Welcome to night five of the 2021 Annual Town Meeting. Tonight we will be taking up the Town Budgets and the Capital Budget. We are taking these articles out-of-order in deference to the town staff who need to be available to address questions on their budgets. After we vote on these two articles, we will return to the discussion on Article 35 regarding changes to Industrial Zoning. The tone of the presentations at the last session on this topic were more appropriate for cable news opinion shows; full of innuendo and conspiracies. It was disheartening, and hopefully, the Moderator will address these.
We are ready to begin. The Moderator has called the meeting to order. Tonight, the Star Spangled Banner was played by Rieko Tanaka, a town meeting member from Precinct 9. Apparently, there was another anonymous email to members. The Moderator encouraged everyone just throw it away.
Mr. DeCourcey moved that upon adjourning tonight, we will be continued to Wednesday, May 13. There is an announcement from Mr. Bagnall on behalf of Arlington Commission for Arts and Culture. There is a neighborhood haiku competition for Arlington Heights. There will be free workshops over Zoom. Additional information is available from their website: <www.artsarlington.org/haiku>.
Article 3 is taken from the table to receive a report. Mr. Yontar, the Chair of the Capital Planning Committee submitted a revised report. Article 3 was put back on the table. Mr. Foskett tabled all open articles from 35 to 54, so we can go straight to the budgets.
Article 55 is the Town Budgets article. The report of the Finance Committee will be the recommended appropriation for each of the budgets. Mr. Ellis, a member of the Finance Committee brought forward an amendment to remove $43,000 from the Police Department budget, the amount that the department has requested related to body cameras. He is doing so, because the department has not issued any policies regarding their use. Depending on the policy adopted by the department, use of cameras could be completely ineffective, and the footage may not be made available. The Moderator made a call for the presenter to stay within the scope of the article in his remarks, and to stay local to Arlington. Mr. Ellis would like the Town Meeting to review the policy before appropriating funds in support of the program.
As we have done for many years, the Moderator read down the list of the budgets, and asked if anyone wanted to discuss a specific budget. If no one wanted to address that budget, we passed over it, and moved on to the next. We will go through the entire list of budgets, discussing what we want to discuss, before voting on the entire budget. Ms. Friedman had a point of order, because we didn't discuss Article 53. The Moderator explained that it was simply tabled, and would come back after the discussion of budgets. Ms. Friedman explained that Article 53 would possibly add positions which could effect the budgets. The Moderator explained that point could be discussed during that particular budget. Mr. Ellis also raised a point of order to clarify how to speak to a budget. The Moderator will read the name of the budget, and if you want to speak, please raise your hand to speak. If no hands are raised, we move on to the next budget.
The first budget to discuss was the Town Manager budget. Ms. Bloom wanted to know more about increased expenses. The Manager noted they were in regards to web services. The Town Manager budget was closed.
The second budget to discuss was the Legal Department. Ms. Bloom was looking for information as to how staff is listed in the budget. The Manager noted that the benefits attorney has been changed to Deputy Town Council. That will take effect upon adoption of Article 53. This budget is closed.
The third budget to discuss was the Board of Registrars. Ms. Stone wanted to know if this was the budget from which poll workers are paid. The Manager said "no"; that is a part of the Select Board budget, which we already passed over. This budget is closed.
The fourth budget to discuss was Planning and Community Development. Mr. Revilak wanted to know if the department has sufficient resources to explore sources for new growth and increasing our tax base. Ms. Raitt confirmed that her department has the appropriate funding and expertise. That budget is closed.
The fifth budget to discuss was the Department of Public Works. Ms. Broder has a question about a specific position that was no longer in the budget. (I think it was the School Sustainability Coordinator, but I'm not positive.). Mr. Rademacher, Public Works Director noted the position was now under the school budget. Mr. Koch asked a question for maintenance of institutional memory; now that Mr. Trembly isn't in Town Meeting, someone has to ask the annual question of how much salt the Town used last winter. The Director reported 6,600 tons were used. Ms. Dray asked if someone could address the position of waste diversion and enforcement. Mr. Rademacher noted that the position will help the town achieve its recycling goals through research of trends and enforcement. The work will go into the next waste contract, a year from now. Ms. Melofchick was curious about the $90,000 leftover from last year. Mr. Foskett explained that surplus funds go into free cash for use by the town in a subsequent year. The budget was closed.
