

• Duxbury High School Baseball

• Duxbury Recreation

• The Duxbury Chamber of Commerce

• Duxbury Beach Operations

• The Percy Walker Pool

• Duxeducators, the Duxbury Teachers Association

• Duxbury Middle School

• Holly Morris

• School Committee member Jen Weedon

• School Committee member Kellie Bresnehan

• School Committee member Laurel Deacon

• Megan Driscoll, chair of the Duxbury Democratic Town Committee

• Karen Wong

• Conservation Administrator Nancy Rufo

• Judy Barrett of the ZBA

• Duxbury Substack (to see what they are doing)

March 14, 2026 (Duxbury) — Michael Healy bought his house on 25 Shipyard Lane in 2019.

Now he doesn’t want any more people visiting the Shipyard Lane Beach until the town addresses his demands for changes.

Just like to respond to the comment about working with the town on the issues. Um, because over time we have tried to, on many occasions, address these issues. We've talked about speed bumps — it's been rejected. Um, so really this comes down to us not wanting to see more things that bring more people down there until these issues are addressed. So that's what we're looking for.

Healy bought his house in 2019. The Shipyard Beach has been there since at least 1944. Healy’s house is about 500 feet from the popular beach.

Healy was at Town Meeting on Saturday to speak against a proposal to add picnic tables and a split rail fence to the park area between Shipyard Lane Beach parking lot and 57 Shipyard Lane.

The problem is that people have stopped using park since Warren and Dawn Hadley built a large house next to the park, effectively erasing any visible boundary between their house and the park.

In 2019, the couple bought 57 Shipyard Lane, which used to be home to a 1795 Cape that was separated from the park by a lovely hedge.

Fortunately, the Hadleys worked with the Duxbury Historical Commission to move the 1795 house. The hedge, however, was removed and never replaced.

As Brie Lieng of the Community Preservation Committee explained to Town Meeting since the hedge came down, some people don’t even know that the area is a park.

The only reason that we want the picnic table down there, or the fence down there, is to protect your neighborhood — to put a barrier between this public area, where everyone can run around on this grass, versus where your property is. And I grew up in Duxbury, but not a lot of people even know that you can go play on that grass. So it's really important for us to, you know, keep it — we don't want to block anybody's property lines. We don't want to block their view. But I think it's really important for your neighborhood to have this. And we're just trying to make it accessible for more handicapped people and more families. So maybe with them down there, there won't be so much hubbub, because there won't be any parking, because all the families and stuff will be down there. So we're just trying to protect you guys, and we thought a lot about the plants and stuff too. It's not just willy-nilly.

Warren Hadley seemed open to working with the town.

He said that he would like to replace the hedge, but that he had not gotten around to it yet.

The other question I had with respect to it was the split rail fence. Our plan was to put hedges up there. When we moved there, there was a beautiful large hedge — probably been there for 40 or 50 years — that very well delineated the park from the property line. Unfortunately, when we did the construction, that had to be removed. We put a little rock wall there, and our plan was to put a hedge along the rock wall. We just haven't gotten to it yet because we've got other work in the backyard we need to finish first. Once that was completed, we were going to put the hedge.

Like Healy, however, Hadley seemed to think that changes to the park were contingent on the neighbors’ demands regarding the beach.

So I guess I'd like to also recommend kind of a no vote at this point, and then hopefully we can have a bigger discussion about this over the next few months and get the improvements — the improvements that would be great to see down there — that everybody in the neighborhood would like to see. We appreciate everything you do, and I echo just about everything. That’s our stand on it.

Healy complained that the beach was overused.

Um, first of all, I do commend the CPC and Livable Duxbury for this, for making, trying to make recreational areas more accessible in the town. And I know I’m speaking for the residents of our neighborhood when we say that we really enjoy and appreciate this resource and we love to see the residents of the town enjoying the beach in the way it’s intended. It makes our neighborhood lively, vital, and just fun.

Um, but there are issues at the beach. It’s a very heavily used resource, and at times in the summer it’s overcrowded. It’s seeing the effects of overuse and misuse. We have problems with overflowing traffic, dog waste, trampled marsh vegetation, and other issues. Our street is very narrow. The houses are mostly small and close to the road. We have problems with speeding on the street and excessive traffic. The beach in off hours is an attractive nuisance. We have many problems with the amenities there attracting people at off hours and doing things that they shouldn’t be doing down there, which I won’t go into detail on.

Um, furthermore, we feel that the hardscape involved in this project as it’s been described is inconsistent with the natural layout of the lawn area. Um, and finally, I believe — first of all, you should note that there already is an accessible picnic area, and this will be more accessible picnic area. Our observations are that that is very little used as it is. So we feel that the money spent, although it’s small, really won’t have upside for the town but downside for the residents of the neighborhood as a continued attractive nuisance. And we would like to request that the CPC withdraw this project, or appeal to the voters to help us out as residents of that neighborhood to vote no.

Holly Morris clarified that there was no hardscaping planned.

People have been walking on the same path on the marsh for 80 years. The marsh has hardly changed at all since 1970.

Michael Segalini of 31 Shipyard Lane was upset that people visiting the beach don’t have the same beach stickers needed for Duxbury Beach. He was also under the same mistaken impression that Community Preservation Committee planned to pour concrete in the park.

We do appreciate the desire to beautify Shipyard Lane. Um, but as my neighbor said, is pouring more concrete consistent with the natural beauty of that beach and parking lot?

Um, I go down to that beach all the time, and my neighbor avoided some of the things that you see. There are condoms down there. Um, I’m always picking up nips and cigarette butts. Um, nine, ten o’clock at night there are people down there with their doors open, radio playing loud, dogs running wild.

Um, we are for the improvement of that area and accessibility. I have a sister-in-law born into a wheelchair who uses that picnic bench every once in a while. Um, it is not heavily used, though.

Um, using those funds to some extent to maybe make better grass, or plantings, or replacing the tree that was taken down, would really enhance the experience for anyone visiting there. But nine out of ten cars that go down there do not have a sticker. Um, 20 mph — an hour — seems like you’re on a highway if you’re walking your dog, or, you know, kids are on scooters down there.

Um, so we ask that, as we look to improve that area, to say no to this, but maybe come back and talk to the neighbors about how we — because we see it day in and day out — what could benefit the area and benefit everyone in the town. Um, but, you know, that area is really sort of in no man’s land in terms of being patrolled. Um, we have — at midnight you can go down there and there could be four or five cars and people are drinking beers. And if it is a public beach, which it is, it should be monitored like the other beaches, and patrolled like the beaches, and enforced. Um, so we ask for a no vote on this, but are certainly open to seeing another proposal, maybe, that involves less concrete and more green.

Stacy Walsh of 57 Josselyn Ave, which directly abuts the beach, as upset that the tree that used to shade the rocks along the beach had been taken down.

The article passed 92 to 27.

Scenes from Shipyard Lane and the Shipyard Lane Beach

March 13, 2026 (Duxbury) — Garren Hilow sold his company for $190 million, now he wants to sell Duxbury on a $1.89 million override and an expensive replacement for the Alden School.

Hilow, who bought Joe Perry’s former house for $4.1 million in 2022, is the treasurer of the Yes for Duxbury campaign, which was established on February 9, 2026.

It was founded to support the Proposition 2.5 override and the passage of the Alden School Feasibility Study Debt Exclusion. The feasibility study also includes a 20% design for a new building or major renovation.

Hilow’s pre-2022 ties to Duxbury are a mystery.

Kenneth (Kip) Doble IV of Hingham and a relatively new Duxbury resident is the group’s president.

Financials for the group are not available yet. They are not registered to the state Office of Campaign and Political Finance, nor would they be expected to register there for a small local campaign. Instead, they are registered with the Duxbury Town Clerk’s office.

Duxbury’s Annual Town Meeting is tomorrow, Saturday, March 13, starting at 9 a.m. On the warrant is a request to fund a $98,335,251 town general fund, a $5,351,851 or 5.4% increase over last year’s general fund budget.

That increase is being paid for with fee increases on everything from beach stickers to mooring fees.

The Selectboard, acting as the Water & Sewer Commissioners, also approved three successive 30% increases in water fees for FY26, FY27, and FY28, but those increases don’t show up on the budget.

All together, the fee increases amount to a stealth override.

When added to the $1.89 operating override requested for FY2027, these fee increases will exceed the $5.8 million operating override which voters rejected last year.

There are no layoffs in the 5A, non-override budget. In fact, the budget adds the following staff members:

• $67,865 for a town accountant (the salary is listed as $70,000, but the budget increase is $67,865)

• $115,000 for a town engineer

• $59,905 for someone to work on vehicle maintenance at the DPW

• $60,336 for someone for the highway department and for step increases

The town has also asked voters for an additional $1.89 million in spending for the town and schools, above and beyond what’s allowed under Proposition 2.5 limits.

The key items on the override budget include the following:

• $50,000 for a half-time assistant in the town manager’s office

• $25,000 in professional / technical services for the town manager’s office

• $36,514 for a half-time retired benefits specialist in the human resources department

• $157,465 for two new patrol officers for the police department

• $138,400 for two new firefighters/paramedics

• $30,930 for an assistant municipal inspector

• $51,698 for a worker in the land & natural resources department

• $57,502 for a mechanic for the highway department

• $58,209 to support various services at the Senior Center, including home delivered food

• $83,025 for an assistant beach manager

• $113,472 for health insurance coverage for people in the new positions

• $812,946 for the school department, including the money for tuition-free, full day kindergarten, math tutors who were initially hired with one-time federal ESSER money, and tech support

Even if Town Meeting, which is usually flooded with parents, approve the increased spending, the town will only be able to fund those costs if town voters approve an override in town elections.

