Click Below for Additional Meeting Resources:
Public Comment (Link: 00:00:00 – 00:13:00)
Chair Dan Fox called the April 8th meeting to order and opened public comment. A speaker urged the select board to include a sustainability coordinator or assistant planner coordinator position in tier one of an override, emphasizing the role’s financial value through energy efficiency measures and ability to secure outside funding. The speaker noted the position would be critical for accessing $250,000 annually as a green community and also requested inclusion of the town planner and Community Development Planning Department director in tier one.
Elaine Lanky spoke about preserving the Community Development Planning Department in tier one of the override. She referenced the town administrator’s question at the state of the town about what residents want Marblehead to look like, describing a vision of a forward-thinking, strategic and vibrant community. Lanky listed numerous projects supported by the department that benefit all residents, including the Marblehead Shipyard Resiliency project, State Street Landing, Village Street Bridge replacement, Elm Street Playground, and Rail trail improvements. She argued that positions bringing outside funding and supporting long-term planning are smart investments rather than expenses.
Tom McMahon addressed social hosting laws, announcing that District Attorney Paul Tucker would speak at the next Board of Health meeting on April 14th. McMahon described receiving significant support after challenging why social hosting laws weren’t being enforced, noting that a community survey identified underage drinking as a major concern. He clarified that he wanted parents hosting underage drinking parties held responsible, not youth punished, and wanted police supported in enforcement. McMahon criticized Fox for making false statements about his efforts and having a knee-jerk reaction challenging the validity of social hosting laws. He described Fox’s statement that “we don’t want to change the culture of Marblehead” and argued there is no part of Marblehead culture involving parents hosting underage drinking parties. McMahon asked Fox directly whether he supports police enforcing social hosting laws and if he would attend the meeting with Tucker.
Fox responded that he could not answer McMahon’s questions during public comment because the topic was not on the agenda, citing open meeting law requirements. Fox stated some of McMahon’s statements were untrue but said he would not address them at that time. He thanked McMahon for having courage to stand up for his beliefs.
Amy spoke about problems with work on Boober Road, explaining that residents voted for Article 11 in 2022 allocating over $12 million for road and sidewalk repairs over five years, specifically for repairs rather than creating new infrastructure. She described trucks arriving on March 30th to begin work on new sidewalks that would pave over public way through residents’ front yards, with no advance notice given. The town engineer explained the new sidewalks were happening because she thought residents had voted for them and because road alterations trigger requirements for ADA compliant sidewalks. Amy disputed this interpretation, stating the Department of Transportation requires curb ramps, not additional sidewalk networks. She noted the proposed sidewalks would terminate mid-street and that Boober Road was not a priority in the town’s safety study. Amy expressed frustration that she and neighbors had reached out to DPW, engineering, and the select board without receiving responses.
Albert Jordan encouraged attendance at the Board of Health meeting with District Attorney Paul Tucker, describing Tucker as a dedicated public employee. Jordan hoped people would attend in good faith and suggested the district attorney’s office might offer programs the town was missing.
Community Development Planning Department Update (Link: 00:13:00 – 00:16:00)
A speaker provided an update on ongoing activities in the Community Development Planning Department, focusing on several capital projects funded through grant programs. The Five Corners improvement project has commenced with surveying work visible to improve the intersection for both traffic flow and to create opportunities for downtown economic activity benefiting local businesses. A public input webpage has been launched on the community development planning website that will remain active through April 30th for residents to provide input and get project information.
The speaker reported that the rail trail project, in partnership with a design firm, will include a virtual public meeting on April 13th via Zoom to present the current design and receive community feedback. The meeting link is available on the community development website. For the Coffin School review study, a public survey remains available on the website and closes on April 13th to gather input on the reuse of the Coffin School.
Regarding grant applications, the speaker emphasized that the department pursues all grants they are eligible for and even those they are not eligible for. They reported receiving an Eco one stop grant through Coastal Zone Management for $519,193 for the State Street Landing and Tucker’s Wharf resiliency project to achieve 60% design. Additionally, they received a grant of $51,265 for the Marblehead High School tree planting project, which focuses on cooling and involves tree plantings in an area with significant asphalt coverage.
