>> I was unable to attend Wednesday night's session of the 2022 Annual Town Meeting. I was planning on watching the session, and several people were interested in a synopsis of the session, so I am taking notes and preparing to post them.
The night started with the test vote before the meeting was called to order by the Moderator. The Star Spangled Banner was played by the twins, Cole and Owen M-Z. The Moderator noted that he and town officials are available outside of town meeting to answer questions. This would be a better use of our time during the meeting. He gave an update on our status. We are at 59% complete, and with the exception of the Consent Agenda, the members are finishing 4 articles a night. Our pace is slow, but we have been getting a little quicker. At this pace, we are ending June 20, which is an observed holiday (Juneteenth). We need to be done no later than the 15th. Our progress is noted on the Town Meeting Dashboard on the webpage. Swearing in of new members is to be done separately with the Town Clerk. SBC Diggins moved that if the meeting continues, it does so to Monday, May 23. There were no objections. There was an announcement from TMM Auster. He had held budgets in order to ask questions about climate change and the sustainable transportation plans. He had those questions answered offline, and the responses are on the annotated warrant under Article 50. He suggested members may wish to review the exchange, and asked that they be included in the record. The Moderator noted he would not usually allow materials to be added to an article after the article is voted on, but he allowed it here due to an earlier technical glitch. There were no other announcements. TMM Foskett moved to remove Article 3 from the table to receive reports. There were no reports to be received, so Article 3 was returned to the table.
The meeting resumed with the discussion on Article 60. The Moderator note TMM Kaepplein had asked that this article be removed from the consent agenda, and he addressed the article at the previous session. TMM J_Worden raised a Point of Order that he had tried to make an announcement. The Moderator asked if it could be delayed. They agreed to have the announcement, which related to an article that was removed from the consent agenda, held until that article came up. TMM J_Worden also noted that when he was moderator, there were many long town meetings, but they always finished in time. There is no need to panic. The Moderator noted it is his job to panic, and if anyone wants to go back through the record to look at historic trends, he would appreciate it. Speaking to the article, TMM Revilak asked how many BlueBike trips would be required to reach the break-even point. Dir. Raitt noted that we would need to almost double the number of past trips. She noted that much of that occurred during Covid, so the rates should go up. TMM Revilak asked if this would allow for additional stations. Dir. Raitt indicated they could add two additional stations, which would also increases the number of trips required to break-even. She noted the costs in Arlington are the same as other communities in the system. TMM Revilak asked whether we could generate revenue through sponsorships on signs, which we recently passed. Dir. Raitt responded that BlueBikes has a sponsorship model we would follow. When asked about usage trends, Dir. Raitt noted that trips predominantly originate outside of town, coming into Arlington. The data was just made available this week, and her department is reviewing it now. The breakdown of the reason for the trips has not been evaluated yet. Lastly, TMM Revilak asked why this article was brought forward. Dir. Raitt noted this is part of a town-wide policy to meet sustainable transportation plan and regional goals.
TMM Holland had a few simple points. The principal value is that it puts Arlington's bike sharing in the same system as other towns, and allows users to not worry about risking their own bikes. It also provides an alternate public transportation option, which is more Covid-safe than taking the bus. The Bike Advisory Committee recommends adoption of this article. TMM Melofchik is concerned about the expenditure in face of declining override funds. She would like to know the Select Board's insight in supporting this expenditure. Her constituents in Precinct 9 found the last override particularly challenging. SBC Diggins noted that the Select Board did not weigh in on this article. He is personally in support of this article as it helps contribute to a more sustainable transportation network. TMM Melofchik asked whether the Select Board had a recommended vote. SBC Diggins noted this was a Finance Committee article, so the Select Board did not weigh-in with a vote. TMM Foskett noted the vote at the Finance Committee was 11-5 in favor of the article. TMM Melofchik is still concerned about expenditures in the context of an override. TMM Tosti was glad the last speaker spoke about the impact on taxpayers. He is very concerned about the multiple hits to the taxpayer over the past several years including overrides and debt exclusions. He supported those as they were necessary to the core services of the town. This is not that. BlueBikes has come to the town in the past for start-up funds. Now they want more funds, which is not related to the core mission of the town. He encourages a no vote. The Moderator called a straw pole asking whether the membership feels ready to close debate. The pole was short of 75%, so the debate continued.
