MHS Proudly Presents the Return of the Morton E. Converse Tournament of Plays!
Tournament of Plays Freshman Class Narrator Bradley Wightman is seen in traditional Dr. Seuss style garb and with prop, as he narrates the Freshman Class play, "The Seussification of Romeo and Juliet" at dress rehearsal, Thursday, April 7.
Photo by Keith Kent
Members of the Sophomore Class of 2024 perform during their last full rehearsal prior to the Tournament of Plays, acting out a scene from the Christoper Connors comical murder mystery play, "Who-You-Me-Someone"
Photo by Keith Kent
For the viewing pleasure of many local residents and students alike, it's the long awaited return of the performing arts after the two year hiatus caused by the global pandemic! it is once again time to come out and proudly support Murdock High School thespians, as the Morton E. Converse Tournament of Plays shall commence with all its prestige and glory at the Murdock Middle High School Auditorium this coming Friday and Saturday, April 8 and 9, beginning at 7:00 p.m. Students from all grades will put it all on the big stage under the lights hoping you will leave with your hearts filled with enjoyment and delight!
In a full four play rehearsal on Thursday, April 7, performing actors from the Freshman, Sophomore, Junior, and Senior Classes drew numbers to find their official order of appearance in the performance. For Friday, April 8, the order of performance will begin with the Senior Class, followed by Juniors, Freshman, and finally the Sophomore class. For the Saturday evening, April 9, performance, the performance order shall start out with the Sophomore class, proceed next with the Junior class performance, followed next by the Seniors, and finally close with the Freshman showing. The Saturday evening closing performance will be followed with the judging and presentation of the awards. Awards shall be presented for Best Performer, Best Performer in a Supporting Role, Most Entertaining Performer, Best Ensemble Performance, Best Sets, Best Costumes, Best Production and Best Play.
All students involved were notified they must be in school on Friday, April 8, and also must be fully academically eligible to participate in the Tournament of Plays. Students were also notified that after their performances were completed, there were to be no individuals or groups of students hanging out in the school hallways, and if parents or guardians were not able to attend, to make sure any rides needed were planned accordingly for both logistics and safety, as per the presentation of the ground rules by ever-dedicated and vigilant staff member, Stephanie Rondeau, who is known for being active in nearly countless student body activities and causes.
Beginning with the Freshman Class of 2025, attendees will be presented with the comical and whimsical performance of Peter Bloedel's, "The Seussification of Romeo and Juliet." Narrated by Bradley Wightman dressed in traditional Suess garb and occasional intentionally goofy accessories, cast members with rhyme, wit, and strategic limited poetry hit on all the key points of Romeo and Juliet, while adding humor, energy, action, and purpose to the human equation. What was once such a serious theatrical work becomes more relaxed to digest, while still provoking intellectual thought, all the time providing a pleasurable experience for the audience to enjoy and embrace while still realizing the depth and meaning of the classic work of the great Shakespeare. Directed by Kelly Fitzpatrick, there is no shortage of energy onstage coming from the students for your viewing pleasure.
Next, the Sophomore Class of 2024 offers up the classic one act script of "Who-You-Me-Someone" by Christopher Connors. Based on the genre of a "Funny whodunit script," have no doubt about it, someone is dead, as in stabbed in the back, and on the living room floor! However the wonderfully designed humor which binds both the characters and plot together, lies within the names of the cast. Expect well executed and purposefully designed confusion when calling on Mr. Who, Mr. Someone, Mr. You, Mr. Me, and the highly suspicious, Mrs. Hymn!
For any of you "of a certain age" who remember the famous past comedic greats, Abbott and Costello, and their routine "Who's on First" from the 1930s and 40s, then you quickly get the idea that the Sophomore Class had their work cut out for them, all the while most likely trying not to die of laughter while remembering who was Who, who is Me, who are You, is he Someone, is she Hymn, and well, YOU GET THE IDEA. Be sure to take lots of deep breaths, because you're going to need them for all the laughing! Directed by Candace Frye, "Who-You-Me-Someone" will take you back to a time of long coats, long dresses, and clean humor that still brings plenty of laughs.
Moving to the Junior Class of 2023, the title says it all to many young adults, as the students present, "How to Succeed in High School without Really Trying" by Jonathan Rand.
Based on a group of student agents who infiltrate an assembly with the desire to demonstrate their top secret tips and tricks, ranging from legally changing your name to get around roll call and much more--like using Tom Cruise to help memorize science terms--they will make sure High School will never be the same. Have little doubt this comical play hit home with more students than most parents and guardians would like to believe, but if you think back, we were all there once no matter how long ago! Based on the original play by Jonathan Rand, MHS Juniors will add their personal touch to make the play stay true to their dreams.
