Town meeting has entered the electronic age! Tonight was the inauguration of electronic voting at Town Meeting. We were issued "clickers" to register our votes, so every vote is now a part of the public record. They should be available on the Town's website by the end of the day following the meeting session.
The night started with the customary first night appearance by the Menotomy Minute Men. This is a great tradition, and it is fun (and loud) to have them. We also had a recognition of the 30th anniversary of the town's sister city program with Nagaokakyo, Japan. The mayor was present to make some very kind remarks and acknowledge the efforts of Dick Smith in starting and promoting the relationship.
Dick was one of several town meeting members and other town luminaries who passed away since the close of the previous meeting. There were also acknowledgements for Harry McCabe, Bill Armstrong, Dr. Michael Foley, John Fitzmaurice, and others.
The first "real" bit of business tonight, after the swearing in of new members, was the appointment of Elsie Fiore as the measurer of wood and bark. I believe this will be her third year in the post. This year, I will really try and find a need for buying some wood or bark so I can request a measurement. James O'Connor was reelected as assistant town moderator.
The first article to be discussed was a zoning bylaw amendment to site medical marijuana treatment centers. The recommendation was to allow their location in B3 and B5 districts, which includes the Mass Ave sections of the heights, the center, and the east. There were several speakers who felt that other locations (i.e. further from their house) might be a better option, and that the proposal should have included all business districts. If this extension was to be a serious proposal, those members could have come with an amendment to that effect. However, taking no action at all would open the door to trying to site such a clinic anywhere in town, including non-commercial districts. I voted with the majority in approving the proposed change to the zoning bylaw.
The second major discussion was in regards to extending the town's outdoor lighting bylaw to include lighting from commercial and industrial sources. The bylaw change would allow residents to seek remedy from the building inspector if a light from an abutting property was directed at their house or property. An amendment was proposed to include nearby properties, since the bylaw wouldn't otherwise include light from two properties over if they were causing a problem. I asked for a clarification that this change would not impact events at Robbins Farm Park, since there was an exception for events approved by the BoS, where our events are approved by the PRC. Town council through the chair of the BoS assured me that would not be an issue. I believe I voted for the amendment, which passed. I know I voted for the final article which was adopted.
Articles 7 and 9 had the recommended vote of no action approved. Article 10 was postponed until May 5 to allow time to read the proposed substitute motion. Article 11 was a change to the bylaw allowing for electronic voting to correct a previous error. The voting system allows each individual's vote to be displayed during the meeting. The intent of the original bylaw was that it would display the individual votes if the vote was close, within 6 votes. However, there are many votes that require a two-thirds majority, which could be really close but be far more than 6 votes difference. The change, which I voted for in the majority, changed the definition to being within three votes of the required minimum.
We ended the night in the middle of a discussion regarding parking in the cemetery. This has been a pet cause of Mr. Harrington's for many years. I must say that his presentation was very persuasive, and I hadn't been fully aware of the extent of the problem. From the ensuing discussion, it appears that at present, there are no parking signs in the cemetery. There is no provision in the town's bylaw to ticket and fine these vehicles; the only remedy is towing. The town acknowledged that there was a problem, but there appears to be no will to actually enforce the existing regulation so long as there is construction on the adjacent Mystic Street. The proposal is to establish a fixed schedule of fines for parking in the cemetery for any purpose other than cemetery business. We adjourned for the night without any resolution.
Overall, I thought the electronic voting was a net positive. Since there are no more standing votes, there is no real way to tell how your neighbors are voting until after the vote is closed. There is no more appealing to peer pressure. It was funny to see just how excited the moderator appeared to be. We had electronic voting for just about everything. There was one issue with someone believing their vote was not properly recorded. I was concerned with the way votes are displayed. The system shows how many votes have been received as the voting period counts down. The system then switches to show the yes and no vote counts. There were several occasions when the vote tally from the first screen was a few votes behind the sum of votes on the second screen. We were assured that this was just a result of someone entering their vote at the last possible moment, and not a glitch with the system itself. Good enough.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You like most TMM were confused on the pot dispensaries article. Voting NO would have the same effect as a substitute motion to include more business zones! The reason is that residential zones do not allow a home business to have any employees, nor signage, nor significant traffic. These are only allowed in business and industrial zones, hence Chapdelaine and the town lawyer were fear mongering. The resultant bylaw makes it nearly impossible for a pot shop in Arlington, especially given the environmental review and distance from schools and daycare. Pure hypocrisy given how voters supported medical pot.
ReplyDeleteNice summary of the meeting!
ReplyDeleteI felt that the discussion on where to zone medical marijuana dispensaries was a whole lot of time spent on nothing of significance.
Based on the rules put forth by the state, such as only allowing x number of dispensaries (2?) per county, I believe the chances of Arlington seeing a dispensary established here, if we made our zoning as permissive as possible, would be very very close to nil.
Of course the same voters that overwhelmingly supported medical marijuana have upon reflection decided that they do support it, just someplace other than on their block; or within a block of their block.
One of the key benefits of a democracy that doesn't get near as much attention as all the others is just how entertaining it can be.
I was working and unavailable when the electronic voting equipment was being tested at Town Hall, so I don't know for sure but will try and find out: it could be that those numbers showing the count of votes before voting has closed represent the total number of signals received, not the total number received by distinct voting unit.
People can change their vote as often as they like during the voting window, but the final total will only show the last vote received from each unit.
My on-the-fly math wasn't good enough last night to really tell whether that might have been happening. Going to have to check and see.
regarding your comments in paragraph 5: I should have come with "a serious proposal"?
ReplyDeleteDon't ever call my remarks to Town Meeting frivolous.
I wouldn't presume to waste your time my own and 200 others' just to hear me go on. Voting down the proposed article would have effected exactly the result I wanted, which MK described above.
With the Redevelopment Board's inability, or fear, of defining just how few places their article qualifies to vend medical marijuana (after the nebulous "child-centered activity" buffer zone is enforced), I thought it fairer to relieve the resulting concentration by broadening the proposed areas to include all retail business addresses.
Our town meeting is a representative body. I'll look out for the serious quality of life issues that concern my precinct, and you can make sure you have your festival lights in the park.
I didn't say anyone's comments were "frivolous", nor did I call anyone out by name for their comments. However, I do believe that if someone has a serious objection to the wording of an article, and if they have a solution in mind to remedy that concern, Town Meeting is improved by the discussion of the alternate proposal. For right or wrong, I did feel that there was a bit if "not in my backyard" going on. That does not make anyone's arguments any less valid. However, in the absence of an alternative recommendation, when faced with a state mandate to do something, we're stuck with what's before us.
Delete