The Alden School Feasibility Study Debt Exclusion needs a two-thirds vote at Town Meeting to continue to town election. If it does pass, a majority of voters at town elections will need to approve it for the study to go ahead.

A Duxbury Substack study published yesterday argues that the feasibility study sets the town up for a $100 million project it can’t afford, but that the town could fix Alden for $5-$10 million.

S&P has told Duxbury that its bond ratings could be downgraded if it takes on more debt. The town already faces up to $100 million cost to mitigate PFAS pollution in the water, an investment that must take priority because it is required by the EPA.

Elections are scheduled for March 28 at the Steele building from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Early voting starts at the Town Clerk’s office in Town Hall on Monday, March 16 and extends to Wednesday, March 25.

March 12, 2026 (Duxbury) — Please see below analysis of the Alden School Building Feasibility study and its implications. It’s still in the works, but I’m publishing it now because it contains information that residents may find useful at Saturday’s Town Meeting.

Approving the feasibility study is a big decision, one that has significant financial implications for the town. If we approve this project, we risk our credit rating and we cut ourselves off from other capital projects we may want to pursue in the next 10 to 15 years. S&P has very clearly stated that if we overextend ourselves, we risk our AAA credit rating.

The school department has tried to downplay the implications of approving the project, but a “Yes” vote is likely to hurdle the town toward a ~$100 million project.

A better option may be to perform our own feasibility study, using consultants who actually want to fix older buildings, not one intent on ginning up big projects.

There are also questions about whether there was proper public consultation and discussion before the decision was made to pursue the project.

As the report says, we should do something, but the question is whether we want to spend $5-$10 million or $100 million.

The question for Duxbury is not whether to invest in its schools. It is whether the investment being pursued is proportionate to the problem, appropriate for the town’s financial position, and the product of the kind of public deliberation that a decision of this magnitude deserves. On all three counts, the record assembled here raises serious and specific doubts. Those doubts deserve answers, in public, before the feasibility study’s conclusions become the basis for a commitment the town cannot easily reverse.

The MSBA Core Program is not designed to come up with $5 million solutions, so we may want to ask ourselves whether we might be better off spending our portion of the $1.75 million for the feasibility study on roof repairs or a new backup generator.

The following report is a work in progress and the result of an analysis of a massive amount of data, followed by interviews with experts on topics like building repair. I would usually use it as a basis on which to write my stories, but I really think people need to see it.

I still have not had time to analyze the previous studies of the roof or the plans that were already in place until recently to repair Alden or to update the financial information taken from the town’s latest bond rating.

Even so, I thought it would be better if everyone had a chance to read it before they make their decision. It will at least start a conversation.

Share

Investigative Findings Memo V12

441KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

Update: I’ve been asked to emphasize that Ken Sweezey developed these proposal independent of MassWildlife.

March 9, 2026 (Duxbury) — At the Selectboard meeting on Monday, Michael McGee tried to convince fellow board members sign a letter supporting a bill that would allow vehicles on the beach to run over least tern nests “by accident”.

A bill submitted by Representative Ken Sweezey, would eliminate state protection for the least terns, leaving them without any effective state or federal protection for their nesting areas.

Bill H.5141: “Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife shall not restrict over-sand vehicle access or other recreational activities on Massachusetts beaches on the basis of species that are not listed as endangered or threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq., by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.”

Least terns are not considered endangered or threatened, but they do meet MassWildlife’s specific definition for species of special concern.

any species of plant or animal which has been documented by biological research and inventory to have suffered a decline that could threaten the species if allowed to continue unchecked or that occurs in such small numbers or with such a restricted distribution or specialized habitat requirements that it could easily become threatened within Massachusetts

The state lists least terns as species of special concern because of their unique vulnerability as bird that nests in the sand in areas where there is considerable recreational activity.

“If we remove the least terns, then there will be no protection for the least terns,” said a frustrated Fernando Guitart toward the end of the debate. “If they nest in the crossover, then we just push them… What is that if we no longer have these species of concern, what is the implication in terms of the conservation plan. What will DBR stop doing and what will access will recreation vehicles have?”

No one could provide a satisfactory answer with McGee simply pointing out that he is not part of the Duxbury Beach Reservation, the owners of Duxbury Beach.

Survey data from 2012 highlights the least tern population’s vulnerability. For some years, the population increases, but then there are sudden decreases as well.

On its website, MassWildlife explains that the state has worked for many years to help the state’s least tern population recover from nearly going extinct in the early 20th century.

The least tern suffered the same fate as Massachusetts’ larger terns at the end of the 19^th century – they were slaughtered for use as decorations for hats. By the early 20^th century, only about 250 pairs of least terns remained in the state. Following legal protection, numbers increased to the 1,500 pair level by the 1950s but declined again (perhaps because of increased recreational use of beaches) to perhaps 900 pairs by the early 1970s. More proactive protection of breeding colonies since then has contributed to an increase in numbers, although progress has not been steady (Figure 2). In 2024, approximately 4,318 pairs nested in the state. It is difficult to estimate least tern population sizes with precision due to the general instability of colonies and the tendency of birds that have lost nests to try again in the same year at other sites.

The least tern’s last line of defense would be the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, but the Trump administration has moved to remove penalties for accidentally harming shore birds.

Sweezey’s Testimony and Ways to Increase Beach Access

Sweezey presented to the bill to the Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources on March 4.

His testimony about removing protections for least terns did not make a lot of sense.

He argued that some federally listed birds were overpopulated in Massachusetts, thus negatively impacting access to the beaches due to “overly strict state regulations.”

Some other species, he said, are not “doing as well in Massachusetts but holistically their population is fine. That’s why the federal government hasn’t listed them.”

He was joined by Andrew Marshall, the founder of Save Duxbury Beach, who said that climate change had caused birds to flock to the state.

MassWildlife says that climate change is degrading the least tern’s habitat.

Sweezey’s two other bills require the state to regularly review its guidelines for managing piping plovers and to provide equal access to mitigation measures meant to deter birds from nesting in heavily trafficked areas.

How these bills would improve access to the beach is unclear.

The state is already in the second year of a review of its piping plover guidelines. Sweezey’s bill would require them to hold these reviews every two years even though MassWildlife informed him that reviews take up to five years.

Furthermore, greater access to mitigation measures may not be the best way to open up beach access.

Last year, a Save Duxbury Beach-led attempt to use pallets to deter nesting failed because the town and volunteers did not follow up by regularly raking the area around the pallets.

More importantly, there are better ways to open up the beach, but Duxbury isn’t doing them. The town could, for example, open implement escorting, a program in which someone walks in front of the cars to make sure that the cars don’t run over any birds.

Town Manager Rene Read has refused to implement the program.

The Selectboard, not the town manager, is in charge of such decisions, but they have not pushed back and forced Read to start escorting.

The Debate about the Bills, Especially the Least Terns

Board members were open to supporting Sweezey’s bills on mitigation and regularly reviewing the rules, but some were hesitant about removing protection for least terns.

Cindy Ladd Fiorini led the charge to protect the terns.

My interest as an environmentalist is that you are trying to do is make it so that we are not protecting the least terns by saying that it needs to be either an endangered or threatened species.

“The least terns are not threatened,” said Fernando Guitart.

Fiorini continued.

The least terns are birds of special concern, and they are protected so they do not become threatened. They are recovering, but they are not at the point where they can just be let go so to speak. So I do have a bit of a problem with that. I do understand, and I am very much in favor of beach parity. I’m in favor of being able to do mitigation to a larger portion of the beach, and I’m in favor of the MassWildlife being required to look at their rules and regulations periodically. I’m all in favor of that. I’m just personally a little concerned. I’m not going to vote no it, but I just want to go out there to say that I’m concerned about the lack of protect here for least terns.

MacNab praised Fiorini for her statement and asked if there were any unintended consequences.

“Yes,” said Fiorini emphatically.

McGee then directed them to the public comment by Christopher Kennedy, a consultant hired by Save Duxbury Beach.

“Kennedy wrote the guidelines,” said McGee. “And I think his comments were excellent.”

Kennedy did not reply to an email asking for copies of his comments.

In 1994, Kennedy was on a committee of 12 people who write guidelines for managing barrier beaches in Massachusetts. Former Duxbury Conservation Administrator Joe Grady was also on the committee. .

The accompanying guide for managing shorebirds, found in the appendix, details the damage over-sand vehicles can do to least terns.

Least terns are vulnerable to disturbance from humans, pets, and vehicles during periods of courtship and egg-laying in May and June. Similar to piping plover, incubating least tern adults, eggs, and chicks are extremely cryptic. Prolonged or repeated disturbance at colonies can lead to egg and chick loss from vulnerable to mortality caused by off-road vehicles, and may stand or crouch in or walk and run along vehicle ruts.

That report recommended shutting down beach access to protect young birds.

Sections of beaches where unfledged piping plover or tern chicks are present should be temporarily closed to all vehicles not deemed essential.

When unfledged chicks are present, vehicles should be prohibited from all dune, beach, and intertidal habitat within 100 yards of either side of lines drawn through the outermost nests in the colony and perpendicular to the long axis of the beach.

A nearly identical rule is written into the 2016 Habitat Conservation Plan for Piping Plovers, the current guide for managing birds on Duxbury Beach.

When unfledged piping plover chicks are present, vehicles are prohibited from all dune, beach, and intertidal habitat within 100 yards of either side of a line drawn through the nest site and perpendicular to the long axis of the beach. The resulting 200-yard wide area of protected habitat should extend from the ocean side low water line to the bay side low water line or to the farthest extent of dune habitat if no bay-side intertidal habitat exists.

