Click Below for Additional Meeting Resources:
Meeting Opening and Minutes Approval (Link: 00:00:00 – 00:00:00)
The Board of Health open meeting began at 7:33 PM on September 29th. The first agenda item was the approval of meeting minutes from previous sessions. Copies of the minutes had been distributed to board members prior to the meeting. The chair asked if there were any comments on the minutes, and hearing none, requested a motion to approve them. A committee member made a motion to approve the minutes from three previous meetings held on July 10, July 22, and August 13.
Chair’s Report on CALM Survey Launch and Charter Committee Update (Link: 00:00:00 – 00:26:00)
Chair Tom Massaro provided his report focusing on two main topics: the CALM survey launch and the charter committee update. He reported that a meeting was held with the Select Board on September 24th where Kaylin Coyle presented information primarily focused on the security and privacy aspects of the survey. Massaro stated that Coyle did an excellent job and the room seemed comfortable with her presentation.
Massaro explained that the general goals of CALM are to document and describe the health and wellness status of the town, which will inform strategic planning and accountability for the Board of Health. The survey will provide relevant strategic data for other town groups beyond the Board of Health and serve as a baseline for documenting progress for future projects and investments.
The survey officially launched that morning with 16,739 postcards mailed to every voting member and resident over 18 in the town. Massaro noted that the largest demographic group is ages 18 to 29, which Coyle identified as challenging because many are college students who may not receive their mail directly. He suggested trying to identify leaders from recent Marblehead High School graduating classes who might still communicate with their peers to help spread awareness.
Massaro expressed hope for achieving participation levels similar to recent town meetings, which would be in the high 5,000 to 6,000 range. He mentioned that Coyle had worked with one Cape municipality that achieved 50% participation, though that was a limited senior group. He believed the timing was favorable, noting that the town handled the recent waste department strike well and that people want to respond positively to recent community challenges.
The board discussed promotional materials, including postcards and posters created by a marketing person at the counseling center and by Jack Attridge. Andrew Petty reported having 12 plastic display stands and the ability to print additional materials. Plans were made to set up information tables at various locations including the YMCA, JCC, senior center, and other venues that would accommodate them.
A committee member suggested reaching out to places of worship. Massaro responded that the person coordinating the ministerial group was at the previous week’s meeting and would distribute information to all ministerial groups. He mentioned that two rabbis had attended his presentation to the ministerial group months earlier.
The board discussed various promotional strategies including a banner for Marblehead Electric Light, social media outreach, and placement in medical offices. McMahon offered to handle social media posting, and Massaro mentioned that Jack Attridge has 45,000 social media connections. The survey is planned to run for three weeks, with the possibility of extension if needed. A follow-up meeting was scheduled for the following Wednesday to assess initial response rates.
Petty explained that promotional pushes would create response blips, so multiple waves of outreach were planned including email blasts and Code Red notifications. Massaro presented information about wellness being defined as happiness in multiple areas of life, emphasizing that the survey allows residents to be heard and participate in solutions rather than just receiving transparency about board activities.
Massaro highlighted the data security measures, explaining that all responses are anonymous with no personal identification. The process has been approved by the institutional review board at UMass Boston, data is collected on password-protected platforms, and no raw data will be accessible to board members or town staff. Only aggregated data will be reported publicly in open sessions.
He shared information from the Massachusetts healthy aging community profile, noting that Marblehead has higher than average rates of falls, cataracts, osteoporosis, and arthritis for seniors over 60, which could contribute to isolation. However, the town has lower rates of tooth loss, Alzheimer’s, dementia, anemia, and chronic kidney disease compared to state averages.
Regarding timeline for results, Massaro indicated that Coyle had been somewhat vague about hard dates but expected data before the semester ends, possibly by Thanksgiving, which would allow planning for focus groups to begin early in the new year. He noted that processing time would depend partly on the number of responses received.
For the charter committee update, Massaro reported that the Board of Health was listed as one of only two out of 68 town committees and boards that were acceptable with draft B of the charter changes. However, he shared concerning news about timing, as the legislative process may extend into 2028 due to the transition between legislative terms and the need for new committees to be established after elections.
School Committee Collaboration Report (Link: 00:26:00 – 00:37:00)
McMahon reported that his collaborative group with the school committee had not yet met, with their first meeting scheduled for Wednesday. The group consists of one member each from the school committee, select board, and parks and recreation department. He explained that he had been putting out feelers and spitballing ideas to see what he could bring to the discussion.