The sixth budget to discuss was the police budget. This will be a long discussion, because as noted earlier, there is an amendment to the budget. Mr. Christiana asked the Moderator about the status of body cameras in the police department and how the amendment might effect other priorities. The Moderator noted we do not have line item authority, and the Chief is able to make those decisions on behalf of her department. Chief Flaherty said that after the George Floyd murder last year, her department was asked to get body cameras. She has been reviewing best practices using Federal and State resources. A draft policy is being created, and that draft policy will be presented to the Select Board. A new state law will provide minimum requirements for all police departments throughout the state. There are upcoming public meetings to craft these state policies. By July, 20 22, there will be town guidelines for body cameras including standards for training, allowances for protecting victims, storage of materials, and protection from tampering. Mr. Christiana asked if the Chief has a sense of how the proposed funding cut would be absorbed. Chief Flaherty would not move forward with cameras at this time. Mr. Yontar asked whether under the proposed amendment, the funds would be conditional upon a policy being adopted. He wants to know whether such a conditional hold can be approved. Town Counsel said "No", we cannot condition a budget on the passage of a policy.
Ms. Dray is in support of the amendment. The Chief and Moderator have been very forthcoming in discussing the amendment. This is not a vote about cameras or trust of the police. We are being asked to fund a policy that doesn't exist. We only know the cost for storage. We don't know what collective bargaining will add, especially when we have a deficit coming up. The amendment will encourage a hold until we can have an informed vote. Ms. Culverhouse asked why a social worker position was reduced. Chief Flaherty wasn't sure what she meant. There is a full time social worker and a full time counselor. The position is partially funded by the Department of Health. The Chief noted that this is a new position. Ms. Culverhouse's second question is how the department has been soliciting community input in the policy. The Chief has been working with accreditors and state agencies. There is no plan to solicit community input. Mr. Foskett wanted to provide background to the Financial Committee vote. The concern regarding the policy was discussed at the finance committee. There was substantial debate at that time. However, the budget was approved 16-1. It is not the job of the Finance Committee to set policy when there is a professional Police Department and an elected Select Board. Mr. Foskett asked for a memorandum of questions for the Manager, Select Board, and Chief, who responded that there will be transparency. The Finance Committee recognizes there will be cameras and state-wide requirements. The best path is to allow town management to address the question. Town Meeting should vote down the amendment. Mr. Maher wanted to emphasize and approve of Mr. Foskett's comments. Town Meeting doesn't set policy; the Select Board and professional staff do that. He supports vote of the Finance Committee. He wants to ask the Manager about his position on the amendment. The Manager would prefer that the amendment not pass, but he will follow the will of Town Meeting. The town would delay implementation until next year if the amendment passes.
Mr. Ellis wanted to point out that there is a lot of work to be done. Waiting another year will not be detrimental to the development of a policy and implementation thereof. Mr. Ellis asked about community input into the development and review of the policy. Mr. DeCourcey noted there have not been specific discussions about how this policy will be discussed or when. There are no specifics at this time. Mr. Weinstein is in support of the amendment, and feels there is a misconception. Not all policies fit all communities. Maybe it would be better to allocate funding elsewhere. We are putting the cart before horse. He is aghast that there is no plan for community feedback. (No plans yet, corrected the Moderator). Mr. Harrelson spoke in opposition to amendment. He has years of experience with the department. He believes that their prior practice of discussing policy with town boards and committees will continue. The Police Department will work with the community and state on the policy. There will also be an immediate benefit to earlier adoption. He encourages adoption of proposed budget. Mr. Jamieson noted the amendment listed a specific fund. He wants to know about the fund being used to purchase the cameras. Mr. Foskett noted the cameras are being purchased through a forfeiture fund. Mr. Jamieson would like to know the balance and past use of that fund. The Chie acknowledged it is the forfeiture fund, under overview by Dept. of Justice. It presently holds approximately $158,000. Mr. Jamieson recommended that this should be reported as a revolving funds. He wanted to know when the policy would be presented to Select Board? He also wanted to confirm that the presentation would allow for public input. The Chief noted the timeline would likely be August - September for the review of the proposed policy, with the cameras deployed in December. Mr. Jamieson asked what would collective bargaining require to get approval for use of cameras. He thinks this should be a standard part of the contract, and doesn't think it should require renegotiation of the contracts. It was noted that extra costs would need to be brought before the Finance Committee. Mr. Jamieson is gainst the amendment, and for cameras.