Since much of Duxbury Beach is less than 200-yards wide, following those rules would all but shut off access to most areas of the beach for most of the summer.

Access is only allowed through detailed exemptions that MassWildlife grants to Duxbury Beach Reservation.

“It’s just common sense, a lot of this,” said McGee, referring to Kennedy’s comments to the legislature about the bill.

“But Chris Kennedy is MassWildlife, or what is he?” asked Fernando Guitart.

“He’s a consultant for Save Duxbury Beach,” said McGee, “but he also is a beach manager.”

“I know, but I mean…,” said Fernando.

“He’s not on the wildlife portion of it,” said Fiorini. “He’s on the…”

“I think he’s balanced, but I know what you mean,” said McGee. “I didn’t mean to cut you off Cindy. Your concerns are valid.”

Guitart asked for clarification about what the law said about the least tern’s classification.

“Species of special concern,” said Fiorini. “They are specifically trying to write that out.”

“Oh they are trying to write that out,” said a surprised Guitart.

“It’s not writing it out,” said McGee. “It’s simply making that statement.”

“It is writing it out,” said Fiorini laughing.

“It is writing out,” repeated Guitart.

“Oh well, let’s have this conversation,” said MacNab.

“It’s overused by the regulators to the detriment of those who want to use Duxbury Beach,” said Glennon, “for our very short season. If they hadn’t overplayed the hand, I don’t know that we would necessarily have to push back so hard, but I do think it’s necessary to rebalance the priorities.”

“I’m going to basically recuse myself,” said Guitart, who said that although he worked in the oil and gas industry, he is an environmentalist.

His daughter works as a contractor for the state’s endangered bird program. After push back from his colleagues, he decided to abstain, which mean he could not vote but could participate in the debate.

“Is there something you would like me to strike from this,” said McGee, somewhat aggressively, referring to a letter he wrote support the bills.

“I’m sorry. I apologize,” he said in a calmer tone.

MacNab said that “this is unacceptable” was a strong sentence.

“The overarching issue is that I’m hearing that this removes from the list of concerned species, these terns,” said MacNab.

“It just says that… so just to phraseology,” she continued. “The terns are listed as a species of special concern. They are included now in our permit because of that. This would potentially, and I don’t and this is probably a better questions for the experts, but I’ll just keep these two things separate. That’s one thing.

“What this says here is it’s asking them not to impose restrictions on over-sand vehicle access or other recreational activities beyond that of a species listed as endangered or threatened. I struggle with this as well.”

Least terns are listed as species of special concern because they nest right in the sand where they can be run over by SUVs or disturbed by people or dogs.

“I think the big question everybody has,” said McGee, “is why do they stay on this list of special concern, how do they create, how do they not come off, when do they come off.”

“And if they are not looking at the rules and regs,” said MacNab.

“Those are experts who answer those questions,” said McGee.

Sweezey’s bill targets the management plans for piping plovers and other birds, not the decision about how a species is classified.

“If you go to MassWildlife,” said Fiorini, “it’s clearly here why certain species from insects to plants to birds are on various different categories, and I was reading it the other day, and as I said, I can’t summarize for you right now, but it can easily be known.”

Fiorini added that she had just heard about the bills a week earlier and that she was worried that they had not had enough time to clearly think through the issue.

“I am in favor of having greater access to the beach, but not at the expense of the natural world,” she said. “It’s how entitled are we as people versus how much do we want to save the world, and so that’s what I was struggling with.”

“The letter starts with 'the Selectboard enthusiastically supports…’ and that word in an off itself was sort of an issue for me.”

MacNab said she wasn’t sure that they were all in agreement with the intention of the letter. She said she did support the reviews of the regulations.

“If the cost is one agains the other, that’s a tough call,” she said, “but I think we can do both. We can even say that.”

She noted that protection of the environment and the town’s rural and historical character consistently tops surveys sent to residents.

Glennon then read the bills aloud. The board supported the bill about having regular review of the guidelines.

Guitart, however, had doubts about the bill asking for the equal treatment of beaches. He wanted to know why MassWildlife treated the beaches differently.

“I’m not going to try to be flippant here,” said McGee, “but these requests are generally just straight rejections. We’ve gotten so many acreages. The other towns are using the acreages. You can’t use more than whatever it is five now or four.

Duxbury Beach’s geography is different from other beaches, so methods that work elsewhere don’t always work here.

More importantly, Duxbury if favored in other ways. The state gives Duxbury Beach 24 of the 60 takes for piping plovers available to the state of Massachusetts, which is also not a fair distribution.

Under the Endangered Species Act a take is an action that is meant “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” A take can also refer to “significant habitat modification or degradation which actually kills or injures fish or wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including, breeding, spawning, rearing, migrating, feeding or sheltering.” The Trump administration is considering rescinding this protection.

“I’m not going to go through… I’ve been living this for five years,” continued McGee, “ and working collaboratively with DBR to try to take advantage of any opportunities, amend our permit. Their permit, I should say. We’ve sat from the folks from MassWildlife. This is just one example. It is the most recent of the examples. You have seen them out there with the pallets. It worked."

It did not work. The town did not rake around the area as is done on other beaches that use pallets.

The other members said that the support the mitigation bill.

The committee had more trouble with 5141, the bill that targets the least terns.

“That’s the one of concern,” said MacNab, “because you have these species that are slightly less than endangered.”

“I don’t feel competent to make that decision,” said Fiorini. “If Massachusetts calls them a species of special concern, I don’t feel that me sitting here can say ‘Well, we don’t care about that part of it.’ I would want a whole lot more information.”

“Well I’ll tell you that I’ve gone to public forums,” said McGee. “I’ve also sat during these meetings. The person that has determined that they should remain on that list works for MassWildlife and also addressed their agency and made her case for maintaining them on these lists of species of least (should be special) concern. I think there are no other voices beyond that person, and that’s just public forum information…”

McGee appears to be referring to Carolyn Mostello, the highly respected coastal waterbird biologist for MassWildlife. Mostello has an extensive academic publication record on seabirds.

McGee then pivoted to the financial cost incurred due to beach closures.

Glennon said that Duxbury and DBR are “good stewards of the wildlife.”

“This bill is not a license to engage in abuse,” he said. “It’s simply a restriction on how far the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife can go in terms of tying our hands. I’m a fan of having much greater flexibility… I don’t read this as being a free for all out there.”

In fact, the bill removing protection from the least terns would create the conditions for a free-for-all environment because it would remove the last bit of state and federal protection afforded to the birds.

“I see it as giving us as good stewards more flexibility under challenging circumstances,” said Glennon.

Fiorini said she did not see it as a free for all, but that she was concerned about removing the protection for the least terns when she did not know enough to make that decision.

A straw poll showed that only Glennon and McGee support sending a letter to the legislature supporting all three bills.

At that point, MacNab backed down.

She said that they could include “something fluffy” in the letter that could say something nice about the least terns, but, in effect, it would not do anything to protect them.

“If we remove the least terns, then there will be no protection for the least terns,” said Guitart. “If they nest in the crossover, then we just push them… What is that if we no longer have these species of concern, what is the implication in terms of the conservation plan. What will DBR stop doing and what will access will recreation vehicles have?”

“I am not on the DBR,” said McGee.

“I think the answer is that once the piping plovers have fledged,” said Fiorini, “that will be the end any special protection.”

“So basically if people go on the beach, and there’s a least tern with baby, a chick and that kind of stuff…” said Guitart.

Resident Susan Curtis then got up and said that in the first five weeks of school, there are least terns flying all over the campus at the school system.

Least terns are species of special concern because of where they nest, not because of where they fly.

The committee then discussed sending the letter back and forth for revisions in a manner that sounded like a violation of the Open Meeting Law.

They assigned McGee to revised the letter, and they agreed to meet to go over it on Saturday morning before Town Meeting.

McGee’s Letter

McGee’s proposed letter is included below.

The Duxbury Selectboard enthusiastically supports the following legislation filed by State Representative Ken Sweezey:

• House Bill H.5139, an act establishing a review process of guidelines for managing recreational use of beaches to protect piping plovers, terns, and their habitats,

• House Bill H.5140, an act creating parity among Massachusetts beaches

• House Bill H.5141, an act promoting recreation on Massachusetts beaches (Note: this is the bill above that would remove protections for least terns on beaches)

By way of background, the Town of Duxbury has a yearly lease agreement with the Duxbury Beach Reservation (DBR), so the public may enjoy recreation on the beloved 7 1/2 mile long barrier beach. The town also sells seasonal beach stickers to residents and non-residents.

DBR holds a permit with the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (MassWildlife) to allow use of the beach while piping plovers and terns are present. The town and DBR collaboratively share responsibilities to ensure compliance with the terms of the permit, so the public may enjoy a short New England beach season.

Guidelines are not regulations, much less law. However, Mass Wildlife has often incorporated guidelines into DBR’s permit, the compliance of which is required to keep the beach open.

The guidelines are also outdated and should be reviewed at least biannually. This House bill requires Mass Wildlife to consult with the beach managers and ensure the guidelines are consistent with balancing recreation and protecting federally listed species.

Additionally, the bill’s notice and hearing provisions promote necessary public engagement and transparency. House Bill H.5140’s requirement to prevent Mass Wildlife from prohibiting or excluding any beach management from utilizing all legally authorized shorebird nesting migration tools is a matter of fairness. For example, DBR has requested mitigation to deter shorebirds from nesting near crossover access to Duxbury Beach. It has been effective, and DBR has requested additional acreage to deter nesting in other locations. However, MassWildlife has capped the acreage of deterrence because other beaches also utilize this mitigation technique.