A committee member acknowledged receiving emails and noted they have been focused on preservation matters, indicating an official response is planned. The speaker confirmed they have been receiving communications from these individuals.
Cultural Council Appointment (Link: 00:16:00 – 00:19:00)
Chair Dan Fox called Katherine forward for a Cultural Council appointment interview. Katherine introduced herself as someone born in Marblehead at Mary Alley Hospital, describing herself as one of the last people born there. She explained that she grew up across the street from Abbott Hall, was away from town for a while, and has now returned home.
Katherine described her lifelong involvement in performing and visual arts, noting that she currently does support work in arts and humanities and is involved with volunteer work including music activities. She expressed a desire to become more involved in the community and embed herself back into Marblehead in a way she never had before, stating that the Cultural Council position seemed like a perfect match for something close to her heart.
A committee member thanked Katherine for her interest in stepping forward and noted that the Cultural Council is a great group. Fox made a motion to appoint Katherine to the Cultural Council with a term to expire in June 2029. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Fox congratulated Katherine and welcomed her back to Marblehead.
Fox then moved to licensing matters, acknowledging Greg Lewis who was present. He opened a continuation of a public hearing that was originally opened on November 13, 2024, regarding the revocation of wine and malt beverage license number 00042RS 066 for Shin Dynasty at 1 Atlantic Avenue. Fox noted that it appeared the establishment was getting close to completion based on his observation while driving by.
Licensing Hearing Continuation (Link: 00:19:00 – 00:23:00)
A speaker reported having a soft opening date of April 25th for their establishment and mentioned conducting small private parties and intimate cheese classes in the meantime. They described difficulty finding help, having hired only one person and struggling to receive resumes, asking the board to send any potential candidates their direction.
Chair Dan Fox asked about remaining inspections. The speaker confirmed they needed to complete one more inspection called a 304 inspection, which a town official explained is a life safety inspection resulting from the club fire in Rhode Island. The inspection requires the establishment to be configured as it will operate to establish occupancy count and check that all required safety components are in place. The speaker mentioned needing an updated floor plan, which their architect had sent that afternoon and would be forwarded to their contractor for scheduling.
Fox clarified that the soft opening could not occur until the 304 inspection was signed off. The speaker confirmed all furniture was in place and they were only waiting for some decor and flatware items. A town official mentioned they might swing by that afternoon to check the setup, explaining that the inspection needed to evaluate how people could safely exit if the building caught fire.
Fox asked the board how to proceed, noting progress was being made. A committee member suggested waiting for the final sign-off. Fox proposed continuing the hearing until the next meeting, stating that if the sign-off was received, they could open and close the hearing without requiring the applicant’s presence. If the sign-off was not received, the applicant would need to attend. Fox noted the applicant could still operate with their liquor license since this was a revocation hearing. The board voted to continue the hearing until April 22nd.
Budget Override Discussion and Presentation (Link: 00:23:00 – 01:30:00)
Town Administrator Thatcher Keezer presented a continuation of the override strategy discussion, explaining the approach for structuring the override and determining what components would be included. He noted extensive collaboration with school officials, the Finance Committee, and select board members to develop the proposal. Keezer outlined the challenge of building the fiscal 2027 budget due to a significant budget gap caused by rising costs outpacing allowed revenue growth, requiring a balanced budget with cuts and service reductions.
Keezer explained the proposed two-question ballot structure. The first question would address service level funding through a tiered override with three options, allowing voters to choose how much to increase the tax levy for municipal operations. The second question would address curbside trash and recycling funding, giving voters the option to replace the planned fee structure with a tax increase of approximately $2.1-2.2 million. He clarified that fees would be implemented as part of the balanced budget, but the override question would allow voters to choose tax funding instead.
The tiered override structure includes three levels where higher tiers build on previous tiers. Under state law, the highest value tier that receives a majority yes vote becomes the levy increase. Keezer presented sample ballot language showing Question 1A for $15 million, Question 1B for $12 million, and Question 1C for $9 million, with voters able to vote yes or no on any combination. He emphasized these amounts would cover three fiscal years, not be raised and spent in year one.