TMM Wagner had a Point of Order that he is concerned that meeting members cannot see the actual straw pole. The Moderator cut him off, noting this point had been raised previously. TMM Foskett raised a Point of Order whereby he was shifted two spots on the list later than originally positioned. How did that happen? The Moderator noted this has been happening, but to his recollection, the order is relatively the same. He is advancing to someone who has not spoken as often. TMM Palmer was going to call the question, but given the poll, he passed. TMM Foskett, speaking as a meeting member, noted this would be town money going to a private company to benefit a small group of residents. This is an example of living beyond our means. The School Department and other departments have tightened their budgets, and this article should be rejected. TMM Quinn is a long-time bike commuter, and he is appreciative of spending on making bike use safer through adding lanes and the like. There is nothing about this article that helps that goal. This should not be supported. TMM Auster was surprised about the concern about spending money with private companies, as we spend a lot of money with private companies. This service is an experiment, and we need to give it an honest try before considering cutting off funding. However, we should not fund it in perpetuity. The benefits accrue to both cyclists and other commuters who will face fewer cars on the road. He is in favor of continuing the subsidy for now. The Moderator noted people can remove themselves from the queue rather than passing when their name comes up. TMM Foskett raised a Point of Personal Privilege that his argument should not have been described as "waiving a bloody shirt" by the previous speaker. That was inappropriate for town meeting. The Moderator supported his action. TMM Quinn raised a Point of Order and shared TMM Foskett's concern. He encouraged the members to be more civil.
TMM Pretzer noted that as a bike owner, BlueBikes increased the ability to ride, as it allows one-way trips and allows people to go places they would not want to go on their personal bike. The article supports using bikes for commuting and errands, and it should be passed. TMM Wiener supports the article. It connects the town to many nearby communities and bike ways. It is expensive to operate but affordable to users. There are reduced price memberships available. TMM Moore asked what percentage of this expenditure goes towards new infrastructure and expansion versus supporting the current under-utilization. Dir. Raitt said 60% would go towards expansion with the remainder going to other expenses. TMM Moore thought is was a reasonable expenditure that benefited the town. He hoped this funding would help lead to it being self-supporting in the future. TMM Babiarz said we did not have the data to know how many people would be able to use the system. Her work as a teacher would not be served, since she needs to carry too many items. The disabled and elderly would not be using it. The youth cannot use it without supervision. We should vote against it. TMM Garber is in support, as we are not subsidizing a company, we are providing a service. It is a low cost public transportation alternative. If it could extend into the Heights, it could provide alternate transportation where the MBTA is removing bus service. She hopes we will continue the funding. TMM L_Heigham moved to terminate debate. The Moderator noted it was 14 minutes since the earlier straw pole. The vote was 189-28 with three abstentions in favor of terminating debate. The vote on the main motion was 144-76 in favor of the article with four abstentions.
