OPEN SESSION
CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING
Administration Building
One School Street
Sharon, MA 02067
Present: Peg Arguimbau, Allen Garf, Paul Izzo, Sam Liao, Abigail Marsters, Andrew Nebenzahl, Suzi Peck, and Colleen Tuck
Absent: Paul Pietel
Mr. Nebenzahl called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m.
ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
Approve Minutes
Mr. Nebenzahl asked for a motion to approve the Open Session minutes from the March 30th and April 6th meetings. Peg Arguimbau asked that an error in spelling be corrected from the April 6th minutes.
Approve Minutes
MOTION: (Arguimbau/Marsters) Moved to approve the Open Session minutes from the meeting of March 30, 2009 as drafted, submitted. Vote was five in the affirmative. Peg Arguimbau, Sam Liao and Colleen Tuck abstained.
MOTION: (Arguimbau/Garf) Moved to approve the Open Session minutes from the meeting of April 6, 2009 as drafted, submitted and amended. Vote was six in the affirmative. Sam Liao and Suzi Peck abstained.
Acknowledge Correspondence
Mr. Izzo acknowledged the article from Boston.com submitted by Mr. Gould, which highlights the difficulty in the ability of towns to recruit citizens to run for office. Mr. Gould also provided the attendance of Town Meeting Representatives from Attleboro, MA. Mr. Garf submitted a Town Meeting Study Report from Needham. The report will be photocopied and distributed to all members FYI.
Meeting with Joseph Bernstein, Chief of Police
Mr. Nebenzahl thanked Chief Bernstein for taking the time to meet with the Commission and explained that the mission of the Commission is to take a holistic view of the town’s government and make recommendations on how to organize and structure Sharon’s government going forward. Mr. Nebenzahl asked Chief Bernstein to address to topics: 1)the strong chief vs. weak chief model and 2) the budget development process. Before beginning the discussion, Chief Bernstein gave a brief overview of his service to Sharon. He has been the Police Chief for the past 17 years.
Areas of discussion:
• There was a discussion regarding the pros and cons of weak vs. strong chief model. Chief Bernstein is employed under the weak chief model and in his opinion, there have been no difficulties with his maintaining authority within the Police Department under this model. During his tenure as Chief, he has not experienced any undue political pressure from other boards or administrators in the Town.
• Chief Bernstein is employed under a 3-year contract, which is renewed by the Board of Selectmen at the recommendation of the Town Administrator.
• There was a discussion the laborious and time-consuming budget process currently followed, which is to require town/school sectors to create numerous budget scenarios.
Mr. Nebenzahl, on behalf of the Charter Commission members, thanked Chief Bernstein for an informative discourse. Chief Bernstein left the meeting at 8:00 p.m.
Talking Points
There was a discussion on the talking points and the most direct and efficient way to discuss/vet each of the 3 key questions. Suzi Peck distributed the consolidated member responses. Mr. Nebenzahl asked that each question be addressed individually and asked each member to give their rationale for each of the following questions:
1. What problems or concerns about town government have been uncovered during the course of deliberations?
Responses from members:
• the need to examine the maintenance of town buildings.
• the need to examine town meeting process and discuss ways to streamline the process.
• the need for a more collaboration among town/school boards and committees.
• leadership – who is leading the town. Need definition of power – who has ultimate control in decision-making process.
• efficiency in all school and town sectors.
• disenfranchisement of voters and citizens.
• planning – need for centralized town planning and the lack of long-term planning.
• more efficient planning – time wise.
• the need to effectively disseminate information to boards and committees in a timely manner.
• stronger communication among boards and committees.
• the need to formulate a Charter that is in the best interest of Sharon.
• Finance Committee – the need to clarify roles and responsibilities of the F.C. and whether the F.C. should be appointed or elected.
• Town Administrator – the need to clarify the roles and responsibilities of the administrator.
• Town Meeting – the need to discuss/vet the strengths and weaknesses of Open Town Meeting vs. Representative Town Meeting and to exam/discuss the town meeting process of surrounding communities.
• Town Moderator – examine the role and responsibility of the T.M.
• Board of Selectmen – the need to discuss retaining a three-member board or increasing to a five- member board.
• the need for transparency for all town boards and departments.
• Collective Bargaining – guidelines for all town/school boards and committees.
• Priorities Committee – the need for a process to arbitrate and mediate opposing views.
Before moving to question #2, there was a brief discussion on the views presented by the members.
2. What practices and procedures have been identified which should be preserved in form or in substance?
• preserve volunteerism and participation in town government.
• preserve direct democracy – Open Town Meeting.
• preserve participatory form of town government.
• preserve the citizen’s right to be involved in the process and have full access to the process.
• preserve collaboration among all town/school boards and committees.
• maintain the welcoming spirit of the town and continue to encourage citizens to become involved in town government.
• continue to insure that everyone has an opportunity to be heard regardless of whether it is an Open Town Meeting or a Representative Town Meeting.
• preserve open spaces in the town.
• preserve the three-member Board of Selectmen
• preserve the collaborative process of the Priorities Committee and the Capital Outlay Committee.
• incorporate the strong chief model into all town departments.
Before moving to question #3, there was a brief discussion on the views presented by the members.
3. What are the values that each of us would like to see advanced by the Charter?
• quality of life issues.
• open space, environmental quality, schools, recreation, respect and diversity.
• strong participation by citizens in town government.
• an open and transparent town government.
• preserve the “service oriented” guidelines for all town/school departments committees.
• preserve responsible management of taxpayers’ money.
• further discussion on how to incorporate values into a Charter.
There was a brief discussion on the views presented by the members.
OTHER BUSINESS
The members reviewed/discussed the proposed schedule with agenda items presented by Mr. Curran. Mr. Curran will make the adjustments to the schedule as discussed.
There was a discussion on the pros and cons of submitting a survey to Town Meeting members.
There was a discussion on submitting an informational article to the Sharon Advocate on the progress of the Charter Commission to date.
Open Forum
Mr. Gould discussed with the members his views on establishing a management criteria.
A representative from Andover is scheduled to meet with the Commission on May 18th.
There will be no meeting on April 20th, Patriot’s Day.
There being no further business to come before the Commission at this time, Mr. Nebenzahl asked for a motion to adjourn.
MOTION: (Marsters/Garf) Moved to adjourn. Vote was eight in the affirmative.
Open Session was adjourned at 10:06 p.m.
Submitted on behalf of the Charter Committee by: Helen Campanario, Recording Secretary to the Charter Commission