Keezer displayed a detailed worksheet showing town-side override components broken down by tier, acknowledging the complexity but noting the extensive work involved. Chair Dan Fox asked about school details, and Finance Director Aleesha Benjamin confirmed the schools would vote the following night. The school committee provided bullet points for their tier intentions, with tier one including no additional fiscal 2027 funds but covering contractual increases and position restorations in fiscal years 2028-2029.
Keezer explained the tier one financial breakdown, showing a total ask of $9 million over three years. In fiscal 2027, the town would draw $1.2 million with no school draw, resulting in a $127 increase on a $1 million home. Year two would add $5 million in draws for a $503 increase, and year three would use the remaining $2.7 million for a $270 increase, totaling $900 over three years. Fox clarified that every million dollars in override equals $100 for a million-dollar home or 10 cents per thousand in assessment.
Benjamin detailed tier one restorations including the school resource officer, police small equipment, inspections technical subscriptions, DPW staffing cuts, hot top for roads, finance positions, and extensive library positions totaling $311,183 for accreditation purposes. She noted several positions remained unrestored including the assistant planner, grant coordinator, and additional library positions. Committee member James Zisson suggested presenting information in a more traditional profit and loss format to better explain the budget construction and cost drivers.
Keezer presented tier two numbers based on a $12 million override, showing year one draws of $2.8 million resulting in a $281 increase on a million-dollar home, year two draws of $5.9 million for a $590 increase, and year three draws of $3.3 million for a $329 increase, totaling $1,200 over three years. Benjamin added that tier two includes additional police and firefighters, GIS and IT positions, library materials restoration, assistant planner, conservation agent, and various part-time positions.
Tier three, based on a $15 million override, would draw $4.2 million in year one for a $430 increase, $6.2 million in year two for a $624 increase, and $4.4 million in year three for a $446 increase, totaling $1,500 over three years on a million-dollar home. Benjamin noted tier three adds more police and firefighters, grant writer, recurring capital funding of $1 million, and psychological counseling services for the health department.
Keezer presented impacts on the average single family home valued at $1.291 million, showing tier one resulting in $167 increase or $13.99 monthly, tier two at $804 increase, and tier three at $1,186 increase. He displayed a graph showing the historic relationship between home value growth and tax bill increases, noting they tracked together until COVID when home values significantly outpaced tax bill growth due to Proposition 2½ limitations.
For question two regarding trash funding, Keezer explained the projected amount of $2,298,575 over three years to replace fees, with year one at $2.1 million growing by 2½ percent annually while contract costs increase 5 percent. He outlined voter options to maintain trash fees with discounts for qualifying households and opt-out provisions, or approve the override to eliminate fees and administrative costs while funding through taxes.
Committee member Erin Noonan asked about service levels and what’s included in each tier, requesting clearer presentation materials. Fox emphasized the balance between what they wanted to restore in tier one versus keeping the override amount reasonable for passage. He noted this represents survival rather than full restoration, describing the difficult choices made daily in determining tier contents.
During public comment, residents asked for clarification on the voting process and expressed confusion about the tiered structure. Fox explained that at town meeting, voters would authorize the select board to pursue an override up to the highest amount, with the actual tier selection occurring at the ballot in June. A resident questioned whether the increases are permanent, and Keezer confirmed they become part of the base operating budget and grow by 2½ percent annually, unlike capital projects that end when paid off.
Waste Disposal Fee Discussion (Link: 01:30:00 – 01:33:00)
A speaker expressed concern about the administrative costs of implementing trash fees, suggesting it would be cheaper for taxpayers to fund trash collection through taxes rather than managing annual billing. Chair Dan Fox confirmed that if voters support the Board of Health fee structure and other override components don’t pass, the fee funding cannot be redirected to other purposes, which would be part of their commitment to voters.
Christine asked about fee structure for multi-unit properties, specifically whether a two-family property owner would pay $280 per unit or a single fee for the entire building. She also questioned the logistics of residents who initially pay for garbage collection but decide to opt out in subsequent years, noting this would require the town to manage garbage barrel storage and distribution for people entering and leaving the program.