How about students learning to just get by using platforms like speaking with mysterious intensity, or speaking with 100 percent confidence even if you don't understand the material! Oh yes, now you can imagine where this is all going, and where the title of, "How to Succeed in High School without Really Trying" truly comes into play. Oh, if it were really that easy, but trust your performing artists, "IT WILL LOOK GREAT ON THE BIG STAGE!" Directed by Nicole Elias, be prepared for more than your share of laughs, and even thinking back, "Why didn't I think of that?"
Last, with the Senior Class of 2022, after missing out on their last two years to perform in the Tournament of Plays since their Freshman year of 2018-2019 due to the pandemic, Senior Class members finally get a last chance on the big stage under the lights performing the play, "The Hallmarks of Horror" also by Peter Bloedel.
A play about how to make things scary, narrators describe what can make all things scary no matter what is involved: lighting, background, sound, music, props, people, from small dolls to dark doors and more! Designed in a simple but descriptive process, you will witness actors playing monsters, clowns, zombies, a butcher, mad scientist, hapless teenage girl, and even an Apocalyptic Log Scientist, with a comedic look of all things scary bringing the audience to laughter in such a way that those watching ask themselves, "Why did I even even find these things scary?" Directed by Kristi Iannacone, for both those seniors and attendees watching, it was worth the wait!
The Tournament has a storied history in Winchendon. In 1938 or 1939 Morton E. Converse, Winchendon toy manufacturer and town benefactor, sponsored a speech contest at the high school. By 1941 the contest became a one-act play class competition. It appears it did not run during World War II, but was revived by 1948 and has been continuously run ever since, aside from the last two years' COVID hiatus. Plays must be shorter than 35 minutes from start to finish. No microphones are allowed. Judges view both nights' performances and select award winners.
The 2022 Morton E. Converse Tournament of Plays can be experienced on Friday, April 8 and Saturday, April 9 beginning at 7:00 p.m. Tickets are $7.00 each, and free for senior citizens and children under 5. Tickets may be purchased in advance from any cast member or at the door the night of the performance. Doors will open at 6:30 p.m. Concessions will be available both evenings. Questions may be directed to the tournament director, Stephanie Rondeau at srondeau@winchendonk12.org.
Freshman Class cast members of the play, "The Seussification of Romeo and Juliet" gather together on stage for one of the larger group scenes of the performance just before interacting with lots of movement among the cast.
Photo by Keith Kent
BOS Choke Up Over Water/Sewer Rate Increases, Defer Vote to April 11
At the joint Meeting of the Board of Selectmen and Finance Committee on Monday, March 28, the Board was unable to agree on a solution to the ongoing and steadily increasing deficits in the Water and Wastewater (sewer) Enterprise Funds. With three recommendations from two different consultants before them, the Board appeared uncertain as to the ramifications of the different plans and how to ease the burden on ratepayers, especially water ratepayers, in the first year of increases. The thirty-minute-long discussion was punctuated by numerous long silences, which is not customary at town board meetings.
Town Manager Justin Sultzbach began the discussion by introducing a spreadsheet summary of the three possible scenarios. "To break them down, scenario one is the data provided by Wright-Pierce at a previous water study that was done. Scenarios two and three are based on data from the Raftelis report that you received on [March] 14th. So the first one being the flat rate and the second being the split rate scenario. Of those three scenarios, the only one that projected out to not run a deficit was the first Raftelis recommendation which was the flat rate," Mr. Sultzbach explained.
"The important takeaway here is the importance of trying to replenish these earnings we've leaned on heavily over the past few years until eventually they run a deficit," Mr. Sultzbach continued. "Keeping those retained earnings is a best practice from a business standpoint, you want to recover about five to ten percent of your annual operating costs, toward the costs of one large capital replacement purchase. And so that's a goal that we're going to work to and move forward." He compared retained earnings to "a savings account for a rainy day."
To summarize for Courier readers: the 2020 Wright-Pierce rate study recommended increasing the water rates by 5.02 percent per year through fiscal year 2024 and the wastewater rates by 12.88 percent per year through fiscal year 2024. The 2022 Raftelis rate study recommended two possible scenarios. The first was to increase water rates immediately, for the current fiscal year, by 18 percent, with a 3 percent increase each year going forward, and to increase wastewater rates by 10 percent immediately, with a 3 percent increase each year going forward. Their second, rather complicated, recommendation was designed to reduce the impact on single-family homeowners by placing a heavier burden on multi-family and commercial properties, and by implementing a minimum flat fee in addition to per-usage rates, calculated by the diameter of the pipe (water: inflow, wastewater: outflow) connected to the property meter. In this scenario, the impact on ratepayers varies since single-family homes will see a reduced usage rate but will pay the additional minimum flat fee per quarter. However, as a general average, single-family ratepayers would see an increase of approximately 5 percent for fiscal year 2023 while non-residental ratepayers would see an increase of almost 17 percent for fiscal year 2023, for water and sewer combined. Not all ratepayers use both water and sewer services; some residents have town water but are not connected to town sewer, complicating the issue even more.