This is unacceptable. Access to one beach is no more important than access to another beach. Requiring MassWildlife not to impose restrictions on overseeing vehicle access or other recreational activities beyond that of species listed as endangered or threatened species, as required by House Bill H.5141, is of paramount concern to this committee.

For more than a decade, as a result of such restrictions and an increased shorebird population, Duxbury has sustained considerable financial harm. Beach sticker revenue has declined because of resident satisfaction. The town has employed professional beach management staff to ensure compliance with the permit. Most notably, our local businesses have suffered revenue loss due to extended beach closures. MassWildlife must be limited to cause no more financial harm, nor harm to quality of life than is indirectly caused by the Federal Endangered Species Act.

The Duxbury Select Board appreciates your consideration of these important bills and respectfully requests you expeditiously move and forward in the legislative process. Sincerely, Duxbury Select Board.

House Bill H.5139 provides two critical components

The committee did not agree to send in this letter.

March 9, 2026 (Duxbury) — Town Manager Rene Read negotiate a compromise to a 10-month standoff between the Highway Safety Advisory Committee and resident Stanley Wheatley over the speed limit on Tremont Street between Cox Corner and the Marshfield town line.

The speed limit will be lowered to 25 miles per hour at the start of the Cox Corner business district, which is pictured below.

Speed limit signs will go up, and the speed limit will apply in both directions for 609 feet. HSAC Chair Brogna measured that length with a tape this afternoon.

Wheatley requested a reduction in the speed limit due to dangerous traffic near his house at 1548 Tremont Street.

Wheatley and his wife Sigrid also hope a reduced speed limit will lower noise from truck traffic. For years, they have been asking the town to do something about the noise coming from 18-wheelers delivering sand to the beach. During some winters, hundreds of such trucks a day drive by their house for weeks on end.

Wheatley had previously reported to the Selectboard that Brogna did not want to approve a reduction in speed because the board had told him to stop bringing such requests before them.

Tonight, however, Brogna described their impasse as being one over the correct interpretation of M.G.L. Chapter 90 Section 17C.

Section 17C. (a) Notwithstanding section 17 or any other general or special law to the contrary, the city council, the transportation commissioner of the city of Boston, the board of selectmen, park commissioners, a traffic commission or traffic director of a city or town that accepts this section in the manner provided in section 4 of chapter 4 may, in the interests of public safety and without further authority, establish a speed limit of 25 miles per hour on any roadway inside a thickly settled or business district in the city or town on any way that is not a state highway.

Section 1 of Chapter 90 defines a “thickly settled” district as one that is at least a quarter of a mile long.

‘’Thickly settled or business district’‘, the territory contiguous to any way which is built up with structures devoted to business, or the territory contiguous to any way where the dwelling houses are situated at such distances as will average less than two hundred feet between them for a distance of a quarter of a mile or over.

Brogna, who is an engineer and Marine Corp veteran, maintains that the entire quarter mile district must be in Duxbury.

Wheatley, an attorney, argued that the quarter mile district did not have to be in the same town for Duxbury to act.

Brogna told him that if that was the case, he would have to involve Marshfield. Wheatley disagreed.

Putting the speed limit signs on the edge of the business district puts that dispute to rest. It satisfies both Brogna’s interpretation of the law and Wheatley’s request for a lowered speed limit near his house.

Brogna appeared perturbed that his efforts on Wheatley’s behalf, including removing a bump in front of his house and performing a speed test of local traffic, had not been properly recognized. He said they cost the town about $6,000.

The bumps in the road had exacerbated the noise from the 18-wheelers.

The Wheatleys have made repeated entreaties for help with the truck traffic, including multiple contacts with the Duxbury Police. Despite that, the police told Read that they had not had a call about a speed complaint for that area since 2011.

In an email several months ago, Freeman Boynton Jr., the owner of the trucks, had expressed support for fixing the street in front of Wheatley’s house.

After some hemming and hawing, the Selectboard voted 5-0 to reduce the speed limit in the business district. In return, Wheatley agreed to indefinitely postpone a Citizens’ Petition he placed on the Annual Town Meeting Warrant to lower the speed limit in front of his house to 25 mph.

According to Read, town counsel had informed him that the Citizens’ Petition would not be binding. There was no news from town counsel on the proper definition of “thickly settled district”.

Brogna has written to Senator Patrick O’Connor to request a flashing red light and flashing yellow light for Cox Corner, but MassDOT has not responded.

March 3, 2026 (Duxbury) — Tuesday’s candidate forum at the Duxbury Free Library featured candidates from a competitive race for Selectboard.

The annual town election is on March 28 from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. at the Timothy Steel Athletic Building on St. George Street.

Derek Bennett, who presented petitioners’ case for funding the police and fire departments at last year’s Special Town Meeting, is challenging incumbents Brian Glennon II and Michael McGee.

Glennon, who currently serves as chair, is a lawyer and a U.S. Marine Corps Reserve veteran, who was awarded the Navy Achievement Medal with Gold Star for professional achievement. He started his career at KP Law, the municipal law firm, before moving on to Cumberland Farms, where he served as general counsel. He currently has a private practice in business law. Before his election to the Selectboard in 2023, Glennon served on the Planning Board for 12 years. Glennon, who describes himself as a “municipal government nerd”, is deeply knowledgeable about municipal government and often attends meetings of the Massachusetts Municipal Association out of pure interest.

McGee, who has been on the board since 2021, is an assistant district attorney in the Norfolk District Attorney’s Office. McGee started his career at the law firm Morrison Mahoney LLP in the Product Liability Practice Group before transitioning to the DA’s office. McGee ran for state representative in the Fourth District of Suffolk County from November 2009 to September 2010.

Bennett is an electrician and union member who works as a foreman on major infrastructure projects. He was previously a member of two other unions and worked on projects such the Metro West Water Supply Tunnel. He was an assistant coach for Duxbury Youth Lacrosse.

Sporting a newish beard, Josh Cutler, the undersecretary of labor, moderated the discussion.

What follows is a transcript of their comments, organized by topic, so each candidate can speak for themselves.

Please go to this link to an unedited transcript. If you want to watch specific passages, you can search for the words in the transcript, and go directly to that portion of the video.

Share

Introductions

GLENNON: Thank you, Josh. First, I’d like to thank the Library Trustees for this forum. This is important, and I’m glad that folks came out and are watching online, either live or later. I also want to take a moment to thank both Mike and Derek. This is not easy — not easy to be a candidate, putting yourself out for public display in a couple of different ways. So I want to thank you both for your service and your willingness to serve.

A little bit about me: as Josh mentioned, I’m out in the woods on Colonial Drive, over by Chandler School. I’ve been in town for almost 20 years. I served for over a dozen years as an elected member of the Planning Board before joining the Select Board. I was a member of the Open Space Committee for over a dozen years. I’ve served on a number of ad hoc committees in town as well, such as the Town Council search committee and the Planning Director search committee — two planning directors ago. I’ve been very involved in the town. I’ve been an assistant scoutmaster for the only girls’ troop BSA had in Duxbury. I’ve also served in a number of volunteer capacities over the years. So I’m well invested in the town, and I’m very proud of my service giving back. I think it’s very important to give back to your community wherever you live. And again, that’s one of the reasons why I thank my colleagues here on the stage, because we all have a desire to serve and make our town the best that it can be.

Some of the things I’m most proud of in my three years — which, by the way, have gone very, very fast; I feel like I just got sworn in and here we are again for re-election — is really the collegiality of the members of the Select Board. There are five of us, and no one person directs the Town Manager. We have a town manager form of government, so the day-to-day is set forth by a professional that the Select Board oversees. But one of the things I’ve been most proud of is being able to work with my colleagues on the Select Board. We all have different points of view on certain things, but we come together at least once a year to put together a set of shared goals that we expect to happen over the next year. We’ll be doing that soon in April after the election, and I look forward to the next round. I see Lester’s telling me I’ve got time. Sorry, I talk a lot. Thank you. Happy to be here.

MCGEE: Thank you. Thank you to Derek and Brian, and thanks to you folks for coming out this terrible weather. I appreciate it. It’s important to have this civic engagement and to have this opportunity to hear from the candidates.

A little bit about me: I’m running for a third term. I was elected in 2021, and it’s been a very busy five years. I echo what Brian said about the collegiality. I’ve really enjoyed working with the other members of the Select Board and our Town Manager, René Read, who’s also here tonight. We might disagree on things, but we all disagree with professionalism and work together to try to improve this community.

A little bit about me: my wife Amanda and I have two daughters in the Duxbury Public Schools. I’m a youth coach — you probably see me out on the fields or on the basketball courts every season, doing that for probably five or six years now. By trade, I’m an attorney. I’m a prosecutor. I’ve been doing that for 15 years, serving victims and their families at some very difficult and challenging times, and ensuring that defendants have the right to a fair trial and that justice is administered. I think that’s important here because one of the most important things I’m proud of is leading with empathy. I was chair for a year, and I tried to really encourage stepping into the shoes of the folks who were in front of us — encouraging debate, encouraging open time for people to discuss the issues that were important to them. The meetings went on a little bit longer, but I think it was really important for folks to get things off their chest, to bring those issues out. It’s your meeting. It’s your Select Board. And I really wanted to encourage that. It’s something I’m most proud of, and I think it’s something we should be continuing to do as we go forward.