Fox responded that the town would need to manage garbage barrel logistics regardless, as this occurs currently when barrels are damaged or during property sales where new owners must show proof of barrel ownership. He noted that fee structure decisions for multi-unit properties would be determined by the Board of Health. Christine offered to research historical data from the 1990s regarding whether the town has traditionally used median or average home values for override and debt exclusion presentations, believing they have consistently used median values to avoid skewing from high-value properties.
Ballot Question Process and Voting Procedures (Link: 01:33:00 – 01:42:00)
A speaker requested printed copies of the presentation, noting that people trying to explain the override to community members need detailed materials. Town Administrator Thatcher Keezer explained the presentation was printed just for the meeting with ink still wet. The speaker also referenced information on marblehead.org explaining the process and asked for clarification on how the tiered voting would work at the ballot.
Keezer explained that each tier requires a majority yes vote to qualify, not simply the most votes. He provided an example where if tier one receives a majority no vote, tier two receives mixed results, and tier three receives 51 percent yes votes, then tier three would be the winning amount regardless of vote margins on other tiers. The threshold for each tier is whether it receives a majority yes or majority no, with the highest value tier that achieves a majority yes becoming the levy increase.
Chair Dan Fox clarified that it is binary – each tier either gets a majority or does not. If tier two gets a majority by one vote, it passes over tier one regardless of tier one’s results. A speaker noted this would be Marblehead’s first tiered override and asked about success rates compared to straight override questions. Keezer responded that more communities recently are using tiered overrides with more successes than failures, explaining that tiers give voters choice rather than requiring officials to guess a single acceptable number.
Keezer described feedback from Citizens Police Academy participants who appreciated having choices in the tiered system. He explained that determining a single number requires perfectly reading voter preferences, while tiers allow voters to indicate how far they are willing to go in supporting municipal needs. A speaker asked about median home value numbers, and Fox directed them to the Department of Revenue website where they can input Marblehead and specific dollar amounts to calculate impacts on median, average, or specific home values.
The speaker noted that 56 communities requested overrides in the current fiscal year, with results available on the Department of Revenue website showing which were successful. They mentioned that Stoneham and Melrose used tiered approaches and that approximately 50 more communities are planning overrides for the next year. The speaker requested that if the board chooses a specific home value metric other than average, they should provide those numbers.
Public Comments on Override and Municipal Issues (Link: 01:42:00 – 01:48:00)
Chair Dan Fox acknowledged Nick Wood participating online. Nick Wood from Rolleston Road commented that the select board continues to misrepresent how Marblehead’s budget works by presenting only two options for balancing the budget – cutting spending or raising taxes. Wood argued there is a third option of new growth taxation that should be considered, particularly when discussing the override’s impact on fiscal year 2029, suggesting the town could set aspirational targets for using new growth taxation to alleviate tax burden on residents.
Wood challenged the characterization of school committee budget cuts as efficiency improvements, arguing that at some point the cuts represent providing less education rather than increased efficiency due to embedded cuts from previous failed overrides. He also criticized the discussion of Marblehead as having financial hardship, noting that according to the Department of Revenue website, Marblehead ranks 20th out of 351 communities in per capita income while discussing average home prices of one million dollars. Wood suggested the community should acknowledge its actual economic position rather than pretending to have widespread poverty.
Committee member James Zisson acknowledged Wood’s point about revenue assumptions being part of the budgeting process and the importance of finding new growth opportunities. Jack Athens from Beach Street asked whether the town could estimate the impact of each override tier on the tax rate annually. Finance Director Aleesha Benjamin provided the median home value as $998,600, noting it is $34,300 less than one million dollars.
A committee member suggested simplifying the tier explanation by putting a red yes next to any tier that gets a majority, removing those with no votes, and selecting the highest tax levy increase among the remaining yes votes. The speaker criticized the tier naming system as disingenuous, particularly calling the first tier “restore” when it does not actually restore all cuts made in the budget. They emphasized the need for transparency, noting that despite being three and a half weeks from town meeting, the presentation lacked clear written details about what is included in each tier’s 9 million, 12 million, and 15 million dollar amounts, making it difficult for voters to make informed decisions.