Article 62 is the vote on the appropriation of the Community Preservation Fund. TMM Rowe presented the report of the Community Preservation Act Committee (CPAC). They are required to spend at least 10% of their annual income on each of three separate activities: historic preservation, open space & recreation, and community housing. The are recommending funding 14 projects this year including Menotomy Manor window replacement, supporting leases for homeless, supporting the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, Hurd Field renovations, Robbins Farm Playground, Mt. Gilboa feasibility study, Cooke's Hollow restoration feasibility study, Jarvis House preservation and restoration, Dallin Museum collections preservation, Covenant Church accessibility improvements, historic planning records preservation, Old Schwamb Mill, Jason Russell House, and Hauser Building electrical upgrade at Drake Village. TMM Bloom asked about the Hauser Building project. Was that an emergency? Can it wait until July? TMM Rowe noted this is a proactive project, so it is very important, but it does not need to happen immediately. TMM Ruderman asked what the state's matching grant percentage is currently. The original law stipulated 100%, but the state has always underfunded it. TMM Rowe chuckled, and replied that it was 27% when the CPA was adopted by the town, and it is now up to 44%. TMM Ruderman asked whether the state is planning to increase fees to get closer to full matching. TMM Rowe indicated she was unaware of any such plan. TMM Ruderman asked which activity the accessibility upgrades for a church falls under. TMM Rowe requested Town Counsel respond as to why historic preservation funds were being expended on a church. Counsel Heim noted Old North Church as an example. The Covenant Church offers a public use and is an historic resource, so providing accessibility is a public good. TMM Rowe noted there are community activities at the church, which the town supports. TMM Ruderman noted that these are not similar to other projects sited, and is a mistake.
TMM Leahy agreed with the previous speaker. She is not a religious person. She noted that the church has a day care and is part of a larger group of churches, so she wondered why they are unable to raise funds for themselves. TMM Rowe noted this is the first church in town to request funds, but this has been used in other communities. The church is in an historic district. The CPAC sought considerable advice before making this recommendation. TMM Leahy interjected that this did not respond to her question. Why is the church unable to raise its own funds? Pastor Phillips from Covenant Church, a town resident, responded that the church is non-denominational but affiliated with other local churches. They have no daycare. A small school does rent space from the church. The congregation is small, and it would be difficult to raise the requisite funds. The money does not go towards programs, just to the preservation of the historic building. TMM Leahy noted she was lucky to live in an historic house in an historic district, but she needs to pay for her own repairs. TMM Quinn was looking at the report. He noted we allocated funds last year for ground source heat pumps at the Jason Russell house, and he was looking for an update. TMM Rowe reported it went very well. The system is installed and functioning. TMM Quinn noted he teaches a class on environmental economics, and he would want to use that information for his class. TMM L_Heigham moved to terminate debate. The vote passed 164-55 with three abstentions. The vote on the main motion started, and TMM Mozina raised a Point of Order to see if it would be possible to amend the article, but since debate had been terminated, the point was now moot. The Moderator agreed, and the voting continued. The main motion was approved 194-25 with eight abstentions. This brought the meeting to the 9:30 break.
Article 65 is an appropriation for the Department of Planning and Community Development to study developing business district design guidelines. TMM Foskett noted this articles was put forward as having design guidelines for development along the Mass Ave and Broadway corridors should streamline the development process. The Moderator noted TMM Friedman had requested that it be removed from the Consent Agenda, and he asked her to speak to that request. TMM Friedman noted there have been several studies in regards to the Mass Ave area, and she wanted to know why this was different. TMM Foskett noted that design guidelines provide information about the physical appearance of architecture. The Moderator asked that the video presentation on the article be played. Ms. Zsembery, the Chair of the Arlington Redevelopment Board (ARB) said this would revise the 2015 design standards developed after the Master Plan was approved. The existing standards are not applicable to many of the parcels along Mass Ave and they do not extend to other major streets. The Residential Design Guidelines will be used as a model to create a set of design guidelines for the business and industrial districts. It will apply to all properties under the jurisdiction of the ARB for Environmental Design Review. TMM Evans asked whether the work constitute an update or a replacement of the 2015 guidelines? How extensive will the revision be? Dir. Raitt noted this would be a wholesale replacement of the prior guidelines. TMM Revilak asked whether there will be a working group and/or public process to supervise the development. Dir. Raitt noted that similar to other such projects, there would be a working group and public engagement meetings. TMM Revilak noted that he had served on the ZBA for a year-and-a-half, and he found the Residential Design Guidelines to be very helpful, and they led to better projects. As a member of the ARB, he thought this would be helpful for the business districts. The public participation in the development of the standards will provide for community input. TMM Palmer moved to terminate debate. The motion passed 189-29 with 2 abstentions. The vote on the main motion passed 199-27 with one abstention.
