2017 Town Meeting - Night One

Another year of town meeting is off to a rollicking start.  The opening night festivities are always fun.  This year's opening was especially nice because my younger son, Connor was volunteering with the electronic voting group, so we went together.   I had to put a copy of an amendment on chairs before the meeting, so it worked well that we both needed to be there early.

We opened with the Menotomy Minutemen marching in and leading us in the Star Spangled Banner.  It is a little anachronistic for a Revolutionary War group, but they always do a great job.  It has been fun over the years to observe my son's friend who is in the Minutemen grow up and progress from a cut-out wood prop to now carry a full muzzle-loader.

This was followed by the invocation.  This year's was delivered by a rabbi from a synagogue in Lexington with strong Arlington affiliation.  Since today was the end of Holocaust Memorial Day as well as Armenian Genocide Day, the tone was very somber.  He encouraged us to be the light and to strive to make good decisions.

Joe Curro gave the State of the Town Address.  It was well delivered, touching on the history of the town, our current struggles, and our potential to make history again.  I liked the reference to the founding of Visicalc in an attic here in Arlington, and how so much of what we do at Town Meeting is now dominated by spreadsheets.

After the receiving of reports, the reappointment of Elsie Fiore as Measurer of Wood and Bark, and the reelection of James O'Connor as Assistant Moderator, we waded into the first batch of articles, those related to zoning.  There is a history of these articles not going well at Town Meeting.  Last year, many were withdrawn at the last instant without any warning.  I was a little nervous about what this year would bring.

I was very pleasantly surprised that the articles were well presented, clearly explained, and couched in language that worked in their favor.  The first two articles, on increasing residential density in mixed-use developments and increasing the area available to artisanal fabrication were passed overwhelmingly with no discussion.  This brought us to Article 8 regarding driveway slopes, reduced parking counts, and buffers.  We granted the presenters a full 15 minutes to make their initial presentation.  Driveway slopes would be reduced to 15% to make it safer to see people in the sidewalk.  The number of required parking spaces was reduced so that wouldn't be such a dominant factor in house design and massing.  The buffer was introduced to facilitate the acceptance of parking in the side setback, by requiring vegetation between the driveway and the adjacent neighbor.  There was an amendment that sought to limit the scope of the proposal to just reducing the slope.  Despite and early attempt to quash debate that failed, there was a lot of discussion about the number of parking spaces.  I felt the proponents did a good job of framing the debate as a choice to provide a lower number of parking spaces if that was a good fit for the property.  Many residents, myself included, get by with only one car in their family.  The additional parking space just takes up space that could be used for other purposes.  A second vote to end debate passed, the amendment failed, and the original motion passed.  Outstanding.

The last two zoning articles had recommended votes of no action, which were promptly affirmed.  This brought us to the good neighbor proposals,  Articles 11-14 proposed changes to the general bylaws, but they were for actions related to demolition and construction.  They were intended to improve communication by providing notice to abutters when larger-scale projects were being approved, institute some protections for abutters in regards to site maintenance and public protection, and limiting the hours for disruptions in residential neighborhoods.  I proposed an amendment that was favorably received by the proponents to require that contact information for the contractor or developer be expressly included in the neighbor notifications.    There was discussion from members who thought the articles went to far, and from others who thought they didn't go far enough.  After a second vote to end debate, my amendment and all four articles were adopted.  My congratulations to the ARB and the Residential Study Group for this tremendous outcome.

We postponed the discussion on Article 15, the pride commission until Wednesday.  I'm assuming that the proponents hadn't expected us to move so quickly through the zoning.  Article 16 was voted no action.  This brought us to plastic bags.  I had an administrative amendment to this article.  The original wording gave plastic bag thicknesses in millimeters, when it should have been mils (1/1000 inch).  As it was written, bags would be 3/16" thick.  There was a good presentation by the proponents, and a proposed amendment to exempt books from the bag ban.  While this was likely an attempt to help a certain small bookstore in town, the mood seems to be in opposition to creating exemptions.  This brought us right up to 11:00 so we adjourned.

It was a good night, and I liked the discussion,  My only critique would be that on several articles, speakers with amendments were called before the proponents could present their initial proposal.  This has happened before, and it is confusing.  I would encourage the moderator to try to reverse that order.  Now it is time to prep for Wednesday's special town meeting.