by Frank Schroth

At last Tueday’s Board of Selectmen’s meeting they discussed the the ongoing management and status of operations of the Ulin rink with representatives of Curry College and reviewed another draft of the process for handling property owners who have been receiving free sewer service with DPW director Joe Lynch and Town Counsel John Flynn.

Curry College, which is in the 4th year of a 5 year agreement with the town to manage the facility, is seeking a rate increase on fees to help offset an ongoing deficit incurred in operating the rink. They estimate they are operating $75 short per hour. Their effective rink rate is ~$191 per hour compared to a rink rate of $220-260 for other DCR outsourced rinks and $300-390 for privately operated rinks.

According to an update filed by Curry and reviewed at the meeting, the college has incurred a negative cash flow of over $500,000. This is largely a combination of operating losses and capital expenditures. They have also increased ice time over that provided when the DCR operated the rink which includes an increase in free skate time to public. The overall aesthetics and condition of the building have also been improved. The college has locker rooms in the facility and their teams use the rink.

They asked to have rates increased to $15 per hour for non-profits and $20 per hour for everyone else. The Selectmen voted unanimously to approve the increase. However, they want to see progress with the DCR. Member Hurley in particular was frustrated “that we have not seen a proposal to the DCR” from the town and Curry. Their is serious concern that the upcoming change in administration at the state house will “kill the opportunity” to secure a long term commitment from the DCR for the rink. Hurley pointed to Arlington as an example of a town that had an agreement with the DCR but TownPlannerBill Clark pointed out that after 25 years Arlington needs to turn the rink back over to the DCR after having invested substantial amounts of money. Clark does not feel that is a good template for an agreement.

Curry officials will work with the town to provide whatever information is required to build a realistic pro forma. Development of that pro forma is the next step.

The selectmen also discussed the contentious issue of how to handle billing property owners who may have been receiving free sewer service for who knows how long, which is part of the problem. DPW director Lynch and Town Counsel Flynn reviewed another draft that outlines how to address the issue. The word “amnesty’ did not come up. As Lynch explained the focus was on the process of identification and methods. Letters will be issued to the suspect properties with intent of “amicable entrance” to determine if there is a sewer hook up.

Town Counsel Flynn reviewed the notion of a 6 year statute of limitations, however, he noted that if “fraudulent concealment” can be established then that would be an exception to the statute. He noted that can be difficult to prove.

A good deal of discussion was taken up with how the appeals process would work and under what circumstances an appeal would be granted. Property owners disputing the finding of the DPW can appeal to the Assistant Town Administrator. If the appeal is denied it can be heard by the Selectmen which would take place in open session. Member Hurley was argued for some kind of conditions be imposed. “They will have to show some new facts,” he said. Chair Keohane was inclined to be more lenient. “We may interpret a different way” from the Asst Town Administrator he said.  Flynn said that it would be possible to put in a process whereby someone requesting an appeal before the Selectmen would need to provide a statement explaining why they believed the Asst Town Administrator’s judgement was wrong. Hurley’s concern was that they would be hearing from everyone who received an unfavorable judgement if there was no effort to be made in requesting an appeal.

The Selectmen are scheduled to take up the issue again at their next meeting.