Mr. Varoglu went back to the social worker question. In the Health budget, the only social worker is under the Council on Aging. The Manager noted it is actually under the Arlington Youth Counseling Center enterprise fund. Mr. Varoglu wondered why the amount is going down. There is only a single full-time position. Mr. Pooler, Assistant Town Manager noted that the police budget last year was incorrect, and some money was being paid out of the Health Department. The position has been listed consistently as a 1.0 FTE position. The proposed budget split is a more accurate representation. Mr. Jefferson moved to terminate debate on this budget and the proposed amendment. This has been a good debate about the limits on Town Meeting's ability to impact the policies of a specific department. I am comfortable moving on. The vote to terminate debate was interrupted by Mr. Jamieson's point-of-order to clarify that the vote to end debate included debate on the police budget. That was confirmed. The motion passed 184-49, and debate was terminated. We will now move on the the next budget.
Mr. Worden raised a point of order, but couldn't un-mute himself. His wife reported that the request was for a break. Mr. Harrelson had a point of information confirming that the vote on the amendment will come at the end after the discussion of all the budgets. The Moderator confirmed that was the case. He then called for a break.
When the vote on the Amendment comes up, I will be voting against it. I appreciate what the proponent is trying to do. Town Meeting can either approve the funding and wait for the Select Board to approve the policy, or we can cancel the funding and wait until the policy is complete before funding. This will institute a half-year delay. However, we often fund things that are not ready to go on July 1. We fund anticipating the need over the course of the entire fiscal year. I am also opposed to using the budget to try and influence the policy of a department. As Chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals, I would be deeply upset if someone suggested reducing the funding for the board until we had enacted a specific policy or incorporated something into our regulations. Some things need to be left to the policy makers, and in this case, that is not Town Meeting.
------------
Town Meeting, brought to you by Xeljanz and J. Crew. (or at least the episode of Tiny Desk the Moderator streamed during the break was...)
------------
Back from break, the next budget to discuss was fire services. There was a list of leftover names from the previous budget. Everyone eventually dropped off. Ms. Benedikt asked what school credits are. Chief Kelley noted that they are an incentive to encourage firefighters to seek additional education up to an associates degree. The same question in regards to the police budget was ruled out of scope. This budget was closed.
The next budget to discuss was Inspectional Services. Mr. Schlichtman noted the inspector FTE number is down to 1.6 from 2.2; is there less work? Mr. Byrne , Director of Inspections noted that they are using more part-time workers, which is working well. Mr. Schlichtman asked whether fines make it back to the department. Mr. Byrne noted that the policy is to try and address the issue without resulting to assessing fines. The department has tried in the past to walk around town to look for issues, but they have not had the ability to look around recently. Mr. Schlichtman asked if they need additional staff for enforcement. The Manager noted that the change is staffing is to move inspector hours to a clerk position to assist in the paperwork. There was a proposed a part-time code enforcement officer, but the Finance Committee did not approve. Inspections and applications are not down. Mr. Schlichtman would like to know if having an additional staff person would encourage Gentle Dental to obey the sign bylaw. Mr. Byrne agreed to look into it. Mr. Jamieson noted new growth is critically important to financial stability. Expedient permitting is essential to that growth. Is time for granting a permit tracked? Mr. Byrne noted that his department has a feel rather than specific figures. They are running 2-3 weeks longer than he would like. The numbers are still good relative to other communities. Mr. Jamieson asked how long does it take to get a requested inspection? These metrics need to be tracked, as this is important for growth. Can the Financial Committee note why it did not approve the position. Mr. Foskett said the possibility of an additional position was raised by the Financial Committee. However, no data was received justifying an additional position, so it wasn't approved. Mr. Jamieson asked about additional inspectors in support of the high school. Mr. Byrne noted that Mr. Ciampa has it under control, and the required documentation from engineers and architects are filed on time. Mr. Jamieson asked that Inspectional Services request additional funds should they be required. He asked if Civic permitting position under Public Works has anything to do with Inspectional Services, and it does not.
