Minutes of Charter Commission Meeting July 28, 2009

Present: Andy Nebenzahl- Chair, Allen Garf, Paul Peital, Abigail Marsters, Suzi Peck,   Peg Arguimbau and Consultant, Mike Curran

Ms. Marsters will contact Bob Levin, library trustee about appearing at the Charter meeting and send us an email with his preference for date. It should be noted that we are encouraging all to make comments at the Public hearing in the future.

Began review of article 3

3-1-a   Insert “Town Meeting Steering Committee” after School Committee

3-1-d   Discussion about need for town election to be set by bylaw for regularity

3-1-f    May need transition phrase “if receiving now, continue to end of term. Discussion           of 20 hour employment of elected officials - PARKING LOT

3-1-g   Insert “Town Meeting Steering Committee” after Board of Selectmen

3-1-h   Question about 1 week notice – seems quick. Mr. Curran clarified that it was only         notice of time and place the action will be taken. Also discussion about        “newspaper’ wording – add standard public notification procedure. Steering             Committee also fills vacancies this way – next candidate on the ballot, if none,    then Selectmen and Steering committee. Ms. Peck thought maybe town        Moderator could appoint to fill vacancy. Ms. Marsters suggested consistency       with the library trustees. Mr. Curran will draft new section for steering    committee to add to 3-1-h. Suggestion made that “at large” vacancy could go to      next runner up, but precinct vacancy be appointed by BOS and Steering            Committee (STCO). Mr. Peital thought that if the BOS and STCO would handle           the precinct vacancy they should probably handle the “at large’ also. Any vacancy     will be BOS and STCO appointed and we assume they will take into           consideration the runner-up.

3-1-h-2 OK

3-1-h-3 Insert “together with the STCO shall….” after Select board. Fix publication      wording

3-1-i    Review of positions on recall - Mr. Curran went over the process for us. More common to have 2 questions on the ballot: 1) for recall and 2) names of       candidates to fill position. Many times the recalled person is re-elected at the             same election! Mr. Curran’s recommendation is to have only election to recall.   Discussion of threshold needed to trigger recall and it came down to 360 (3%) of voters needed to circulate petitions to collect a needed total of 15% of voters   signatures within 21 days of the Town Clerk issuing the petitions. This would be             for all offices – BOS, STCO, School Comm. and Moderator. If recall is for a             precinct member of the STCO, then recall election in that precinct only. Everyone             on board with the concept of the one question recall.

3-1:2 election recall procedures – Mr. Peital began with the process for appointment after         the recall – to include the BOS, STCO, Moderator and School Comm. in the      appointment process until the next election. Some wondered about that and the       Chair noted that if the whole board were recalled , there would be no one to call            the election. Mr. Curran suggested to use the vacancy policy to fill the seats so    election could be called. – PARKING LOT

            Chair noted that there could be a resignation with threat of a recall and  need to             clarify when a resignation is because of recall or for other valid reason.         Committee seemed to agree on the threshold numbers and one election.

3-2       SelectBoard – present members agree to 3 – PARKING LOT until others can weigh in. Chair asked if there was in issue with BOS ONLY doing policy –   should it be the STCO? Mr. Curran interjected the Belicheck analogy – he’s the             head coach with many others under him. Chair suggested removing that sentence           about BOS being chief policy makers but, Ms. Marsters thought it was needed             for leadership. Took a straw vote and it was 4-2 to leave it in. Ms. Peck suggested             removing the last sentence in 3-2-b. may be a need to step in to deal with “day-to-        day administration” and said we don’t need language to prevent bad behavior, but    for the need to help. Straw poll 5-1 to leave it in.

3-2-C Questions about BOS sector budget. Mr. Curran explained that the TA would be           collating the one big budget with inclusion of the School Board budget. Group          thought we may need to incorporate Priorities and Capitol into this. This section      was added to the PARKING LOT

3-2-D OK

3-2- e strike out “but not” if we want an appointed Town Clerk. Straw poll – appt.-3    elect-1 abstain-1. Exclude priorities, capitol outlay and maybe others. Mr. Curran     suggested we not refer to them by name but rather have a provision for others that        are made up of designated members. Allow bylaw to create them.

3-3        Mr. Garf wondered if this reflected the present situation and that we should refer           to the School comm. for their comments. Adopt it for now, but get input before   the public hearing.

3-4       Mr. Curran noted we can strike the word “finance” – add an “s” to committees.             Vacancy issue already covered.

3-4-b clarify that Moderator does all Town Meetings, not STCO meetings. Mr. Curran             stated the STCO is an extension of the present Finance Committee.

3-5       new section for Steering Committee – reference this section in section 2.

Article 4

4-2-b TA will appoint new positions – may want BOS to do that. Para.3 – can the TA appoint subordinates? We wanted Dept. heads to be able to do that.

4-2-g   Para. 2 – PARKING LOT

       m  goes hand in hand with BOS ability to do it

        n  ability to reorganize – have legislation in its right form

        o  change to STCO

        q  insert agencies and staff to help with collaboration

Any comments concerns with Articles 2, 3 & 4 send to Chair and Mr. Curran. Commission will vote on Art. 4 next week.

Discussion of the switch from elected to appointed.

Chair suggested Planning Board be appointed by the BOS and shall act as Subdivision Control Board with 5-year terms. Planning Board is the only group that has 5 year terms – do we want to make it the same as others? Polled the group and consensus was to go to 3-year terms. The Long Range Planning Comm. should be a representative group. Mr. Curran pointed out that Chapter (section?) 81D lays out what should be considered for this. He’s sent that out to us but will send it again. Ms. Peck stated that we needed to clarify what it is we want from that group. Polled the group as to appoint vs. elect:

Assessors – 4-0-2abstain                    

Library Trustees will be contacted by Ms. Marsters. Planning board will be contacted by Ms. Peck. Mr. Garf wondered about the Personnel board  - appointed by the Moderator. Ms. Marsters ondered what the difference is and Mr. curran explained it was due to the legislation involved. Mr. Garf commented that some believed it was more impartial if appointed by the Moderator.. Considered any other boards – Standing Building Comm..? issue of independence because of the set-up by State regulations(SBAB?) Need to be answerable to the town. Town Meeting has no mechanism to oversee what they do. Board should report to BOS or at least to the group which sponsors the project. Given Colleen’s absence and her involvement with this committee – will revisit it when she’s here.

Ms. Marsters suggested people need a place to go to air grievances. Not going to finish this topic tonight so moved on to Building Maintenance.

Mr. Peital gave out copies of two reports regarding building maintenance – MMA Consulting group memo that tried to address issues specific to town and the town of Milton put out something that summarized what other towns had a good practice. Encouraged all to read them both for next meeting.

Mr. Garf moved to adjourn 10:15PM. Ms. Marsters seconded. Voted unanimously.