BENNETT: Good evening, everybody. My name is Derek Bennett. My family and I have called Duxbury home since 2008. My wife Nicole and I have been married for 33 years and have raised three children in Duxbury. I’m running for Select Board to bring open dialogue and transparency to the residents — to make sure that their voices are heard and lifted at Select Board meetings, and that we’re making thoughtful, practical decisions for all the residents in town.

When I first moved to town, I was a youth lacrosse assistant coach and was involved in Duxbury Youth Lacrosse. Sorry, a little nervous.

In my career, I’m a licensed Massachusetts electrician. Throughout my career, I’ve worked on major infrastructure projects and tunnel projects, including the Deer Island Outfall Tunnel, which carries treated wastewater offshore. I’ve also worked on the Metro West Water Supply Tunnel, which carries drinking water to Boston and the surrounding communities. I’ve also, as an electrician, worked on complex electrical life safety systems, which involve strategic budgeting around the projects. Sorry, I’m still nervous.

Storm Response

CUTLER: All right, let’s dive in and you’ll shake it off. So we’re here on a kind of snowy, yucky night, which reminds us all of the recent storm. So the first question — and this will be to Mike, then Derek, then Brian, and we’ll keep going in that order. Storm management: last week a major storm hit Duxbury, closing roads and knocking out power to thousands of homes. Please identify one or two things that you think the town did well in handling the storm, and maybe one or two things that you think the town could have done better.

MCGEE: It was probably the biggest storm I’ve endured in my life, from a snow-and-wind perspective. I commend our public safety — our police, our fire, and DPW — and also our facilities department, for really stepping up and doing their very best to try to get these roads cleared, get the schools opened up, and get those sidewalks cleared. It was a tremendous effort. They put their lives and their safety at risk. We had several plow drivers go off the road. And I know you all got the updates from René Read. I don’t know if he slept for probably four to five days, quarterbacking all of the — providing information to the public and also making some tough decisions about how the town would handle such a storm that impacted the coastal towns here, from Scituate all the way down to the Cape. We knew about it. We knew this was going to be bad, but when you saw that eye of that storm just swirling around the south coast there, we got hammered. So I commend our departments for doing such an incredible job under those circumstances.

When we had a nor’easter, I want to say it was back in 2022, we had some issues with electricity, and I asked that Eversource come in and explain why we weren’t back up so quickly. Again, the Thursday after the storm I asked our Town Manager to bring in MEMA, Eversource, and our emergency services team to provide the public some input about what went wrong, what went right — because I think a lot of things did go right — and so that we can learn from this. I think it’s an important service to the town, and I hope we’ll have that discussion at an upcoming Select Board meeting.

BENNETT: Perhaps I’m not as privy to some of the information available from the town, but just from what I follow on social media or the town website, as far as response to the storm — so, yeah, it was a historic storm. I commend the DPW and public safety for their response in working with the resources available to them. Staff should not go unrecognized.

Some things I’ve been looking into that I think we could do better: perhaps communication. I was looking around the town website and I didn’t find any information about emergency management or preparedness. So I think maybe we should have a strategic plan going forward that really prioritizes street clearing, and egress and ingress into the town, and makes sure that those routes are taken care of first and foremost. And then also, for the community to be able to follow along with street prioritization, so parents know whether their children are going to school the next day, or whether parents are going to work and will be able to do that. So I think we could kind of outline some of those things and perhaps even form a committee or advisory committee to get us an outline for storm preparedness and emergency management. I think those are some of the things we could look into.

GLENNON: I echo a lot of what Mike had to say in terms of what went right. This was a historic event. I was around for the blizzard of ‘78, so I do remember that — I was a little smaller then. But I was trying to explain to my kids what the similarities and differences were. Certainly the big difference was we had a lot more notice this time around. It didn’t just sneak up on us like almost 50 years ago.

But with that said, looking at Fernando — I know he was at the Emergency Operations Center during the storm — I had had the opportunity to stick my head in, trying to stay out of the way but just observe what was actually going on, and I was blown away by what a well-oiled machine it was. The fire chief had the wherewithal in advance of the storm to notify the National Guard that we would likely need assets and people, which I thought was a tremendous feather in his cap for having the foresight to do that.

We can all look at our own streets and say they could have been done better. In fact, Derek — I think in either your PACTV speech or on your website — you made the point that resonates with me, which is you experience local government on your street, basically. So what’s immediately around me is what I think the town is. And I think you made a good point there. As I looked out my window three days on, I was still snowed in. We, contrary to popular belief, don’t get plowed any faster than anybody else — in fact, I think to the contrary.

But with that said, hats off to everybody. There are absolutely things that could have been done better. I don’t know what those are right now because we haven’t done a postmortem, and anybody who was at the Select Board meeting last night may recall that during open forum I mentioned that we need to do a postmortem — if that’s the right term — on the storm. Not to point fingers, but just to determine that, in our unsettled weather future — which could happen again in another 50 years or maybe in another five — we’re ready, and to Derek’s point, that we have systems and processes in place that we can sort of break glass, pull the handle, and execute on.

But nothing’s perfect. I certainly wish my street were plowed a little faster and a little wider. But you know, we’re all in this together. And one thing that really blew me away — and I should have expected it, but I was really happy it happened — was the camaraderie in the neighborhoods, the folks who banded together with snowblowing teams going up and down the streets, shoveling each other out. That’s what community is, and it was demonstrated in full color here in Duxbury over the last week. I commend our residents for picking up the shovels and snowblowers and helping one another out. It’s very impressive.

Share

The Budge, the Override, and the Alden Project

CUTLER: All right. Thank you, gentlemen. Our next question is about the budget and override vote. I actually had a very similar question come from an audience member — I’m going to go with the audience member’s question. The upcoming ballot asks voters to approve a $1.89 million operational override, including full-day kindergarten, as well as the Alden MSBA feasibility study. The question is: do you support both measures as currently written? And if voters approve them, will you commit to fully implementing them in good faith and without attempting to scale them back? I believe we’re first with Derek.

BENNETT: So, with regards to the override — personally, I am not in favor of the 5B budget, particularly because, given the uncertain economic — sorry — personally, I’m not in favor, just because I think we could do a better job with discussion and transparency and getting residents more involved. Personally, I try to follow along and it’s sometimes difficult to know what we’re spending on and where it’s coming from.

I’d like to see core and essential services funded first in our 5A budget, including public safety — police and fire — and the schools, and work through what we have for an operational budget. I think we owe that to the town. And listening to residents: long-term tax increases are compounding, and that might fit some folks in town through their lifetime, but we have other populations in town — growing families with young children, seniors — whose voices I think should be considered and respected. So I think more dialogue and discussion before we move forward with a 5B budget.

GLENNON: All right. This is a pretty loaded question. Short answer is yes to both. I don’t want an override, but I think we need an override. One thing I want to be clear on: when we started the override discussion, it was a larger number — it was $2.8 million — and the reason for that was we built in some excess levy capacity. I won’t go into that at the moment, but it would have increased the number higher than I personally was comfortable with. I realize the wisdom in municipal finance as to why we would have done that, but at the end of the day, what I think is resonating with most folks is the actual number that we’re voting on. And I endeavor to have that number as close to zero as possible. I want to live within our Prop 2½ means. I’m a taxpayer. I don’t want the government to have unfettered access into my bank account and my wallet.

With that said, I’ve been privy to the details of the budgeting process, and I know we’ve squeezed quite a lot out of all facets of our local government. We all live here for a particular reason, and it’s not because we’re in a convenient commuting distance from Boston. There’s something about the character of Duxbury that we all love — for some it’s the bridge, for some it’s the beach, for many of us it’s the outdoors, the open spaces. All those things cost money, and if we want to preserve what we have, then we need to account for it through our taxes. So I don’t want to do an override, but in order to preserve the things that make Duxbury Duxbury, I think it’s something that I’m personally going to support. It’s not something I want to do.

With respect to the Alden debt exclusion, that’s also a large number, and I wish it weren’t so big. Anyone who’s had kids go through Alden — and I’ve had two go through Alden, my kids are both in college now — when they were at Alden years ago, there were issues. I think any of us who have any familiarity with the school, whether it’s 20 years ago or today, know that something needs to be done. What is that something? The group that’s putting together the proposal for the study through the MSBA I think has done a good job in terms of identifying what’s necessary. I think it’s a difficult sell, however, because the MSBA is requiring us to be so detailed in a feasibility study. So these are not easy answers — they're not things I would have waved the flag around saying I'm absolutely behind under any circumstances. I do think they represent real needs in the community, and for that reason, I plan to support both of them.

MCGEE: I also support, and recommended, both articles to the Select Board.

Taking a step back: most suburban towns right now are facing decreases in revenue and state aid — I know there are folks here from the state, so no offense — but it’s been declining for years, and it comes in the form of a number of things, but in particular school aid. On the other side of that, we have massive increases in expenses. Utilities, and most notably health insurance, have gone through the roof. So where we’re left is squeezing a lot out in our towns, trying to preserve the services that our communities demand. And that’s where the fiscal responsibility comes in. We really have to, as Select Board members, balance the needs that folks demand in this community, while also being mindful of how that impacts people’s tax bills.

So, going with the override — it’s been now almost a two-year process from the town side. We’ve dissected the different departments. I’ve attended Finance Committee meetings. We’ve had a number of meetings on revenue. Some of the bigger departments have come before us and discussed their needs. We’ve had a lot of input. We’ve had opportunities to set goals for our Town Manager. We’ve had opportunities before the budget letters went out, and we’ve had an opportunity to look at the budget before Mr. Read presented it in December. There’s been community input at every stage, and we’ve learned a lot of lessons.