Mr. Revilak wanted to follow-up on several of Mr. Jamieson's questions. If there was an additional enforcement officer, what would they do? Mr. Byrne noted they would be doing plan reviews. The department stayed open throughout the pandemic. Things took a little longer than usual, but there is a lot of pride in staying open. Being able to conduct more field inspections would be better. Mr. Revilak sought to clarify whether the additional help would be for inspections or enforcement. Mr. Byrne noted it would be inspections. Ms. Memon wanted to know about the clerk and typist. In the age of computers, is this position needed? Moderator says yes, as explained earlier. It allowed clerical tasks to be shifter away from the inspectors. She also asked about what base salary and steps are. Mr. Pooler, said steps are part of the pay schedule. People are hired at a base salary, and they receive steps for seniority and longevity. Ms. Memon asked what longevity is. Mr. Pooler explained that they are payments, usually at five year increments, that are a part of public contracts. What is the percentage? Each contract has its own set of payments, usually a set dollar amount., but some contracts are percentages. Ms. Leahy is interested in sign bylaw enforcement. Does the Inspectional Services have the manpower to enforce the bylaws. Mr. Byrne said it is not a question of staffing; it is a question of priorities. Signs are secondary to public safety and ongoing inspections. Ms. Leahy asked if it would be helpful to send a letter to businesses to remind them of the regulations. Mr. Byrne noted that the complaints his department receives are taken care of. It is more of a complaint based system. Email Inspectional Services if you see something.
The next budget up for discussion was Libraries. Ms. Dray asked about $60,000 for overtime. The Director, Ms. Nicolay noted that it is to support weekend and holiday staffing. Ms. Dray asked if staff is paid overtime to work weekends? Yes, it is part of the contract. Can that be worked around. No, it is covered under collective bargaining. Ms. Carlton-Gysan wanted some clarifications. How are the positions determined in regards to hours? Mr. Pooler noted that there are multiple part-time positions, leading to an odd number. The night time differential is for staff working evening hours under a union contract. Mr. Deyst passed. Ms. Stone wanted to follow up on the FTE figures. In the budget, the positions appear to be created numerically, but the odd numbers for hours seem more random. How are those positions determined? Who is setting the hours? Mr. Foskett noted that the department managers determine their own staffing levels based on need. If they only need a person for a few days a week, there is a partial position. Base salaray is set in the contract. Some are positions are hourly, some are annual, and some use another scheme. The budget was closed.
The next budget up for discussion is Education. (Numerically, we accidentally skipped over it, but Mr. Ciano brought it to the Moderator's attention.) Mr. Ciano noted that the school department report has not been distributed. Mr. Fosckett noted that the school administration would like to speak. Superintendent Bodie noted that the school report was posted, and the Moderator confirmed it was on the Town Meeting website. The Superintendent is here to answer questions, but there appeared to be none. Ms. Friedman had a late question. She noticed there were many new hires, and she wanted to know if they were pandemic-related? Why so many? Dr. Bodie noted that some positions are determined by the number of students. The department anticipated many fewer students, but the numbers were not down as far as expected. Some support positions are only staffed if needed. They are expecting higher social - emotional needs next year, as well as educational coaches. They are being added to meet the anticipated needs of the students next year. Mr. Marshall asked who helped develop the policy regarding whether schools would remain open? Dr. Bodie reported there were extensive meetings over the summer to determine the correct policy. Information was received from the Department of Education and the Department of Health. The number of students per room was dettermined by the spacing of desks. After reviewing multiple guidelines, six-foot spacing was considered the conservative approach. The district Director of Nursing was involved, but there was no single person making the decision. Ms. Dray looked for translation and interpretation services for foreign language learners. Dr. Bodie noted ELL has a need for translation. It is listed under the special education budget. Funding has been increasing. Mr. Mason, the financial officer noted that it falls under special education and administration. Ms. Gray asked if there is an interpretation budget. Mr. Mason said it is included in the same budget as translation. Both are contracted services. Ms. Dray asked if the high school handbook has been translated into any additional languages. Dr. Bodie doesn't know answer, but she notes that the state required documents have been translated.