Mr. Sultzbach told the two Boards, "Our accounting and DPW staff have put in a lot of work to put together three scenarios compiling that data and trying to project out what that would look like in terms of the budget." He explained that the original Wright-Pierce recommendation would result in a deficit in the Water Enterprise Fund of $25,000 and a surplus in the Wastewater Enterprise Fund of $185,000. The Raftelis recommendation with a flat rate would result in a surplus in the Water Enterprise Fund of $80,000 and a surplus in the Wastewater Enterprise Fund of $185,000. The Raftelis recommendation for the complex split rates would result in a deficit in the Water Enterprise Fund of $90,000 and a surplus in the Wastewater Enterprise Fund of $95,000.
Selectman Barbara Anderson said, "One of the questions that I had is when we're talking about the flat rate, and it is proposed to just apply it to water users. The problem I had with that is that there have been several circumstances in town where the town has benefited from water usage, where it hasn't been charged, but it is put on the Water Enterprise Fund, for instance the cemeteries, the parks, when they were washing out the veterans' home with the fire hydrant, whenever fire hydrants are used. That is put solely on the backs of the water users. And I was wondering if maybe we shouldn't put...a ten dollar flat tax on all the residents before looking at increasing water and sewer rates for just the water and sewer users."
This launched a discussion of water use by the town, which Department of Public Works Director Brian Croteau rose to clarify. He explained that Grout Park, the park on School Street and the Winchendon Community Park have meters and bill the town to pay the Enterprise Fund for their water use; the G.A.R. Park has no water source. The cemeteries are not metered because of the way their lines were connected to the main coming from Ashburnham, and installing meters would cost thousands of dollars.
Board of Selectman Chair Audrey LaBrie asked, "Is there a way...to build into the town budget a flat rate fee for the town's portion of the water?"
Mr. Sultzbach replied that it was possible, and they could look at the various town properties, "such as the cemeteries, who's probably a large water user, maybe trying to find ways of determining costs, what would it take to actually get that water metered."
Ms. LaBrie said that as far as voting on a flat fee levied on all households to cover town water use, "I would be hesitant to do that tonight, without having some further discussion, and research, and public input and stuff like that. But whatever we decide to do tonight, it does not negate the fact that we could do something, research into something else and then do something again in the future," which Mr Sultzbach affirmed they could.
Board of Selectmen Vice Chair Rick Ward then made a motion to approve the first Raftelis scenario of a flat rate with an 18 percent increase for water rates and a 10 percent increase for wastewater rates for FY2023. Mr. Ward and Ms. LaBrie voted in favor, while Ms. Anderson and Selectman Danielle LaPointe voted nay. Selectman Amy Salter was not present for the joint meeting. With a 2:2 vote, the motion failed.
Ms. LaPointe then made a motion to adopt the split rate in the second Raftelis scenario with a 9 percent increase for fiscal year 2023 followed by an annual 3 percent increase for water, and a 5 percent increase for fiscal year 2023 followed by an annual 3 percent increase for wastewater. With this motion on the floor, Mr. Ward asked if this meant the Water Enterprise Fund would show a deficit. Mr. Sultzbach affirmed that the second Raftelis scenario indicated a $90,000 deficit.
"I have a real problem with just keeping these deficits going along," Mr. Ward said. "You know, this is an Enterprise Fund. The revenues collected is supposed to match the budgetary expenses. And we've been doing this for a long time, living with these deficits. In June 2020 we got a report from Wright-Pierce Water Rate Study that cost the town about $20,000 for that study. They told us we had to take action to stop these deficiencies. In March 2022, just a while ago, we paid for another study for $19,000. So we're up to almost $40,000 in studies, and the studies said the same thing, gave us these results. You need to make the changes now. So I am not going to support any, and I mean any motion that has a deficit in that column."
Finance Committee Chair Thomas Kane spoke up. "We've twice now gone to the town and asked the town to come up with quite a bit of money to cover the shortfalls that we've had, the deficits that we've had in both the water and sewer enterprises," he said. "There's got to be a solution. I think the only responsible thing for the Board of Selectmen would be to come up with a way of creating a balanced budget for the Enterprise Funds. To bring an un-balanced budget to the town, as I said, I think it's irresponsible. I wouldn't do it on the town side, I wouldn't do it in the schools, we have to have a balanced budget. I don't see why the Enterprise Funds would be any different."