This is a much smaller override, and like Brian, I also didn’t ask for that excess levy capacity, because I think in future years this town deserves that transparency — to know where that money is going to be spent. I understand the wisdom that Mary had for adding that excess levy, but I think the town wants to know where their dollars are spent. I know that as a taxpayer, and I think that’s an important piece.

With respect to the Alden feasibility study: I had a daughter go through that school. I understand the weather issues and the maintenance issues. But for $52 a year for three years, I’m willing to learn what we could do as a town — whether it’s renovation, replacing the building, or putting some kind of building somewhere else — and know our options. That’s worth it to me as an average taxpayer here in town: for $150, to know what the best course of action is. We don’t have to do it. But it keeps us in the MSBA game, and I think that’s an important thing to do.

Lightening Round Personal Questions

CUTLER: Last book or streaming series you’ve read or watched; your favorite place in Duxbury; and who is someone you admire? One word or a couple of words.

MCGEE: All right. So, books — I’m a girl dad and a youth sports coach for female teams. After our Select Board meetings and on the weekends, you’ll find me watching a lot of women’s basketball — college ball and the WNBA. I love it. I don’t even watch men’s sports anymore. I might watch a little Celtics, but that’s what I do. I enjoy it, and I think it’s a beautiful game.

My happy place: sitting out on the beach, driving the Jeep over the dunes, walking down on that beach with my girl right next to me. That’s my favorite place in Duxbury. And I advocate for it year-round, because I know I’m not alone out there. It’s thousands of people and their families who enjoy that beach.

The person I most admire: my 93-year-old father, Paul, is an elected town meeting member down in Plymouth. He’s sitting on a disability committee and he’s on the cable committee down there. 93 years old — he’s still doing it, and he’s been doing it his whole life. We had fundraisers at my house when I was 10 years old. John Kerry still owes him a dollar from the Brighton Day parade — he bought a soda at the Deluxe Spa, I’ve heard all the stories. He has been involved in helping out his community his entire life. His brother used to hand out his campaign cards out in front of the streetcars in Brighton when he ran for office. I learned everything from him about serving my community. I admire him so much, and I’m just glad he’s around to share those stories. He talks a lot and I hear all about the disability committee and what they’re doing down there — I hear all about Comcast and everything about cable I would never need to know. But I’m so proud of him, and I only hope that I can be half the man that he is.

BENNETT: I would concur with Brian and Mike that my favorite place is also the beach. It’s just a nice place to relax and unwind, and we’ve been doing it for years, even prior to moving to town. So yeah, it’s quite the place.

As for a favorite book or streaming series — to be honest, I don’t watch a lot of television. What I do watch is probably Animal Planet, and my son Derek can pretty much narrate any episode for me, so I look to him for that. But usually just a calm, peaceful, relaxing evening — honestly, not a lot of television.

Lastly — I was thinking about this briefly — I think early on in my career, we’ll go back to the 90s: I was working with a laborer whose name was Pepe, and he just taught me a lot, hands-on. He was a joke-teller, he was a gardener — just a lot of basics to help you get by in life, from concrete work to laying pipe. But he was very inspirational and just kind of showed me that if you put your head down and go to work every day, you can make something for yourself and your family. He was probably my biggest inspiration.

GLENNON: I’m going to go back to the beach again. Whenever I have a visitor, straight across the bridge — and this is any time during the year. We’ll go right out on the wooden walkway, whether it’s open or closed, right off the main parking lot. You can’t beat that vista, and I think it tells you everything you need to know about our community.

AI: I’m a Perplexity person.

CUTLER: I didn’t have that on the list.

GLENNON: But sometimes I’ll ask one AI for an answer, and then ask another one for its opinion, and see if I get the same answer or a different answer. Sometimes it’s a different answer, which —

CUTLER: Which should scare you, Mike.

GLENNON: And then early or in-person: I’ve historically been a purist and you get there on Election Day. However, I’m also risk-averse. So now that I have the opportunity to get my vote in early, I did do that last year, because you never know what might happen between then and Election Day. I’d be concerned if I couldn’t cast my ballot at all, so I’d rather do it early than not at all at this point.

Long Term Planning

CUTLER: All right. Thank you, gentlemen. All right, so back to our more substantive questions. Next question, first up would be Derek. Long-term planning: the bridge, the Alden School, and PFAS in our wells are all being listed as examples of the effect of deferred maintenance in town facilities, which have contributed to rising capital costs. How would you rate the town’s current performance with regard to facilities management? What are your thoughts on how the town is doing with long-term capital planning, including how the town prioritizes projects and balances affordability and sustainability?

BENNETT: Great question. One of the things I’ve been doing is going around trying to meet with different department heads to find out about their departments and day-to-day operations. Recently I did talk to Facilities, and it kind of plays out in what I’ve been watching in Select Board meetings about the budget and capital spending. I know we have some capital spending coming up for an HVAC system for the fire department, and I think I heard several times in that meeting that there’s been some neglect of maintenance over the years.

So I think as a town we really need to come up with a comprehensive long-term plan that pays close attention to the facilities in town, whether it be an emergency generator — I think at the Alden School we just had an issue with some heating coils in the HVAC system that let go, causing some damage — and I think what I’ve heard a lot is that maybe they’re understaffed and that routine maintenance just isn’t happening. So I think there has to be a good assessment of town facilities, walking through a lot of the buildings to get a grasp on what needs replacement and just have a good long-term plan going forward addressing those issues.

I did have a good conversation with Facilities this week, just to learn a little more about their department. I think it’s crucial that we invest the time, and somehow find a way to set aside money so we’re not so reactive to these — in some cases catastrophic — situations, and instead be more proactive. And I have a good grasp and understanding of it from my day-to-day work.

GLENNON: We are head and shoulders above today where we were a few years ago. We now have a Facilities Manager that we did not have in the past. Facilities maintenance has probably been one of the flat spots this community has had over the years. We’ve addressed that. It’s not fixed yet, but we’ve addressed it through hiring a professional who knows what the heck she’s talking about, has taken inventory of all our municipal properties, and can articulate to us as a board what the priorities ought to be — what needs to be addressed now versus what can wait a little while longer with some more duct tape and bubble gum.

We’re a very frugal community, and most municipalities are, for obvious reasons. The trade-off is stuff goes without being repaired when it should, and then it breaks and you have a more expensive issue to fix. But in terms of where we are now versus even five years ago, I would say we’re definitely on the right path. We still have a lot of work ahead of us as we address the backlog of many years of deferred maintenance. But I’m very proud of what this board and the Town Manager have been able to do in putting together a team that can address this very important issue — because it’s the little things that creep up on you and break, and then they become big ticket items that we don’t want to see more of going forward.

MCGEE: If you had a chance to watch our meeting a couple of meetings ago about our capital expenses, there was a discussion about replacing, I believe, the HVAC units in one of the schools. But it underscored an issue we’ve had in the past: we buy all these things but then we don’t maintain them.

We are very lucky now to have a Facilities Director in Katie who is just a workhorse. She is in charge of all of our buildings and our schools and works with the custodians. But it is a very, very lean department. She’s identifying critical issues and laying out a plan for the Fiscal Advisory Committee. But it’s not enough. It’s important to invest in folks like her, because I don’t want to be sticking the bill on the next generation when they ask, ‘Oh, why didn’t we maintain the HVAC? We paid all this money for it — why aren’t we maintaining it?’ It’s crazy to me that we haven’t made those investments in the past. But we’re doing it now, and I think we need to continue.

As to the second part of the question, about capital planning: throughout my first two terms, I’ve asked, do we have a plan? We do have a plan — the Fiscal Advisory Committee has a plan. They discuss it with the community every Town Meeting and discuss it with the Select Board shortly before. But one of the goals I had for our Town Manager was to have that plan in front of us as a Select Board. Fernando brought it up at a meeting as well. That’s not a hard ask, and I think the Fiscal Advisory and Finance Committee would like to have that conversation. Because yes, those committees are doing excellent work, but as a Select Board, we are the policy body and we are your voice. We are elected by you, and we should be expressing that policy to those committees so that we have a plan going forward that is representative of what our community wants.

Subscribe now

What to do About Rene Read’s Megalomanic Management Style?

CUTLER: Okay, thank you. A couple of you mentioned the Town Manager. Question about overseeing the Town Manager: a key function of the Select Board is employing the Town Manager. Please identify how you do or would approach this function. How do you define the boundary between the board's policy-setting role and the Town Manager's administrative role? How do you or would you ensure that the Town Manager keeps the Select Board fully informed about key operations and developments in a timely manner before they become controversial issues? How do you address sensitive decisions or actions by the Town Manager that you don't necessarily agree with? Brian, I believe you're up next.

GLENNON: The most important thing to recognize is that René doesn’t have five individual bosses. He has one boss, and that’s the Select Board speaking through a majority. So at least three of us have to agree on any particular issue before it becomes something that René has to deal with. He hears from us constantly — five different voices — but in terms of directing the Town Manager, and that’s the important word you use, it’s done by committee through what we do in our Select Board meetings. That’s the opportunity we have to come together and tell him what our policy is, what we need him to do, what we want done differently.

In terms of communication — at least for the three years I’ve been on the board — I very much appreciate the communications I get from René. These aren’t things that are necessarily going out to the public; it’s a heads-up to the board about, you know, there was a fire over here or there’s some issue going on. It’s not just to keep us aware — it’s so that as we get calls from concerned citizens, we generally have been alerted by René that these things are going on. I personally appreciate that. It’s something I would expect, but I still appreciate that he does that.