The Moderator noted that we have covered the main funding articles, so we would leave articles 71 and 72 for later. TMM Foskett said the meeting could address those two articles tonight. He also noted Article 49 was currently tabled, and needed considerable amendment. However, the funding covered by the article would not change. We could take up Articles 71 and 72 now, and the Finance Committee will provide an amendment for Article 49 in time to comply with the 48 hour rule. The Moderator agreed.
Article 71 allocated the funds leftover at the end of fiscal year 2021, referred to as free cash. The amount has been certified by the state as being unencumbered, so the vote is to allocate half to offset next year's tax rate and leave half in the account. The Moderator noted that there was only one person in the speaker queue, so if they were planning to terminate debate, that would take far longer than just passing and letting debate end. TMM McCabe still moved to terminate debate. Before the motion was seconded, a second member entered the speaker queue. The motion was seconded, so the meeting proceeded to the vote to terminate debate. That vote passed 204-14 with five abstentions. The vote on the main motion passed 219-1 without abstention.
Article 72 was the appropriation for the Fiscal Stability Stabilization Fund. TMM Foskett reminded the meeting that the amount of the funding had been changed administratively earlier in the meeting, and the change was posted to the annotated warrant. This vote requires a 2/3 vote of the meeting to take money out of the fund. Once this fund is expended, the town is in deficit, and an extensive override would be required. The Moderator checked whether he had the correct figure, and TMM Foskett corrected him. TMM Jamieson asked for an explanation of the increase. TMM Foskett noted it was an oversight by the Finance Committee. The Board of Assessors drew funds from the overlay reserve surplus this year. Some of it was allocated during the Special Town Meeting, so there was less available for the Annual Town Meeting. This was corrected in one location, but not under this article. TMM Jamieson confirmed that it was only a difference of $100K. He also commented on the excellent quality of all the reports and the committees who generate them. The town could not operate without them. TMM Melofchik was called upon, but there was a technical issue with her audio. TMM Moore moved to terminate debate. That vote passed 196-24 with three abstentions. The main motion passed 213-5 with five abstentions, well in excess of the 2/3 required. TMM Foskett moved that Articles 17-48 be removed from the table. The Moderator noted this would obviously not include articles which have already been voted upon, as they are not on the table. This leaves only Articles 3 and 49 on the table.
Article 17 would allow for self-service gas in town. TMM Revilak raised a Point of Order to note that this article had been previously tabled since the proponent was hospitalized. He wanted to ask that it be put back on the table, so the proponent could be notified about when to appear. The Moderator noted that had already happened, and the proponent was present at this evening's session. TMM Revilak was unaware, thanked the moderator, and removed his request. The Moderator called for SBC Diggins to introduce the article. He indicated he had done that at a previous session, and he would need to locate those notes if he was to do so again. He requested that in the interest of time, the request be waived. The Moderator agreed, and he called upon TMM Revilak to introduce the proponent. He asked to use his time to introduce an Arlington business owner who resides in another town, and an attorney who resides in Arlington. The Moderator held a straw-poll vote to allow the non-resident to speak to the meeting. The Moderator reported that there were 12-13 objections, which he considered a positive vote. Mr. El Khaouli, a resident of Everett, introduced Mr.Annese, his lawyer and a town resident. Mr. Annese noted that while he was a resident of the town in the past and does currently own property and a business in town, he is not presently a resident of the town. The Moderator opened a new poll to allow Mr. Annese to speak to the meeting. He reported 26-27 objections, far less than half of the meeting, so he considered that a positive vote. Mr. Annese noted that his client, Mr. El Khaouli operated the Eli Service Station on Broadway. His client has to have an attendant on site to serve gas to his customers. He has a lot of trouble keeping workers, as it is not a great job. The town's