Memorandum of Understanding Presentation and Discussion (Link: 01:48:00 – 02:16:00)
Chair Dan Fox introduced the memorandum of understanding regarding the fiscal 2027 override framework and financial management plans, noting it is a six-page document that the board would not vote on that evening since the school committee had not yet approved it. Fox read the preamble stating that Marblehead seeks fiscal discipline while providing quality services, faces a $7.7 million budget deficit for fiscal year 2027, and that the select board, school committee, and finance committee wish to make public commitments regarding override structure and implementation for fiscal years 2027 through 2029.
Fox explained the MOU as a pledge from the three boards to residents and taxpayers covering fiscal years 2027-2029 with guardrails and commitments for fiscal practices. He emphasized that if any override tier passes at the ballot, neither the select board nor school committee may propose another general override until at least fiscal year 2030, regardless of which tier passes. The commitment covers the three override tiers but does not include the separate curbside trash function.
The MOU includes annual spend caps separated by school and municipal budgets, with projections included as an appendix. Fox explained that any budget overages would go to the stabilization fund, with the goal of reaching 5 percent of the budget, followed by capital needs and offsetting OPEB and pension liabilities. If revenues are lower or expenses higher, the boards must adjust budgets without drawing more than the MOU caps. The agreement includes transparency measures with state of the town reporting on override funds budgeted and spent year-to-date, plus quarterly updates from the superintendent and town administrator to all three board chairs.
The MOU commits to pursuing expanded property tax relief programs, including the means-tested senior citizen property tax relief currently in the state legislature, and continuing to pursue new revenues and efficiencies across departments. Fox described the bottom line as disciplined use of funds with strict annual caps, shared commitment across all three boards, and fiscal stability through 2029 with pre-agreed cost controls and stabilization fund targets.
Committee member Erin Noonan expressed support for the concept but raised concerns about communication regarding partial restoration. She noted that positions like the sustainability coordinator in tier two bring growth opportunities and significant funding to the town, and questioned the implications of losing such revenue-generating positions if only tier one passes. Noonan emphasized the importance of clearly communicating what is lost with each tier choice and the multi-year consequences of the commitment.
Committee member James Zisson noted that $3 million of the $7 million deficit comes from what could be considered one-time moves including free cash and declining local receipts, meaning the town is essentially voting on a continuous tax increase for partially one-time issues. He acknowledged this provides cushion but suggested people should understand the revenue situation. Fox asked about any previous MOU from 2019, and Zisson confirmed it was a different type of agreement focused on revenue sharing.
During public comment, Susan Shannon requested clear information about what citizens lose if the override fails and what additional services each tier provides. A speaker asked about the legal binding nature of the MOU. Town Administrator Thatcher Keezer explained it requires public votes from all three boards and includes a “black swan” mechanism requiring a two-thirds vote from all three boards to modify the agreement due to extraordinary circumstances.
A speaker questioned the terminology of “restore, stabilize, invest” used in the MOU, arguing these terms do not accurately represent the reality since tier one still involves cuts including 14 school positions. Fox agreed to consider revised language that more accurately reflects what each tier accomplishes. Another speaker emphasized that the town has implemented efficiencies and is not simply asking for money to return to previous spending levels.
A final speaker asked whether contractual raise limitations in the MOU apply to both union contracts and individual contracts for positions like the town administrator and department heads. Fox confirmed that all salary growth rates are controlled and built into the expense projections, with all contract negotiations held to those parameters regardless of whether they are union or individual contracts.
Board of Health Revolving Fund Authorization (Link: 02:16:00 – 02:18:00)
Chair Dan Fox introduced agenda item seven regarding a Board of Health revolving fund, referencing a letter from Andrew Petty requesting authorization. The revolving fund is dedicated to waste disposal for fiscal year 2027 expenditures, funded by Board of Health fees for solid waste disposal costs, payment of a John Deere backhoe lease, employee costs, transfer station upgrades and repairs totaling $1.3 million. Fox noted the revolving fund is jointly supported by the Board of Health and Finance Committee.
