SOUTHAMPTON — Over 100 Southampton voters elected to pass all but one article at a special Town Meeting held on Saturday morning.

Among the eight articles passed were a $3.2 million debt exclusion for engineering and architectural services for the construction of a new public safety complex and the appropriation of $15,000 to preserve the historic First Congregational Church.

The first article on the warrant — requesting permission for the town to borrow and appropriate $3.2 million for pre-construction costs associated with the town’s new public safety complex project — garnered the most attention from the crowd. This amount will be used for initial engineering and architectural services for the project, namely the required hiring of an owners project manager.

“Basically, they’re the person that represents the town and the town’s best interests during the building process,” explained Town Administrator Scott Szczebak.

The complex would be constructed on a 52-acre property at 117-225 College Highway, which the town bought last year for $2.2 million. The property is large enough to serve as a potential location of other needed projects including a new senior center and possibly affordable housing.

But up first is the public safety complex.

Southampton’s Fire Chief Richard Fasoli and Police Chief Ian Illingsworth both spoke to the need for a new public safety complex in the town due to the difficulties that their current aging buildings face — which they believe cannot be effectively addressed with renovations.

The fire station was built out of a schoolhouse constructed in 1863, and the police station operates out of the old town hall building, constructed in 1904.

Fasoli said that the walls of the current fire station are so cramped that trucks have to be brought out of the station for everyone to get inside of them. He also noted the tripping hazards posed by the old school building’s foundations, which jut out, as well as issues with leaks, mold and storage.

“We’re just out of space in the station,” he said.

Illingsworth faces the opposite problem at the police station, which has an abundance of space — but space that isn’t laid out appropriately for police station operations. Many parts of the building, he said, are also not accessible for those with disabilities.

“We are one ADA complaint away from major renovations to that building,” he said.

But what Illingsworth said stands out the most to him in the station is the location of its holding cells, which are just past the station’s lobby. He said this means that victims of crimes often have to walk past the person who victimized them, which he takes issue with.

Kristina Madsen, at-large co-chair of the town’s Public Safety Building Committee, told voters that approving appropriations now is important, because costs have already gone up for the project since the town approached the idea of building a new public safety complex roughly 10 years ago.

“If we choose to kick the ball down the road once more, it is certain to keep escalating,” she said of the costs.

Resident Maureen Groden agreed with this assessment, saying that the need for a new public safety complex “applies to everyone” in town, as anyone could have an emergency.

“Our town needs to keep this ball rolling,” Groden said.

There was some concern expressed over the breakdown of cost approvals for the project. Despite the town’s ultimate decision to approve the $3.2 million appropriation, no money from that approved amount will be spent until the remaining $24.7 million for the project’s construction and building costs are approved. This final stage of approval will take place at a future special Town Meeting in September, followed by a special election in November.

Szczebak responded that this breakdown is due to the town hoping to have a clearer picture of costs, and particularly interest rates, before asking for the total amount.

The townspeople will also have to approve the $3.2 million appropriation at the town election in May.

Szczebak explained that the tax increase associated with the initial $3.2 million amount will be about $0.16 per $1,000 of a home’s value until the conclusion of the project.

“So, on average, for a $433,000 house in Southampton, this $3.2 million will cost a little over $69 per year,” Szczebak said.

For the additional $24.7 million amount, the increase will be about $1.28 per $1,000 of a home’s value.

This article passed with a placard vote of 123 “yes” votes to 25 “no” votes.

Other articles

The town also voted to allow the town treasurer to invest town funds in accordance with the Prudent Investor Rule, and allow the town to adopt an Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) Liability Trust Fund. An OPEB fund is a trust fund established by a government unit for depositing funds to benefit retired employees and their dependents.

Additionally, voters approved a change to town bylaws rescheduling the annual Town Meeting from the first Tuesday in May at 7 p.m. to the first Saturday in May at 10 a.m. in an effort to make meetings more accessible and draw out more voters.

Another change to town bylaws was also approved to streamline the process of naming public buildings, structures and lands — as well as updating the criteria for naming one of these things after a person, organization or entity.

Voters also approved a transfer of $5,000 from the Group Health Insurance account to Town Hall accounts for ongoing legal expenses related to land use planning, bylaw changes, land acquisition and more, as well as a transfer of $21,452.28 to pay unpaid bills from previous years.

Finally, Town Meeting voters approved the transfer of $15,000 from Community Preservation Act funds to the First Congregational Church of Southampton for the installation of three heat pumps in the portion of the church used by the public in an effort to preserve the historic building and provide proper climate control for its public events.

An article proposing changes to general bylaw language surrounding swimming pools and aiming to strengthen regulations for securing swimming pools was ultimately struck from the agenda over confusion about whether previously existing swimming pools would be grandfathered in under the new regulations, or whether they would be found in violation of these new regulations. This article will be brought back to committee for further consideration.

Alexa Lewis can be reached at alewis@gazettenet.com.