One contentious idea McMahon had floated was implementing a curfew for minors. He clarified that he was referring to Massachusetts’ existing under-18 driving curfew from 12:30 to 5:00 AM, not a general curfew requiring all minors to be home by 12:30. He explained that such curfews, used in cities like Lynn and Revere, would prevent minors from wandering around places like Village Plaza or being at houses without parental supervision when police arrive. McMahon acknowledged that his wording may have caused confusion, leading some people to think he was proposing that all children had to be home by 12:30.
The curfew discussion led to other suggestions from community members. One person McMahon graduated with reminded him of a sober driving program that had existed when they were in high school, where students could page for rides home and other students would pick them up. McMahon noted that Matt Martin had provided good insight on this concept as well.
The main proposal McMahon planned to present was an “Arrive Alive” tour program that Cynthia, who had attended the previous week’s meeting, had researched extensively. The program involves driving simulators using virtual reality where students sit in actual cars and experience simulated scenarios including texting while driving, drunk driving, and drug-impaired driving. The program would cost an estimated $22,500 to serve all high school students plus seventh and eighth graders over nine days.
McMahon explained that while purchasing a simulator outright would cost around $150,000, the touring program was more realistic. The program offers various funding options including Title IX funding and potential sponsorship from car insurance agencies, with some insurance companies already showing interest. Petty indicated he would check whether opioid settlement funds might cover the program. The touring company suggested mid-April as optimal timing since they would be in the area working with a college.
Massaro shared that he had been interacting with SAMHSA regarding a presentation on cannabis and its behavioral influences. He expected to receive slides within a couple of weeks that could be presented to the board and potentially used in newspaper columns. Massaro noted that the presentation showed how the cannabis industry is following promotional patterns similar to the alcohol and tobacco industries, claiming products are not addictive or problematic.
Massaro explained that cannabis regulation is complicated because it remains a federal Schedule I drug, so federal oversight is absent and states have not taken responsibility for examining recreational cannabis consequences. McMahon asked about doctors’ ability to discuss cannabis with patients, recalling his doctor saying he couldn’t provide information due to scheduling restrictions.
A committee member clarified that doctors can discuss cannabis but typically lack training in different types and prescribing methods, requiring additional training to write cannabis prescriptions. The committee member noted there have been continuing medical education credits available on cannabis, but studies are limited because cannabis is inexpensive to produce and lacks pharmaceutical company backing for research funding.
Massaro added that the SAMHSA webinar showed emergency room visits and psychiatric episodes related to cannabis, particularly when mixed with other substances, noting that cannabis is combined with other drugs more frequently than alcohol. He emphasized that modern cannabis products are significantly different from traditional forms and that the slides would be valuable for community education about recreational cannabis risks.
COVID Vaccine Guidance Update (Link: 00:37:00 – 00:46:00)
McMahon first read through a detailed list of bills and expenses for various health department services, including rat control at the transfer station, compost services, laboratory testing, vehicle maintenance, and other operational costs. Massaro clarified that a laptop purchase mentioned in the expenses did not come from tax money but from prison funds and is property of the town, explaining that he needed the laptop when he took his position.
Amanda Ritvo then provided her report as Vice Chair for Community Health, focusing on COVID vaccine guidance for the 2025-2026 season as respiratory virus season approaches. She explained that there has been understandable confusion about COVID-19 vaccine recommendations following changes made by ACIP, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices under the CDC.
On September 20th, ACIP shifted from previous broad recommendations to an individual-based decision making approach. Ritvo noted this change has been controversial because the previous ACIP panel was completely dismissed and replaced with members who lack health expertise and some who hold anti-vaccine views. She emphasized that no new evidence was presented to justify downgrading the recommendations, and there was a proposal to require prescriptions that was narrowly voted down by one vote.
Ritvo explained that final recommendations still need approval from the CDC director or HHS secretary, making this an evolving process that she would continue to monitor. In contrast, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health has taken clear steps, including issuing a standing order allowing all pharmacists to vaccinate eligible individuals without requiring a doctor’s prescription, even if the federal government eventually requires one.
Massachusetts is also requiring insurance coverage for COVID vaccines and has issued guidance that aligns with professional entities including AAP, AASP, and ACOG. This guidance also reflects consensus from the Northeast Public Health Collaborative, a voluntary coalition of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York State, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and New York City working together to share expertise and strengthen evidence-based public health.
The Massachusetts Department of Public Health guidance recommends vaccination for all adults 18 and older, especially those over 65, those never previously vaccinated, and those at higher risk. For children 6 to 23 months, vaccination is recommended as studies show their risk is as high as the 65-plus age group. For ages 2 to 18, a risk-based approach can be taken, though low-risk individuals can also be vaccinated.