Ms. Mansfield wanted to know why the special ed budget was down by 2.2%. Dr. Bodie noted that the budget has two parts: in-house and out-of-district placements. The in-house spending is increasing, but the out-of-district is decreasing more. These figures are volatile, so it is hard to know year-to-year. Mr. Ciano (second time) has found report, and he wanted to know why it wasn't mailed. He offered his congratulations to Dr. Bodie upon her retirement and thanked her for her service to the town. Ms. Cohen wanted to know if the budget has money for teacher retainment. Is there something in the budget for increasing teacher salary. (The Moderator noted this question should go to the School Committee.) Mr. Mason said salaries are set by contract with some leeway for special circumstances. Ms. Phelan noted expenditure by student for Arlington is lower than other communities, and she wanted to know how the town sits relative to other communities. Dr. Bodie noted that we have been below state average for most of her tenure. The town has been very conservative in managing money. This budget was closed.
The next budget up for discussion is Health and Human Services. Mr. Marshall saw that there are two new positions, and he wanted to see if the Director could describe the positions. Ms. Bongiorno noted the two additional health compliance officers were hired using a federal grant for Covid related services. The positions were staffed last year and are being maintained for the upcoming year. One of the positions is vacant due to a retirement. Mr. Jefferson wanted to acknowledge and thank the Health Department for their professionalism and Ms. Bongiorno and Ms. Waden for their exemplary service in keeping us safe and healthy. Ms. Bloom wanted to know about health compliance / sealer position with additional hours. Ms. Bongiorno noted that this year the budget is indicating the true hours of various positions that are paided by grants. These were not reported in the budget in the past. This budget is closed.
The next budget up for discussion is Retirement. Mr. Jamieson noted there was a wonderful review in our AAA rating in Standard and Poor, but there was a concern regarding the investment strategy of the Retierment Board. Mr. Foskett noted that the retirement funds are invested with the state retirement board. Mr. Jamieson encouraged we refer to the Standard and Poor report. This budget was closed.
The final budget up for discussion is the Council on Aging Enterprise Fund. A point of order was raised because we skipped the recreation enterprise fund. The Moderator disagreed, and since no one wanted to actually speak to the Council on Aging enterprise fund, that completed the Town Budgets. The first vote will be on Mr. Ellis's amendment to the police budget. As I noted earlier, I do not believe this amendment is an appropriate action for Town Meeting to take. We should not be micro-managing individual budgets in this fashion, regardless of our good intentions. The amendment fails 45-171. The Town Budget was approved 213-10. This is a low number - where is everyone?
It is after 11:00, so the Moderator asked for notices of reconsideration. I raised a point of order to clarify the order of business at our ext session, since we did not get to the Capital Budget this session. The Moderator confiirmed that we will open with Article 61 and the budget for Minuteman. We will then go back to Article 5 and the Capital Budget. Than, we will go back to continue the discussion on Article 35. With that, we adjourned.
--------------
It took a while to clean up my notes this evening. I hope no one was sitting by their computer waiting for them to come out. Since we took very few votes, there was little downtime during the meeting to edit my notes. There was just a lot of questions and answers. That is the best part of being on town meeting. Even if you are not the one asking the questions, just being in the room makes you much better informaed. I think Town Meeting is one of those civic duties that everyone should try to be a part of at least once in their life. It has been a pleasure so far, and I look forward to every session.
No comments:
Post a Comment