FinCom member Maureen Ward asked if the projected $95K surplus in the Wastewater Enterprise Fund could be used to balance the projected $90K deficit in the Water Enterprise Fund. Mr. Sultzbach said he had thought of it, but "those aren't numbers that I'd be comfortable calculating on the fly, we'd have to sit down and really crunch it. But I would say that even though that would come out to about net zero, it would further prolong building up retained earnings, which every year we're skating by [with a] deficit in retained earnings is a year that the town isn't insulated from some potential issue down the road."
Ms. LaPointe said, "I'm not even comfortable with the 9 and the 5 percent that I proposed, because I think it's irresponsible and unfair to put this on water users at the end of a pandemic, when people have lost their jobs and their livelihoods have decreased. We are all sitting up here in privilege, being able to deal with it. Most people in our community are not. And I think it's irresponsible and unfair, on top of the increases they've had in the past three years, to just throw another 18 percent and say 'oh, well' because it's just what we have to do. We have to come up with some other way to buffer it, and make it easier while we're in this state of affairs." This led to further discussion about the different rates, percentages and projections, until Ms. LaPointe said, "I would make a motion that we table this until our next meeting if the timeline allows, so that we can dig into other scenarios. I mean, the vote's not going to pass tonight." She rescinded her earlier motion.
The Board agreed to return to the discussion at the next BOS Meeting on Monday, April 11, when the Town Manager and the BOS will have had time to work through all the numbers for an alternative plan.
For previous Courier coverage of the water and wastewater budget shortfalls and rate increases, see:
"Consulting Firm Addresses Growing Deficits in Water and Sewer Budgets" in the June 25-July 2 2020 edition of The Winchendon Courier
"Board of Selectmen Approve Water and Sewer Rate Increases for FY2022" in the March 25-April 1 2021 edition of The Winchendon Courier;
"Town Accountant Updates BOS: Water/Sewer Hemorrhaging Dollars and Gallons" in the August 12-19 2021 edition of The Winchendon Courier
"Dollar Amounts for Water and Wastewater STM Warrant Articles Adjusted Downward" and "FinCom Votes Not to Recommend STM Articles Addressing Water and Wastewater Enterprise Fund Deficits" in the October 21-18 2021 edition of The Winchendon Courier
"Winchendon Water, Sewer Users Facing Third Substantial Rate Increase" in the March 24-31 2022 edition of The Winchendon Courier
Also see:
June 23, 2020 Wright-Pierce report and presentation
March 11, 2022 Raftelis study report (PDF)
Residents Voice Questions, Concerns at Public Hearing for Revised Signage Bylaw
On Tuesday, April 5, the Planning Board held a public hearing to consider comments and changes on the draft version of the revised Zoning Bylaw regarding signs, which will be placed before voters at the 2022 Annual Meeting on Monday, May 16. The draft revision had been presented to the Board of Selectmen at their meeting on March 28 (see "Planning Director Urges Public to Comment on Proposed Sign Bylaw Changes" in the March 31-April 7 2022 edition of The Winchendon Courier). Several residents including three members of the Board of Selectmen attended the hearing.
The hearing began with consultant Ted Brovitz (Brovitz Community Planning and Design) going through the 17-page long document which comprises a single article, Article 9, of the Zoning Bylaws. (Read the draft document here (PDF)). Following this, Planning Board Chair Guy Corbosiero opened the floor to comments from the Board and town staff in attendance.
Planning Board Member Burt Gould said, "What this really is, is the city or the town is telling the ordinary homeowner or the business owner what he can do or what he can't do. Most of the time what he can't do. So be careful of one of these things. Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it. I would suggest a very careful look at some of these things. For example, say a big retailer came in here, like Lowe's. And they have a specific sign that they put on their property. You can't do it." Mr. Gould continued, "The gentleman has done a damn good job...it's the best boilerplate out of the city zoning I've ever seen. It really is. It doesn't fit Winchendon."
The Board discussed the draft bylaw's requirement of a special permit for portable message signs, since this would cover the message signs used by the town. It was agreed to add an exemption for those signs since the DPW or another town department might need to deploy them quickly in an emergency, such as an accident or road closing.