In terms of difficult conversations: all five of us would agree that we don’t agree 100% of the time, certainly not with each other, and not always with the Town Manager either. Again, I go back to the idea that he’s not reporting to five different bosses and trying to keep five different bosses happy. But we do have a formal review process that we do every year. We set forth goals — I mentioned at the outset of the program that we set goals for the Town Manager by committee every year. We review those and we measure him against those goals. Rainey’s no different from the rest of us: as much as we’d all love ‘exceeds expectations’ on every review, that’s not realistic. I think he’s a great resource for the town, but he’s human, and there are typically opportunities for improvement every year.

The discussions we have with him — it’s typically the chair that meets with René, and Mike was the chair, and I’m currently the chair — and we meet with him and discuss the performance review. It’s a very open back-and-forth. He’s a professional and we expect that he’ll approach it professionally, and he does. I’ve been pleased with the process.

MCGEE: I think it’s important to recognize that Duxbury is a little different here. We do have a Town Manager, as opposed to a Town Administrator. We do have a Town Manager Act. We don’t run the town as a Select Board — we’re almost like a board of directors. If you look at a town like Marshfield or another town that has a TA, their Select Board hires and fires police chiefs and others of that nature. They have additional responsibilities. We have a professional here that we hire, who is responsible for all of those duties.

What we’ve tried to do — and when I joined the board it went from three to five, so there have been some growing pains — is have five separate people from diverse backgrounds with different priorities work through those and communicate them to Mr. Read. I can tell you that if I call him and he doesn’t answer right away, I probably get a call back within a couple of hours. That’s how I deal with a lot of difficult decisions or things I want on the agenda or questions I have following a meeting. He is very responsive.

And I can tell you this process we have now is not only important to the community and the Select Board, it’s also important to Mr. Read — because what we’re doing now with setting goals is we’re outlining the policies and priorities we have as a community and giving him a road map, so that he’s not surprised six months down the road that something was on our mind or our neighbors’ minds that was important to us. He’s diligent about it. If there’s something he can’t meet, he brings it forward and says that’s impossible, we can’t do that this year, for whatever reason. He’s absolutely responsive to those goals. And now we’re in our second year of actually judging him based on those goals, and I think it’s been a positive for Mr. Read as well as for all of us and the community at large.

BENNETT: I have not had that experience yet — or really any experience with René — but I would basically operate as a Select Board, discussing matters and empowering him to make decisions as Town Manager. I don't have any experience to draw on at this point.

Trust in Government

CUTLER: This one is two questions, but they’re kind of related, so I’m going to read them both. First: with trust in government seemingly at an all-time low, what will you do to build trust in local government? And second, what will you do to increase resident knowledge and participation in local government?

GLENNON: Trust in government is everything. If we don’t have trust in government, then it doesn’t work. That’s fundamental. And where I probably overuse this term — municipal government is where the rubber meets the road. It’s where your streets are plowed. It’s where, if you think of anything that directly affects your quality of life, it’s typically provided by your municipality, here in Duxbury.

One of the ways I think our board engages the public and fosters trust is accessibility. Mike made a point earlier that any citizen who wishes to be heard — and if they’re not calling us directly already — can come up to the microphone at open forum. We don’t put a time limit on it. Most communities do. I probably shouldn’t have said that, but we welcome folks to bring to us whatever is on their mind, and we will endeavor to address it. Maybe not that same night, but at least it goes on a list, and we know that it’s an issue, and we get to it.

I think I hope, through opportunities like this, that you understand that whoever is running — whether as a new candidate or an incumbent — has the town’s best interests in mind. This is not a lucrative position, and we’re doing it because we love our community. We want it to be a better place. I would like to think that the folks in town would see it for what it is: that we’re simply servants of the community, elected directly by the community members to keep Duxbury great and do what we can to improve where possible.

There is one area where I think we can do better, and we have plans to do better, and that’s communication. Our website is functional, but it’s no beacon of great information. Everything’s there if you know where to look. We can do a much better job providing information to folks in town through our website primarily, and other ways as well — social media, though that’s a little trickier. In terms of being a resource, in terms of folks having the opportunity to get information, to push information out, and just to be as frictionless as possible so that you feel informed and able to communicate with the town and get timely information — that is something we’re working on, very concerned about, and have plans in place, potentially with vendors, to help us with that. Because it may sound easy — ‘Oh, just update the website’ — but anybody who does coding and knows all the things that go into making a website useful and informative knows we need professionals to do that, and we don’t have that in house. So it’s absolutely on our radar, and I think that will go a long way to help foster trust in government when you have a better portal into seeing exactly what’s going on.

BENNETT: To build off what Brian said: first and foremost, I want to listen to residents, hear what they say, and then have thoughtful, meaningful discussion with other Select Board members to make sure their voices are heard. And as Brian said, one way to do that is through the town website. I feel as though I’m pretty savvy, and I do have a difficult time navigating and finding documents and other items on the website. So I’m in agreement that we need some updating on there, to make things front and center for folks to easily find and be communicated to. Yeah, I would like to hear from residents. I’d like to have discussions. I’d like to bring those things front and center to board meetings, and then I’d like it on public display for everyone to be able to engage and follow along as matters in town unfold.

MCGEE: Trust — like reputation — is something you can spend a lifetime earning, and lose like that. I’ve been trained that way, and I live my career that way: just being open and honest with the people I work with, the people I’m in front of, and the community. And I think that’s something you can count on with me: I try to be as honest and transparent with folks as possible. I talked about leading with empathy. I think it’s really important to encourage public input, and to let it all out — never cut it off. I know Brian and I had a meeting last night for what felt like a billion and a half hours or something, but for the people who are there, it’s so important to have their voices heard.

One of the benefits of having this five-member Select Board is that we are always pressing René to put things on the agenda so they are out in the public, so that decisions aren’t made outside of the public’s eyes, and we can discuss them and deliberate about them in open forums. So I think we should continue that.

I am mindful of the fact that there are elements from the national level about mistrust in government. But look — we’re volunteers. Right down the road, I’ve got kids in the schools. I’m a volunteer. I’m a taxpayer. I love this town. That’s why I’m doing this. This is very different from the national political world.

As far as communication: Brian hit the nail on the head there. We can always do much to improve. I think Mr. Read would have preferred not to be making those storm updates on Facebook, where people could respond every 30 seconds. But that was the tool he felt was the best way to communicate with the community at the height of that storm and to keep people informed. We can always do better, and I’m encouraged by our IT department to seek out opportunities — through grants — to improve our website and other communication methods.

Share

Demographics & the Override, Why are We Adding Positions?

CUTLER: All right. We had a couple of questions that were closely related about the override, so I’m going to read them both, and again, whoever feels like jumping in can. First part: what will the override do for specific demographic groups and age groups? And the second question, related to that: why are there eight new positions in the budget if we don’t have the funds for that?

MCGEE: What we’ve implored throughout the budget season is to really respect the demand that’s being put on departments and ask them what they need to meet that demand. And we push back. There was a request for an assistant planner when we didn’t even have a planner. I pushed back on that. But to answer the question about demographics: we’re trying to preserve a beautiful town that has a number of resources that people have spent a lot of time, energy, and money on for a number of years, and to keep that going forward for generations. So I don’t think we’re cherry-picking various demographics. Everybody uses the beach, everybody uses the library, everybody uses our facilities. These are things that people use throughout the town. So I really do feel like our budget reflects the needs of all the demographics in our community.

As far as the eight new positions: year in and year out, department heads get the message that we’re asking for level services going forward. What does that mean for your department? For some of those departments — when we talked about facilities, how lean they are — maintaining the services of a facilities department of one is really, really challenging. She’s in charge of all the schools, in addition to the custodians and all the municipal buildings. So to maintain level services, an additional position, yes, is an additional position that our revenue stream can’t currently meet, but it’s a service critically demanded by the community. I’m not going to go through each and every position, but police and fire have constantly been asking for more. The police department has had the same size since the 1970s, and the town is now at 18,000 people and things are a lot more complex. Our fire department is dealing with multiple simultaneous EMS calls that pull them in one direction while there are house fires requiring support from other communities. They’re asking for, I think, at least two additional firefighters, and even that’s not enough. But I would suggest to the community that these are reflective of services that are demanded and needed in our community, and we’ve tried to scale it back in a way that’s responsible.

GLENNON: I’ll just jump on that. I think those questions can be combined, and Mike touched on this with respect to public safety. From 1970 to now, the population of town has roughly doubled, and we have roughly the same number of police officers and firefighters we did in 1970. So one of the proposals in the override budget is two new police officers and two new firefighters. To Mike’s point, both chiefs want more. Can we afford this? Well, Town Meeting will decide first, and then the voters will decide whether it’s something we want. What demographic does that support? I would argue it supports the entire town — it doesn’t matter how old you are. If you have a medical emergency, a crime in progress, or something else, you want a first responder coming to help you, regardless of where you live in town or what your age is.

There’s another component of the budget — and maybe this is where the question-asker was going. There’s about $800,000 going to the schools. What is that for? It’s in the override budget. You can make the argument that component is directed toward school-aged children. But there’s also money in the override budget for the Center — formerly known as the Senior Center. That’s probably not going to school kids; that’s going to seniors. So if you go through Article 5B — it’s on our website — you will see exactly what we’re asking for. The money breaks down, in a thumbnail, to over half for public safety and schools combined. Some of it’s debt service, some of it is miscellaneous back-office administrative work where we have some really talented, hardworking people who are stretched pretty thin. Part of this budget is to alleviate some of that pain. So I would say this addresses constituencies across town, and in terms of the eight positions, I can account for at least half of them with police and fire.

