2018 Town Meeting - Night Four

We're done!  A new record since I've been at Town Meeting.  At 9:02 on Night Four, we dissolved the Annual Town Meeting.  An hour and a half later, we dissolved the Special Town Meeting as well.  It was a good night filled with good debate.  It even had a fitting end.

Tonight was supposed too start with the Special, but we were so close to finishing the Annual, the Moderator recommended finishing with the appropriations, starting where we left off in the Town Budgets.  There were only 4 left, and there was very little discussion.  The budgets were easily  approved.  We then discussed the appropriation for committees and commissions.  We had an odd amendment presented.  The proponent sought to strike some language regarding oversight of consultants being under the direction of the Town Manager.  This was a change from previous years, and the request was to strike the language and bring it up in a subsequent special town meeting.  This could have been addressed by actually asking why the language was inserted, but that was not this member's agenda.  The Manager did address the question, noting the difficulty all volunteer boards have monitoring the day-to-day operations of consultants.  Since there was a sizable appropriation specifically for a consultant, the oversight clause was added.  The Meeting resoundingly voted down the amendment and approved the original appropriation language.

Next up were OPEB and Free Cash.  A member held these two out of the consent agenda so the new members could benefit from an explanation of these two items.  The Moderator noted that there is a well attended new member session where this is explained.  The discussion and positive votes were over quickly, but it posed an interesting question.  Whose responsibility is it to help new members understand some of the specifics of the votes we are asked to take?  Is it the Moderator, who has taken it upon himself to provide that training.  Is it up to the more senior members to slow down the meeting as we go along to provide more insight?  Is it up to the new members to seek out answers to questions they have?  I'm not sure what happened tonight was the most efficient use of the meeting's time.

We approved the town's annual contribution to the long term stabilization (rainy day) fund without debate.  We approved an appropriation into the fiscal stability stabilization fund established to hold the excess funds raised by the last override until needed.  That money will start to be spent next year.  We then jumped back to approve the collective bargaining agreements negotiated to date.  I felt sorry that the raises to the library staff were lower than to the other bargaining units, but they were all approved by the unions and the meeting.  All that was left was to close the article on accepting reports and dissolve the meeting.

Since it was so early, we delved right into the special town meeting.  After accepting reports, we started with a proposed extension of the current moratorium on recreational marijuana stores until the end of the year,  The state released guidelines in March, long after the close of the town meeting warrant in January.  The delay will give the town an opportunity to enact local laws governing where and how a business gets sited.  This was also an object lesson in the maxim that the Moderator repeats every year:  if you go on too long, your supporters will turn against you.  I came in fully supporting the extension.  One of the first speakers launched into a diatribe on a whole bunch of issues related to marijuana, but not to the topic of the article.  After many requests to keep to the scope of the article, all ignores, the moderator tried to intervene.  He was also ignored.  At his point, I was ready to vote down the moratorium.  There was then a really positive argument for not extending the moratorium.  The state and town have been very efficient in "slow rolling" the legislation to delay the legalization as long as possible within the confines of the law.  Recreational marijuana can be a replacement for opiates, helping addicts move to something far less dangerous.  Another reason to vote no.  However, the issue is without local bylaws, the town gives up its ability to direct the development of new stores, allowing them to be located anywhere business is allowed.  This is a real issue, so in the end I did vote for the extension.  I hope there will be new zoning recommendations in the fall to address this topic.

Next up was a proposal to refer to the Residential Study Group the task of trying to develop new residential development guidelines aimed at stopping "bad" teardowns while sill encouraging "good" teardowns.   Given all the controversy surrounding this topic, they will have their work cut out for them.  There were a couple of people against the new developments.  There were some people who livein those developments.  In what was the most controversial vote (that I was present for) so far this year, it was approved 157-35.  I wish that committee good luck.

We approved a home rule petition to request that the town be allowed to set a different (higher) income threshold for property tax deferrals.  The current rate is set by the state.  The article we approved will allow the town, after a vote from the Select Board and Town Meeting to set a higher rate, allowing more seniors the option of seeking a deferral.  There was then a no action vote on means-tested tax relief, because there wasn't a vote approved for us to vote upon.

The next article sought to add an additional liquor license for a retail outlet.  We have five package stores in town, but six is better than five.  There is a "defecit" in the Heights, where this store would be given priority.  There were several speakers against the proposal stating that you can just go up to Berman's in Lexington.  As far as I'm concerned, keeping that income and revenue within the town is a better option.  The police chief confirmed that his department would be just as able to oversee compliance of six outlets as well as the current five.  This was an even closer vote, but it passed 126-67.  This now needs to be ratified by the state before it can go before the town voters next spring.

The last article sought to remove gender-specific language from throughout the town's bylaws.  This is the logical compliment to changing the name of the BoS.  There we many speakers for the article, and only a few against it.  The later focused on the cost involved in making the changes and the possibility of changing the intention of the bylaws while addressing gender-specific language.  In the end, the proponent of the original BoS article called to end debate, a very appropriate gesture.  The article was passed, we disolved the meeting, and we all went home.

I have been thinking about the take-away lessons from this meeting.  In a lot of ways, we rubber-stamped the recommendations from the town's leadership by wide margins.  I personally feel this is more a statement about the quality of the research and though that goes into the recommended votes rather than a criticism of the meeting members.  As a few members notes throughout the proceedings, it is really astonishing how professional and knowledgeable the leadership of the town really is.

It was also a really positive development to see more women come to the fore at town meeting.  There were several new voices this year, and they were really impressive.  I am really excited about where this body and this town are headed.

**************

I realize that I never wrote any notes after the February Special Town Meeting.  After 18 months of work on the recodified zoning bylaw, I was so burned out and tired.  I started some notes but gave up.  I'll try again later on.

2018 Town Meeting - Night Three

I wasn't able to get to Town Meeting tonight until around 8:30.  I had a work commitment in Billerica at 8:00 for all of 10 minutes.  However, I ended up just missing the presentation, discussion, and vote on the Minuteman School budget.

Next up was the Town Budget Appropriation.  First, we participated in what has been a common occurrence this year, correcting typos.  (More on that later.)  We then started going through the budgets one-by-one.  We had the usual "how much salt did we use" discussions, the "why are we spending so much more on this this year than last year" questions, and the "while we're discussing this department's budget, I have a question about the department" questions.

We made it through all but four of the budgets tonight, including the school budget.  On Wednesday night, we will start with the Special Town Meeting.  This seven article meeting is called to address issues that need to move on a quicker pace.  We should be able to do it in less than a night.

We have seen an unusually large number of typos in the reports issued to town meeting this year.  The authors are all very apologetic, and I understand how they arise.  It is however, disconcerting to not be certain that the information being presented is accurate.  I hope that the committees can give themselves the extra time that they need to proofread their information next year.

===

What happens on the floor of Town Meeting is only a part of the meeting.  The conversations that take place at the break and immediately after adjourning are a huge part of what we do.  I had a conversation with the Building Commissioner regarding a constituent matter, the ZBA budget, and what the department does with incoming fees.  I then spoke with the Police Chief about reporting overnight parking violations.  I was able to find out whether a particular project was eligible for Symmes Fund funding.  Lastly, I was able to speak with the DPW Director about the signal at Swan Place.  These conversations are possible because all of the department heads need to be at Town Meeting to answer questions and defend their budget requests.  This is the most informative aspect of Town Meeting