When Mr. Corbosiero opened the floor to public comment, resident Inanna Arthen rose to ask about flags. "I was just curious as to the rationale for the blanket prohibition on the feather flags or the teardrop flag signs," Mx. Arthen began. "That puzzled me. Why, and related to that question is unless I missed it, there's nothing in here about flags per se. There's a big gray area between flags and signs, and that still created some confusion last fall, and that still has not been addressed in the new bylaw. Do we have any regulations about...flags? Because not all flags are like the American flag or a national flag, there are those 'OPEN' flags. Lots of people use those, some of them are bigger than six square feet."
In response, Planning/Land Use Coordinator Nicole Roberts explained that the existing bylaws say that "flags which advertise that an organization is open for activities such as OPEN or Welcome flags are permitted," but flags are not mentioned in the new draft. Mr. Brovitz said flags were considered something people "just do" but could be added as allowed without a permit. Ms. Roberts said that the feather or teardrop flags were considered to be a distraction to drivers.
The next speaker recognized was resident and Vice Chair of the Board of Selectmen Rick Ward. He began, "I think the old bylaws said you had forty-eight hours to remove temporary signs once the event was over, and I couldn't find in the new bylaw where those forty-eight hours are or were they taken out. Did it change?" Mr. Brovitz explained that the new draft changed the time limit to seven days. Mr. Ward went on, "And just for clarification, because everyone in town has yard sale signs, and I'm trying to read this for clarification for yard sale signs, which are temporary signs. Do you need a permit, yes or no." Mr. Brovitz replied that residents do not need permits for yard sale signs.
"Also in the old bylaws it says no signs may be posted on utility poles or trees in a public way," Mr. Ward said. "I didn't see that in the new bylaw." This led to a discussion about signs not being allowed on any public right-of-way without permission.
Director of Planning and Development Tracy Murphy said, "I did reach out to the Town Manager's office because I was curious about this, because I know that there's an application for sign and banner requests for signs on town property. So I wanted to know what regulations govern this form, and Linda dug up that in the 'Town Manager's Policies and Procedures.' There's a section, 3.18 'Signs on Town Property' that is under the jurisdiction of the Town Manager. No sign public or private, permanent or temporary shall be placed on town property that is under the jurisdiction of the Town Manager or his designee including the town owned cable spanning Central and Front Streets without the prior written approval of the Town Manager or his designee. So there's already a policy in place for that."
After Mr. Ward, resident Jill Sackett rose to address several points. After stating that she is a member of the Master Plan Implementation Committee but was speaking solely as a citizen of the town, Ms. Sackett began, "I'd like to applaud all the work that you folks did. This is a really comprehensive document." She went on, "I am just as enthusiastic and on-board with everybody else here about seeing this town develop and I have really high hopes and aspirations for this town's economic viability. There's always a difficult balance between encouraging businesses and making it easy enough for a business to come to town and having freedom of expression and freedom of speech, and trying to follow some of the desires we have for what is appropriate in this town." But, Ms. Sackett said, the Purpose seems to be all about "aesthetics" and this isn't reflected in the detailed explanations of the signs and restrictions for each. "If I were a business coming here, I wouldn't know what the planned character of each zoning district is and whether my signs are going to be whatever that is."
Ms. Sackett admitted that asking businesses to follow a "branding" or theme for how a town wants to appear can be "overly prescriptive" in defining styles. "But there are things that you can do to guide people on what would be an appropriate type of a sign. We don't have that right now in town, and if you were to drive around, you see everything, you see...some crazy colors out there. On some of the buildings, you see all manner of fonts and the way it's written now, if I were a business coming in, and I was in a permitted section of the chart, if I wanted to do a thing that's permitted I guess I don't have to come to anybody about it. It looks like I could do just pretty much anything I want for color, for type of font, maybe certain graphics, which may or may not be considered appropriate or desirable for this town."
Ms. Sackett added, "I'm just saying that we have plans to develop this town in a certain look, we have an Historic Commission, which isn't mentioned here. So if I have an historic building or [I'm in] an historic district, and I'm going to put a sign up, how do we make sure that it's appropriate for that historic building?"
Ms. Murphy responded that Mr. Brovitz had put together a draft of design standards (PDF), and this would have to be developed in tandem with the Bylaws and with public input, including input from the Historic Commission. It's an ongoing and multi-part process.
Ms. Sackett then asked how the new draft bylaw categorizes vinyl signs attached to the walls of businesses with cords, which appear to be taking the place of permanent signs for the businesses. Would they be temperary signs, permanent signs or wall murals? "I think they're really tacky," she said. "I don't think it's the look Winchendon wants. If I were a business considering coming in, I wouldn't want to open a store next to a place that looked like that because it looks like a pop-up shop. You know, it looks like it's there for a little while and maybe it'll go."