BENNETT: I’ve already said I’m not an advocate for the override this time around — and that’s not to say I’m anti-override. But we’re talking about public safety and schools, and I think those departments should be funded out of the 5A budget. If they’re core and essential and they touch everybody in town, then that should be the priority: getting them funded in that budget. If they need two new positions for police and two for fire, and we really need those positions, then let’s get them in the 5A budget, so we have proper coverage in public safety in town.

Along with the schools — I mean, I would love to learn more about the school budget if I were elected. As it is now, I think it makes up at least 50% of our operational budget, and so when we talk about does it touch everybody in town, it does touch the students, though it perhaps might not touch the seniors — but they have the Senior Center.

On that note: I was recently asked, and I was trying to look into the Council on Aging and the Senior Center specifically. I know there’s a rebranding or name change for the Senior Center, and I was trying to get some more information about it, but most residents I talked to knew nothing about it. I think that’s part of the transparency process I was also talking about. Those institutions have been around since perhaps the ‘50s and ‘60s. They identify a particular population, and I think we owe it to the seniors — I’m setting up a meeting with the Senior Center to try to address that and learn more. But I think it’s important. If we’re going to ask for an override, it should extend and benefit every resident in town.

Wants vs. Needs

CUTLER: Okay. All right. We’re getting towards the end of our time — I’m told we get kicked out at 8 o’clock. So we’re going to try to squeeze in one more question, and then I’ll give everybody a chance for just a quick closing statement.

I did get an audience question that was fairly similar to our formal question. It’s probably a challenge to answer in two minutes, but do your best. Duxbury is viewed as a wants-versus-capacity type of town. Namely, Duxbury is in a classic New England bind: we have aging infrastructure, high expectations, a limited commercial tax base, rising enrollment projections, and a tax structure heavily dependent on homeowners. What will you do to address this?

GLENNON: I’m happy to answer it. It’s the classic question of needs versus wants — it’s just like you at home. I would love to eat at Sang every night; I love their food, but it’s a little pricey, and I have to live within my means. The community is the same way. We know how much we’re going to make every year because it’s set by law, and otherwise they’ll take the house, but you have to pay it. So we know what our budget is.

The challenge is the things that make us a desirable community — the reasons we live here — are typically the things that aren’t specifically core to the town. Every city and town has police, fire, libraries. But there are things about Duxbury’s police, fire, libraries, beach, everything — think of three things you love about Duxbury. Those are going to be paid for somehow, and we have to make choices every year. Some people are happy, some people are not. And then the next year maybe the roles are reversed. But that’s what Town Meeting is all about — those discussions between our needs and our wants. We can only afford so much, and there are very rare exceptions — like this year — where we ask taxpayers to pay more, and we feel it’s justified. We wouldn’t do it just because. We need to demonstrate to you that we’ve squeezed every penny out of every place that we can, and I would expect Town Meeting to hold us to that.

It’s really the classic issue of how much of what we all collectively love about Duxbury can we afford? And if we cannot afford it within the levy limit, then what do we as a community want to not do anymore? Who are we going to cut? We’re in the service business. Most of your interactions with the town are with people, and people, as terrific as they are in Duxbury, are expensive. If you look at our budget — fire, police, basically all of public safety, DPW, the schools, plus debt service and employee benefits — just those alone are about 87 to almost 90% of our budget. The question becomes: what do we not want to do anymore? We can’t just tax everybody out of existence. None of us would live here anymore, and that’s not the right decision.

That gets to who you want on the Select Board, because you need to trust those people to make the decisions that reflect your values. We don’t substitute our judgment for yours when you reach out to us — we take that into account. But I hope you’re aware that we think of all of you as we’re making decisions. It’s most apparent at Town Meeting, because that’s where the decisions actually happen, and then at the ballot booth in the rare instances where we propose an override.

MCGEE: Something our Finance Director has really impressed on this community — and she is fantastic — is that we do have a revenue issue here. It’s beach sticker sales and other revenue, but it’s also on the state end: state aid, particularly for schools. I would love to see more work done on formulas for suburban schools, and the circuit breaker for special education. That has a real impact not just on the schools but on the town side of the budget as well.

I think fiscal responsibility is something we encourage year-long. We start with the budget goals, then we move on to the budget letter, and then we’re asking for a look at the Town Manager’s budget before he produces it in December. We need to work at that and continue to improve that process, so that there’s more public input — but also with capital planning, and reviewing our financial policies. We have excellent volunteers on both our Finance Committee and our Fiscal Advisory Committee, and we also have financial policies adopted years ago that we as a Select Board should understand too. Because it’s important to understand not only the operating side of this budget, but how these capital projects and excluded debt will ultimately impact your tax bills. We have to be mindful of what’s rolling off in the coming years. That’s how, in this New England bind of aging infrastructure, you can best plan and manage your capital projects.

BENNETT: I think these are challenging times. There’s a lot of economic uncertainty at the state and the federal level, and it really squeezes municipalities locally. So we definitely feel the squeeze. That’s why I said I’m not actually anti-override — I just think we have the November elections coming up at the state level, I don’t know how things will play out with that, maybe there’ll be some relief with energy bills, which are really hitting families hard. Not everybody in town will feel the same impact — some may feel it more than others. So I think as a Select Board member, you have to consider all of those factors and not make any decisions lightly.

And perhaps this year — I want to back up for a second — I also want to appeal to young families in town. My family was a young family in town back in 2008; we raised three children here. I know full-day kindergarten has been talked about, and I don’t know why we haven’t started that process sooner. I know a lot of communities — from what I hear, we’re one of 11 towns in the state that perhaps don’t have full-day kindergarten — and many of those towns are heavily subsidized by the state. So Duxbury, being primarily property-tax-based, is contributing to that. If there is a way to explore that opportunity — and again, I think we go first with the 5A budget, and if it’s totally impossible, then we should explore other options — I don’t think it’s unrealistic to offer that in the community. It will help a lot of young parents who are struggling to work two jobs. I don’t want to sound anti-override. I just think I want to be part of a process where we can find perhaps better opportunities, more discussion, to get us there.

Closing Statements

MCGEE: Serving this community for the last five years has been one of the most rewarding parts of my life. I really enjoy it. I love this town. And I’m encouraged every day by things like the neighbors plowing each other out with snowblowers. This is a town that has a wealth of volunteers and wonderful people, and I’m humbled to be able to serve this community. I really hope that I’ve earned your trust. I hope that I can earn your vote by the 28th. We do have vote-by-mail, early voting, or you can show up in person on Election Day — all of them count equally. I would ask you to vote for me. I hope I’ve earned it from you. Thank you very much.

BENNETT: I’d just like to thank everyone for coming out this evening and giving me this opportunity. I will say my nerves did get the best of me, so I apologize for that. In life, I think most of the decisions I make are pretty thoughtful — I like to deep-dive into things before coming to a conclusion. And that’s more or less how I would like to approach the Select Board: making sure we have all the information, that we’re making the most informed decision possible for the residents of the town. I just do that day in and day out; I’ve done it my whole life. Maybe this would be at a new level. So I would appreciate the opportunity, and I’d like to thank Josh and the library, and Brian and Mike. Yeah — it takes some courage to be up front. Thank you.

GLENNON: It’s an honor and a privilege to serve on the board. First, I want to encourage any of you to please volunteer. We have boards and committees that need volunteers in town — roughly 50 boards and committees. I know we feel like a sleepy bedroom town to a certain extent, but the reason it’s so great is because of the people who work on a regular basis for the town in a voluntary capacity. So I first implore you to please volunteer. There’s a talent bank form in the warrant.

For myself: it’s been an honor and a privilege to have served in an elected capacity in this community for 15 years — first a dozen-plus years as a Planning Board member, and the last three on the Select Board.

One thing we didn’t get to touch on that I’m passionate about is the implementation of our town’s comprehensive plan. Back in 2017, the community undertook two years of effort to gather what’s important for the town in terms of our long-term development — not necessarily building things, but in terms of what services we should provide and what amenities we should have. It’s called Envision Duxbury, and it’s on the town’s website at the very top if you care to look. I was heavily involved in that as a member of the Planning Board, and now as a member of the Select Board, one of the things I’m excited to see through and to support is the implementation of that plan.

You might say: well, it was done in 2019, why isn’t it implemented already? Good question. COVID happened, and we didn’t have a full-time planner focused on this for quite a while — until recently. We now have a new planner. We’ve got tremendous volunteers on board, all focused on implementing the comprehensive plan. It goes on for pages and pages of spreadsheets of exactly what sorts of things we’re going to do. It’s going to address things like housing diversity for our seniors — a big issue in the community. You’ve got the family home, but once you move out, where are you going to live if you want to stay in Duxbury? We need to address that somehow. Comprehensive plan addresses that. Economic development: we like to think of ourselves as a sleepy bedroom community, but we do have a vibrant business community in Duxbury — in fact, the Duxbury Chamber of Commerce has recently become very active, and I encourage you to visit their website. There are opportunities for more economic development in Duxbury as well. Comprehensive plan addresses that. Groundwater protection, open space protection, recreation — it’s all there.

It’s going to be implemented over time, but the reason I’m bringing this up is that with me continuing to be on the Select Board — and I ask for your vote — it’s something I’ve been passionate about for years, and I think it’s going to be a great thing for the town and for the residents. Hopefully it will help us alleviate some of the financial pressures that we find ourselves in, like so many other communities in Massachusetts and on the South Shore. Please come out and vote — whether it’s old school on the 28th, in person early, or by mail — but please do come out and vote. And I ask that one of your votes be for me. I sincerely appreciate that.