Finance Director Aleesha Benjamin explained that the Finance Committee had requested the revolving fund be established and noted that while it sets a spending cap, departments are not required to spend the full amount. Fox observed that on February 11th the board had approved a lower number, and Benjamin confirmed the Finance Committee requested the higher amount. She stated this item was discussed at the Finance Committee meeting on Monday.
Fox made a motion to reauthorize the revolving fund account for fiscal year 2027 according to Massachusetts General Law Chapter 44, Section 53E½, specifically authorizing the Board of Health commercial waste disposal revolving fund for $1.3 million. He noted this motion would prevail over the previous motion taken on February 11th. A committee member seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Fox then mentioned they would proceed to review select board articles that need numbers assigned to them, which were also discussed at Monday night’s Finance Committee meeting.
Select Board Articles Review and Approval (Link: 02:18:00 – 02:45:00)
Finance Director Aleesha Benjamin noted she received an addition from the schools for an unpaid prior year bill that would need to be added for the Finance Committee, describing it as very small. Chair Dan Fox explained the process for reviewing select board articles, stating he would read through them and board members could put holds on specific items for separate discussion, with the remaining articles voted on as a group.
Fox read through numerous warrant articles, including consent articles, bylaw amendments, departmental revolving funds, equipment purchases, capital improvements, and compensation items. During the reading, holds were placed on Article 19 (collective bargaining for fire department), Article 21 (Essex North Shore Agricultural and Technical funding of $749,920), Article 29 (override-related), and Article 34 (dissolving the Public Works Committee). The board voted to approve all other articles except those on hold.
Committee member Erin Noonan questioned Article 21 regarding Essex North Shore Agricultural and Technical funding, asking whether the $749,920 amount was final given recent policy changes. Benjamin explained the Finance Committee chair and vice chair are working with the North Shore Collaborative to examine assumptions and growth numbers, noting the enrollment system changed from application and interview-based to a lottery system. The funding increased from $468,025 to $627,000 to the current $750,000, with expectations of another significant increase.
Town Administrator Thatcher Keezer explained that two factors drive the cost increases: per-student cost increases and enrollment changes due to the lottery system, which has resulted in smaller communities picking up larger numbers of seats. Noonan expressed concern about the sustainability of 5 percent annual growth against the town’s 2.5 percent increase limitation and the potential impact on the memorandum of understanding if costs escalate significantly. Benjamin noted this represents one of the biggest budget items the town cannot control, along with healthcare costs.
The board approved Article 21 after discussion. Committee member James Zisson placed a hold on Article 34 regarding dissolving the Public Works Committee, stating his opposition to dissolution. Zisson described the committee’s effectiveness in coordinating projects, citing examples from the Brown School building project and current work with Parks and Recreation. He noted concerns about public meeting law issues but argued other groups like the compensation committee operate without such problems.
Zisson expressed concern about governance and continuity, noting the town administrator’s limited contract term. Keezer responded that the Public Works Committee was created in 1970 before the town administrator position existed, arguing that having both creates a conflict where he would chair a committee of his subordinates. Keezer stated that coordination and collaboration occur through normal administrative processes including department head meetings and ad hoc groups.
Committee member James Zisson suggested the committee could function as an advisory group to Keezer rather than having independent authority. Keezer explained that the committee was presented to the Finance Committee as a group that would review projects and give opinions to other boards, which he viewed as circumventing the town administrator’s role. Committee member Erin Noonan questioned whether there should be a mechanism for department heads to have strategic discussions separate from day-to-day operational meetings.
Zisson emphasized the governance issue, distinguishing between an advisory role versus independent decision-making authority that could circumvent the town administrator and select board. Keezer noted the committee has been largely dormant since its creation and that the town has moved toward centralized administration. Fox concluded that further conversations needed to happen offline before the board could make a decision, maintaining holds on Articles 19, 29, and 34 for future discussion.
Street Sweeping Overnight Parking Ban (Link: 02:45:00 – 02:50:00)
Chair Dan Fox made a motion to implement an overnight parking ban to facilitate street sweeping in downtown, Old Town, and shipyard districts. The original proposal included dates from Monday April 20th through Friday April 24th, from 12:01 AM to 7:00 AM each day, with proper notification through temporary no parking signs, website updates, and social media posts. Fox noted a date error in the motion, correcting Friday’s date from April 22nd to April 24th.