Finally, Ms. Sackett addressed the issue with old signs for long-gone businesses remaining in place indefinitely. She suggested that new businesses be required to put down some kind of deposit to cover the cost of removing their sign if they close down without clearing their property. The Board agreed with the problem, but felt that charging a deposit to new businesses might be unfair to the majority who do act responsibly.
Resident and member of the Board of Selectmen Danielle LaPointe rose next to address numerous points. She began with the draft bylaw's Purpose, which seems to refer only to businesses and not to ordinary town residents who may not have "goods and services" to offer. She then moved on to questions about why illuminated signs need a special permit, and whether section 9.7.2 concerning electrical signs means that every electrical sign must be hard-wired into a circuit and couldn't just be plugged into an outlet. "I'm just saying, one of the reasons we were doing these changes were to get rid of any ambiguity or confusion. So I'm just offering things that maybe make it clear," Ms. LaPointe added after discussion of her points.
Ms, LaPointe then moved to the prohibition on sidewalk or A-frame signs and display case signs in all residential zones (R10, R40 and R80). "What if somebody has an approved home based business in one of the first three districts...They can't even put a sidewalk sign like that at the bottom of their driveway, maybe just to say, you know, while their hours are open." She observed, "It just doesn't seem like we're doing our best to make things easy on our people. Not that everything has to be easy, but sometimes it seems like we're just being a bit restrictive."
Ms. LaPointe urged the Board to make a very clear statement about current businesses being grandfathered, so that they would not be required to redo all their signage to conform to the new bylaw, because she had been hearing concerns about this. The Board affirmed that this is the case and that existing signs will be grandfathered in.
Other details Ms. LaPointe questioned included a rule about only allowing the business name and logo, and no other information, on suspended signs, and counting two businesses that share an entrance to a building as one business for calculating signage. She also asked why the Building Inspector would determine temporary signs and not the Planning Board. Each of the questions raised by Ms. LaPointe evoked considerable discussion. On the last question, Ms. Murphy said, "the way our zoning is written, if it's not listed, it's prohibited. So by listing 'all other' than it could be allowed. But again, it's up to the determination of zoning enforcement...The Building Inspector [does] zoning enforcement, and more than likely once he makes the decision he can make a decision and if it has to go to the Board, then it will, other than that, he may be able to authorize it prior to save time."
Following Ms. LaPointe, resident Kyle Bradley rose to say, "I didn't write down an item list or bullet point list but it seems to me that whoever wrote this forgets where we live. We live in Winchendon, Massachusetts, not Boston or Cambridge." He went on, "you scroll down, the more drawings we get it's more city-like, it's just totally prohibitive. I mean, what if we get somebody that was moving to town with like a craft store, and they're going to net $300 a week, the ROI on $1,000 sign? You're talking six, eight months, just to bring in business when they could put up a simple sign to bring business and...maybe net $500 a week." He mentioned businesses that had to operate under old signs from long-defunct businesses because they can't afford to remove the old sign, such as Two Foxes Farm Pizza whose storefront still reads Jersey Diner. (The Jersey Diner sign has been there for decades, throughout the tenure of the previous tenant, Lisa's Central Diner.)
Mx. Arthen rose a second time to emphasize a point made by Ms. LaPointe. "Do not underestimate the number of home based businesses in Winchendon...There are several dozen home based businesses and there are more of them starting up all the time. And what it occurred to me was that we have several categories of signs which seem rather harmless. The sign case, isn't going to trip anybody up on a sidewalk and yet they are totally banned from residential zones, R10 or R40. These businesses are allowed to operate in those zones. But we're telling them, they can't put signs up in their zones. So maybe we need to think about that. Business is changing. And we're seeing a tremendous amount of entrepreneurship in Winchendon right now, it's really quite amazing. And what I noticed, trying to collect these people and sort of help promote them with the Courier is that they have a lot of trouble promoting themselves. And so maybe it behooves the town not to make it even harder for them."
Ms. Murphy responded that Article 6 of the Zoning Bylaw deals with home based businesses. "There'll be an opportunity when you get to Article Six to make some changes to it to even further support home based businesses because I think that section needs quite a bit of work as well," she said.
With all comments heard, the Board reviewed the changes agreed upon. Page 9.1, add "residents" to the Purpose; page 9.2, mention the Town Manager's Policies and Procedures regarding signs on town property; page 9.3, remove item 9.6.3.5 requiring a special permit for illuminated signs; page 9.4, add "new" to 9.7.2.1; page 9.5, allow A-Frame/Sidewalk signs in residential and industrial zones by Special Permit; page 9.11, strike out "additional information is prohibited" for suspended signs; page 9.12, change definition of "mural sign" to mean permanently, i.e. un-removably, fixed to or painted on the building; page 9.13, remove the line about two businesses with a common entrance being considered one business for sign computation purposes--each business is allowed one sign; page 9.15, add an "Exemptions" section for the town's portable signs; item 7., add "all other" temporary signs and replace "Building Inspector" with "Zoning Enforcement Officer"; page 9.16, remove "people signs" from prohibited signs. (After considerable discussion, feather flags remain prohibited.)