prohibition on self-service goes back to 1975. Arlington is one of only a few towns who has this type of prohibition. Under this article, full-service stations can remain, but it would allow station owners to compete with self-service stations in other communities. All of the safety requirements would be in full effect. There is a button allowing a customer to request an attendant come and assist them. There would still be an attendant on site, they would just not be out pumping gas all the time. The service stations are on major thoroughfares, under the jurisdiction of the ARB. There would be oversight of any changes to the property. During Covid, the station owner sought to reduce face-to-face interactions, which allowing self-service gas would address. TMM Revilak apologized for the error regarding Mr. Annese's place of residence. TMM Jamieson raised a Point of Order to make sure the Moderator was aware that TMM Benson had submitted a Substitute Motion. The Moderator noted he was aware, and he called on TMM Benson. TMM Benson introduced his substitute motion which would require full compliance with the fire protection laws, compliance with the ADA, and an attendant on site to provide assistance. He modeled the language on a similar bylaw in Cambridge. He thought of his mother, who preferred to have full-service as she got older. He wanted to make sure Arlington residents had the same opportunity. The Moderator explained the differences between the main motion and the substitute motion. TMM Jamieson raised a Point of Order and questioned whether the article is in scope. Were the ten signatures required for submission from town resident voters? Is this article to be allowed. The Moderator called on Town Council or Town Clerk to address the question of residence. The Clerk indicated her department checked the signatures to confirm they are from residents. TMM Jamieson said that he was fine with the Clerk's statement.
TMM Pretzer noted we heard from a service station's owner, but what about the employees. Pumping gas is a low-skill job, and people who need those jobs don't have a lot of options. TMM Quinn raised a Point of Order noting that he was unable to locate the proponent in the list of registered voters. He asked for a clarification on the spelling of the name. When provided, he noted that person is not on the list of registered voters. The Moderator indicated the Clerk would look into that question. TMM Pennarun was in favor of the substitute motion. She has two questions. First, is there any association among service stations in town, or knowledge of other operators in town agree with this article. Mr. Annese was unaware of any objections from any of the other gas station owners. They have not talked to any associations, just station owners. TMM Pennarun asked if he could name any of the operators. Mr. Annese noted that some operators do want to remain full service, which would be allowed under the change. TMM Pennarun wanted to know if the conversion of the stations would result in construction and retrofitting, and what environmental impacts would be. Mr. Annese noted that he is not an expert, and he is not talking about construction or renovations. He does not anticipate that the environmental conditions would be any different than they are now. TMM Pennarun was concerned that changing the pumps would have an environmental impact.
The Moderator noted it was nearly 11:00pm, and there were outstanding questions regarding residency. Town Council noted that an article can be brought forward by anyone regardless of residency, so long as the ten registered voter signatures are from registered voters in Arlington. The Moderator apologized if he added to any confusion. He then asked for notices of reconsideration. TMM Foskett requested notice of Articles 65, 71, and 72. TMM Pennarun noticed reconsideration on Articles 60 and 65. TMM Gast noticed reconsideration on Article 62. TMM Ruderman noticed reconsideration on Article 62. TMM Carlton-Gysan noticed reconsideration on Article 62. TMM Rosenthal noticed reconsideration on Article 72. TMM Fischer noticed reconsideration on Article 62 The Moderator then entertained a motion to adjourn. TMM Foskett made the motion, and with only two objections, we were adjourned.
>>So I was not at this session, so I will refrain from editorializing on the evening. I will only note that it is much easier to take notes when I can pause the recording. I think it is worth getting my notes out sooner, so I will keep doing them as I have been, especially if I can avoid having to sit through the same session twice.
No comments:
Post a Comment