Committee member Erin Noonan raised concerns about the timing, noting that the proposed dates fall during April vacation week when many residents leave town for the entire week and may leave cars parked without knowing about the street sweeping. She questioned whether there was collaboration with schools for notification and suggested the timing might not be optimal for success since people would be away and unable to move their vehicles.
Noonan explained that the street sweeping needed to be completed before Mother’s Day when boating season begins, creating time pressure. She noted that the overnight parking restriction from midnight to 7:00 AM was required due to off-street parking regulations. Fox suggested postponing the dates by one week to avoid vacation week conflicts.
The board agreed to amend the motion, changing the dates to Monday April 27th through Friday May 1st, maintaining the same 12:01 AM to 7:00 AM timeframe for all five days. The amended motion was seconded and approved unanimously.
Fox then moved to licensing matters, making a motion to renew an all-day alcohol seasonal club license for Eastern Yacht Club, pool license number 4244 Foster, with Chief Manager Jared Shorney. The renewal was subject to all taxes and fees being paid, receipt of all applicable departmental approvals, and compliance with Chapter 304 of the Acts of 2004. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously.
License Renewals and Permits (Link: 02:50:00 – 02:57:00)
The board conducted a roll call vote on the Eastern Yacht Club license renewal, with committee members Erin Noonan, Alexa Singer, Moses Grader, and Chair Dan Fox all voting in favor. Fox then addressed a local Sunday entertainment license for Dolphin Yacht Club, noting some confusion in the documentation about which license was being processed. After clarification, the board approved the Eastern Yacht Club Pool License for 4244 Foster Street.
Fox moved to the consent agenda, making a motion to approve several items subject to usual rules, regulations, fees, and receipt of required certificates of insurance. The approved items included Abbott Hall usage by Marblehead School Music for June 13-14, 2026, National Prayer Day activities on May 7, 2026 including bell ringing at Abbott Hall and meditation in the select board room, a student mock public meeting by Marblehead Charter School on April 8, 2026, and a Marblehead Rotary Pops Concert on December 12, 2026. The consent agenda also included a proclamation for May 7, 2026 for Marblehead Counseling’s 2nd Annual Community Champion Celebration.
The board reviewed a change order for the Village Street bridge replacement project, extending the contract with Freeman Peterson Inc. by $55,000 through December 31, 2026, funded by Chapter 90 money. Fox made a motion to approve change order number three for contract 2023003, authorizing the chair to execute the change order on behalf of the board. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously.
Fox presented one-day liquor license requests for two events: Coastline Marine at 8 Sewell Street for May 2, 2026 from 12 noon to 4 PM, and Steven Decatur for Cook Street on April 25, 2026 from 1 PM to 4 PM. The licenses were subject to standard conditions including $50 fees, proof of authorized alcohol sources, proper delivery and storage procedures, liquor liability insurance for town property events, and compliance with state liquor laws. The alcohol would be purchased from Harpoon Brewery and Merrimack Valley Distributors. The motion was seconded and approved by roll call vote.
The board received a letter of interest from Levi Sidman, a junior at Marblehead High School, expressing interest in serving as student representative on the Marblehead Task Force Against Discrimination. Fox initially suggested scheduling an interview for April 22nd but reconsidered due to school vacation week, rescheduling the interview for May 13th instead.
Fox made two announcements, first praising the JJ superhero event organized by the Make a Wish Foundation with local Boston media and Sergeant Morley’s participation. He noted meeting JJ’s grandfather, Steve Bubba Weinstein, a former Finance Committee vice chair and classmate, and jokingly asked if he might rejoin the Finance Committee. Fox also recognized Shelly Bedrosian’s presentation on Reynolds Field, praising her ownership and dedication to the project. Finally, Fox announced his support for police enforcing all Massachusetts laws and local regulations, including social hosting laws, while emphasizing his current focus on securing funding to support police operations.
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.