The Planning Board voted 4:1 to close the hearing, with Mr. Gould opposed. The Board then voted to approve the new draft Article 9, with the changes made, with 4 in favor, 1 opposed (Mr. Gould).
The next step will be a vote on the new Bylaw at Annual Town Meeting. Town Manager Justin Sultzbach will present a draft of the Town Meeting Warrant at the next Board of Selectmen's meeting on Monday, April 11. Zoning articles require a two-thirds majority vote to pass.
BOS Approve New Contract for Town Manager
Winchendon's pay scale still well below local average for comparable positions
In this informational material provided at the March 28, meeting of the BOS regarding Town Manager contract negotiations, individual assessments over ten categories can be viewed as given by each Selectman on the Board. Of note is a large disparity in scores regarding "Relations with Elected Board Members" which also coincided with the only no-vote regarding the new contract. Selectman Barbara Anderson also provided the lowest score in every category, of all scores submitted as presented by the BOS at the public meeting.
Public record, Town of Winchendon
After convening more than one executive session devoted to contract negotiations, at their regular meeting on Monday, March 28 the Board of Selectmen voted to modify Town Manager Justin Sultzbach's contract based on his performance to date, and to set a salary closer to the competitive rate for the field.
The original contract which was effective May 17, 2021 through June 30, 2024, established a starting salary of $130,000 annually plus benefits, based on experience. It was Sultzbach's first official position as a Town Manager and he needed to prove he could do the job. Since then, Sultzbach has demonstrated competence through aggressive future capital planning, seeking grant funding opportunities both on his own and with town assistance, budget management on his own and with town assistance, and other required facets of the position. The Board, by a vote of 4-1, approved increasing Sultzbach's base salary to $139,050, with the only no vote cast by Selectman Barbara Anderson.
Sultzbach told the Courier that after the pay raise, he still earns $16,000 less annually than what his predecessor Keith Hickey would have been making at this point. With standard annual increases, had Hickey continued as Winchendon's Town Manager, his salary would have been set at $155,086 by 2023.
Additional benefits such as regular paid holidays, sick days, bereavement leave, and four weeks paid vacation continue as specified in the original contract, as does a "Phone and Vehicle Stipend." The stipend, which Sultzbach explained was previously $3,600 for his predecessor, is now $4,300, as adjusted 2.5 percent annually over the years 2015 to 2023.
One of the dilemmas facing many municipalities in finding and keeping qualified professional staff is that the private sector pays much more competitively than the public sector. Due to this, many cities and towns in Massachusetts struggle to find and keep qualified Town Managers and Town Administrators, forcing most municipalities to offer a higher pay to qualified candidates. A Google search on "Much closer to Sultzbach's home" shows that Carlisle, MA is advertising for a Town Adminstrator at $170K plus; a search on "Sultzbach's home town" shows that Lowell, MA is advertising for a City Manager at a salary of $195,000 to $235,000 annually. The local town of Lancaster, at half the commute for Sultzbach, was advertising recently for a Town Manager at $160,000 to start. Even the small western Massachusetts town of Williamstown, with a population of just 7,800, is seeking a Town Manager at a starting pay of $140,000 to $155,000. It's easy to see the competitive salary problem in finding and keeping qualified professional staff. At $130K, Winchendon was offering far below the competitive pay rate. Communities that don't offer competitive pay risk seeing a high turnover in highly qualified staff.
At the March 28 meeting, the BOS began discussion and voting on the topic of "Consideration of ratification of the new Town Manager's Contract" at 2:35:30 into the meeting. The recorded meeting can be viewed online at Winchendon Board of Selectmen Meeting March 28, 2022.
Board Chair Audrey LaBrie acknowledged that since coming on board, Sultzbach had helped the town obtain some $1,750,000 in grants so far for fiscal year 2022. Many of these were team efforts where Sultzbach contributed his input. She added that Sultzbach had also personally landed three additional grants for a total of $127,000 to date and is currently working on further grants. By working with the Robinson Broadhurst Foundation, Sultzbach secured an additional $600K for the Winchendon Community Park Amphitheater, LaBrie pointed out, and also negotiated health care cost percentages resulting in a $20,000 savings for the next fiscal year for the town.
