OPEN SESSION
CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING
Administration Building
One School Street
Sharon, MA 02067
Present: Peg Arguimbau, Allen Garf, Paul Izzo, Abigail Marsters, Andrew Nebenzahl, Suzi Peck, Paul Pietal and Colleen Tuck
Absent: Sam Liao
Mr. Nebenzhal, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:09 p.m.
ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
Approve Minutes
Mr. Nebenzahl asked for a motion to approve the Open Session minutes from the May 18th meeting.
Approve Minutes
MOTION: (Garf/Marsters) Moved to approve the Open Session minutes from the meeting of May 18, 2009 as drafted and submitted. Vote was eight in the affirmative.
Acknowledge Correspondence
Mr. Izzo presented an overview of a May 22nd email sent by Gordon Gladstone, in which Mr. Gladstone outlined his reasons for favoring an Open Town Meeting form of government.
DISCUSSION ITEMS – Overview of Finance: Fiscal Matters, Budget Development and Electoral Matters
Mr. Nebenzahl stated that a way to initiate discussion would be for the members to state what boards, committees, positions, etc., in their opinion, is working well and what needs further discussion.
Areas for further discussion:
P. Pietal – budget development process, timing issues and consistency among departments and committees.
Mr. Curran stated that the most important charge of a Charter Commission is to consolidate the budget process. The charter is to provide guidelines and formats of budgets to the Town Administrator. There was a discussion on the current town budget process.
C. Tuck – possible consolidation to two sectors from the current three to become town and school. What works well: Town Finance Director.
A. Nebenzahl – possible creation of a strategic planning task force committee. Define the role of the Capital Outlay Committee and Priorities Committee. Capital Outlay Committee process works well.
P. Izzo – lack of industrial tax base must be addressed and become part of the long-range planning for Sharon. Planning and accountability must be improved.
There was a discussion on Sharon’s tax base and how it compares to towns of comparable population and medium income.
A. Marsters – how to insure that the collegial relationship between the town and school department continues (people vs. process).
There was a discussion on the feasibility of having a stand-alone strategic planning task force committee vs. expanding the role and membership of the Priorities Committee and whether employees of the town should be voting members of policy-making boards.
Mr. Nebenzahl asked if there was a consensus among the members for a strategic planning committee concept. Clarifying the membership of the committee would be a discussion item for a subsequent meeting. There was a discussion on the current composition and effectiveness of the Priorities Committee and the possibility of diluting its effectiveness by expanding their role and membership.
A. Garf – define the role of the Finance Committee.
There was a discussion on whether the Finance Committee should opine on warrant articles that relate specifically to financial issues or whether they should continue to operate as a warrant committee and opine on all warrant articles that come before Town Meeting.
There was a discussion on the current composition of the Planning Board and the possibility of clearly defining their role in relation to long-range town planning. The need for a town planner was expressed. Mr. Curran stated that defining the role of the Planning Board could be incorporated into the town charter.
P.Pietal – board functions must be discussed i.e. land use, long-range planning, financial planning, water use, public safety, building use and maintenance.
S.Peck – long-range planning should be linked to the budget process i.e. sub-committee of the Priorities Committee.
C. Tuck – future role of the Economic Development Committee as the Board of Selectmen has appointed them.
There was a discussion on the most effective way for budget oversight and maintaining strong checks and balances and the role that the Finance Committee, Board of Selectmen and Priorities Committee play in the budget process. Mr. Curran again stressed that the goal is to have a consolidated budget.
There was a discussion on what committees, boards or positions should be appointed or elected (particularly whether the Town Clerk should be elected or appointed) and the pros and cons of both. Historical data regarding past elections and the number of citizens running for offices in the past few years would be requested from the Town Clerk.
Mr. Curran clarified for the Committee on when, by law, local elections can be held and the length of time a person can be appointed to a board, committee or position (should not be longer than a three-year term).
Mr. Curran presented an overview of the initiative petition process, referendum process and recall process and explained that it is not mandatory to include recall language in the charter. Mr. Curran will provide sample recall petitions for further discussion by the members at the June 1st meeting. Open Town Meeting can also have a referendum provision. Mr. Curran will research Marblehead, which has an Open Town Meeting form of government and has referendum language.
Mr. Nebenzahl stated that discussion items for the June 1st meeting would be terms of office, referendum and initiative provisions and number of Board of Selectmen (maintain 3, increase to 5).
OTHER BUSINESS
The next meeting of the Charter Commission is scheduled for June 1st at 7:00 p.m.
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 9:30 p.m.
Submitted on behalf of the Charter Committee by: Helen Campanario, Recording Secretary to the Charter Commission