Vaccination is recommended at any stage of pregnancy to confer immunity to newborns during their first six months when babies cannot be vaccinated. Women planning pregnancy, postpartum, and lactating women are all recommended to get vaccinated. Ritvo noted that the same ACIP board that downgraded COVID recommendations is still recommending influenza vaccine for everyone six months and older, and she planned to discuss flu vaccines in more detail at the next meeting, including dispelling myths about the vaccine.
Massaro responded that having regular updates to organize thoughts is absolutely mandatory, describing the need for some sort of information lighthouse. He expressed that he never thought such confusion would happen but found it reassuring that Massachusetts is taking appropriate steps.
Transfer Station Contract Award and Future Waste Collection Planning (Link: 00:46:00 – 01:40:00)
Andrew Petty presented details about the transfer station project and requested approval to award a construction contract. The project includes a new scale house, site work to move the scale to a permanent location in front of the pit, new paving, curbing, gates, fencing along the neighbor border, and site work for a concrete pad where the tractor trailer is parked. Two bids were received: DeLuise Brothers Construction of Lynn at $1,590,000 and GVW also of Lynn at $1,708,435. McMahon made a motion to approve the DeLuise Brothers contract, which was seconded by Ritvo and approved unanimously.
Petty explained that the construction would cause some disruption and downtime at the transfer station, particularly affecting the pit area when moving the scale. During construction, trucks would need to be rerouted directly to Resco, and the town would haul residential trash directly to Resco as well. The construction timeline involves fall concrete work and winter construction for the scale house, with the pit potentially shut down for multiple weeks during excavation, forming, pouring, and curing of concrete.
Petty then provided a comprehensive overview of current and future waste collection policies. Currently, residents are allowed one 65-gallon toter for trash or two 35-gallon trash cans, with all trash required to be bagged and containers having tight-fitting lids to prevent rodent issues. For recycling, there is currently no limit on curbside amounts, but residents must follow the Recycle Smart guidelines and cannot bag recycling materials or include thin film plastics.
The major change coming is that recycling will have disposal costs in the new contract, whereas it has been free for the past 10 years. Petty estimated current recycling at 3,000 tons annually, which would cost $80 to $90 per ton to process, representing a significant budget increase. He recommended standardizing all curbside collection with 65-gallon toters for both trash and recycling, requiring the town to purchase approximately 16,000 containers for 8,000 homes at a cost of about $900,000, which could be financed over five years at roughly $130,000 annually.
Petty explained that automated collection using mechanical arms would eliminate the need for laborers on trucks, reducing costs by employing only drivers instead of driver-laborer teams. The downtown district would likely continue with manual collection due to parking and traffic constraints, but the other four collection days could use automated systems. This approach would also control tonnage by limiting residents to specific container sizes.
The board discussed recycling collection frequency, with McMahon noting that Salem uses every-other-week recycling collection with 96-gallon containers, which worked well during Marblehead’s recent strike period. Petty confirmed this could provide significant cost savings, potentially cutting the estimated $800,000 annual recycling costs in half. He also addressed business recycling, proposing that downtown businesses either be prohibited from using residential collection or pay approximately $100 per month each for trash and recycling service.
All new containers would include RFID tags for tracking ownership and preventing misuse. Petty noted that residents needing smaller containers could request 35-gallon alternatives after trying the standard size. The board discussed various implementation challenges, including storage issues in the historic district and the need for public education about the changes.
Current collection costs are just over $1 million annually, with projections of $1.6 to $1.7 million for the new contract plus $130,000 annually for container financing. Petty emphasized that maintaining the current system would be the most expensive option and that these changes represent necessary cost-saving measures. The town cannot use overrides for essential services like trash collection because failure would leave residents without service.
The timeline requires issuing the Request for Proposals in October, awarding the contract by November, and having the new service ready by September 2026, as collection companies need nearly a year to purchase trucks and prepare for service. Petty confirmed that trash and recycling costs are covered by taxes rather than direct billing to residents, and the increased costs will need to be absorbed within the town’s Proposition 2½ budget constraints.
Petty explained that Massachusetts landfills will close by 2030, after which all waste will be transported to states like Michigan, Ohio, or Louisiana. New Hampshire and Maine are expected to ban out-of-state waste to preserve their own capacity. He noted that waste-to-energy incineration could provide volume reduction and energy generation with proper technology and environmental controls.
The meeting concluded with discussion about public outreach strategies, including displaying sample containers at various locations and potentially holding a special public meeting to gather community input. Massaro emphasized the need for extensive communication about these changes, noting that while residents may initially resist changes, the cost implications make the current system unsustainable. The meeting was then adjourned.
All About Town provides all information in a good faith effort to improve community engagement and awareness. However, text is generated by artificial intelligence, and we make no representation or warranty of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability, or completeness of any information provided herein. Use of the site and reliance on any information on the site is solely at each individual’s own risk.