LaBrie explained, "There was a lot of discussion about it's a tight budget. It's always a tight budget. The comment was made by multiple members about the current employment situation, the need for qualified people at various levels, and the need for the town to ensure that we can keep [people] that we feel are good for Winchendon, and at the same time balancing that with the bottom line numbers. The amount of savings that Mr. Sultzbach has brought in, as a majority, the board felt that it was more than offset of the $9,750 of the additional costs." Selectman Danielle LaPointe responded to LaBrie, "You've done a very good job with your synopsis."
A vote was taken to approve the updated Town Manager's contract which passed by 4-1. Sultzbach thanked the Board, saying, "I would like to express my appreciation of support from the majority of the board, it's definitely appreciated. I think this community has definitely done its job expressing its hopes for the future. I think seeing historically where Winchendon was and where Winchendon could be, I think it's special for me to be a part of that, and I think it's special for the community, so thank you."
The Courier met with Sultzbach on Wednesday, April 6, to clarify the points in the new versus the old contract. Asked what he would like to say to town residents regarding his continued employment with the community, Sultzbach said, "I would really like to thank the Board of Selectman and the citizens of Winchendon for their continued support. I think we came to agreement on a contract that was both competitive to the market, but also fair to the community. I think that was an important piece. In addition, I am always thanking the community for the opportunity to serve this town. I think there are a lot of good things we have coming down the road, and their continued support is appreciated."
Down in the Trenches, Traffic Diverted as Necessary
Seen in these photos taken on Tuesday, April 5, serious trench work continues at the intersection of Summer and Central Streets in Winchendon, in front of the Unitarian Universalist Church, as part of the entire sewer replacement component of the Central Street Reconstruction Project. As explained by a crew member from Baltazar Construction, the replacement of all pipes throughout the project will take place on the southbound travel lane of Central Street, with daytime traffic allowed to flow on the northbound side from the direction of the intersection of Front and Central Streets toward Maple Street. During normal project work day hours, all southbound Central Street traffic will be diverted by law enforcement as needed down Pleasant Street towards its intersection with Front Street by the Winchendon Town Hall. Please be watchful during project hours for police officers, project construction crew staff, and tighter than normal traffic in intersection areas as congestion is to be expected throughout 2022. Photos by Keith Kent
Winchendon COVID-19 Numbers Continue to Drop While New Variant Becomes Established
First the first time in many months, Winchendon has recorded two consecutive weeks of COVID-19 viral positivity of less than two percent, dropping from the March 31 number of 1.70 percent, to a low positivity level of just 1.23 percent, as of the most recent Massachusetts Department of Public Health Report dated April 7.
Locally, in our ten town area, only four towns went up. Ashby, which registered 0.0 percent just a week ago, this week saw a significant spike, going up to 6.80 percent positivity. Despite this singular town surge, our ten town area still registered virtually the same, coming in this week at 2.82 percent, almost paralleling last week's reported average of 2.83 percent. Royalston has registered at 0.00 percent for nearly a full month.
Ashburham increased from 3.40 to 3.85 percent, Westminster dropped from 4.45 to 4.34 percent, Templeton dropped from 4.75 to 2.07 percent, Phillipston dropped from 3.95 to 2.53 percent, Athol slightly increased from 2.15 to 2.57 percent, Gardner with 21,000 residents increased slightly from 2.41 to 2.61 percent, and Hubbardston dropped from 2.68 to 2.23 percent.
As peoples' bodies adjust to the newest viral strain, the Omicron BA.2 subvariant, numbers across the Commonwealth have, as expected, continued to slightly increase. Boston has increased from 1.61 to 2.31 percent positive, Worcester increased from 0.73 to 0.93 percent, and Springfield increased from 1.37 to 1.97 percent positive over the last 7 days. All numbers are still far more medically manageable than many previous months. The Massachusetts 14-day viral positivity average as of the April 7 DPH report is 2.38 percent positivity.
The Winchendon Board of Health recently voted to hold a "Town-Wide Earth Day Cleanup" on Saturday, May 7, during the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., rain or shine. It was the hope of the Board that warmer weather would bring out more people to assist with cleaning up our town. Our viral numbers are way down and we need your help! A large open top roll off dumpster will be located on Pleasant Street, across from the Town Hall, as a base of operations for waste collected, and gloves will be available.
In closing, the Town of Winchendon Board of Health continues to recommend becoming vaccinated if not yet vaccinated for COVID-19, if healthy enough to do so. Please have that conversation with your certified health care professional, and not with those on social media.
Keith Kent
Chair
Board of Health
Town of Winchendon
