I take notes during Town Meeting. They are not official in any way. As I listen to people speak, I type notes. I’m sure that, at times, I mishear or misunderstand the speaker, but my notes represent what I hear at the time. I then publish the notes every night after the meeting. I do go back and make a few edits as errors are pointed out to me.

I do not try to reproduce my entire notes for this online version. Sometimes I relay a quote from a specific speaker. Most of the time I only summarize the discussion. At points I give a purely personal opinion; those are clearly labeled like this: Personal note.

Jane Howard led the meeting in the Star Spangled Banner.

Moderator John Leone announced that Representative Sean Garballey was seeking additional support for Hearing Awareness Day.

On Chair of the Board of Selectman Clarissa Rowe’s motion, we voted to reconvene on May 18th.

Announcements:

• Peter Howard – On your seats is a resolution about PAYT to be considered in June.
• John Maher – Symmes Trust. Thursday’s Advocate had notice for people seeking grants for health care.

The viewing gallery had a good-sized crowd. From the looks of it, and some of the signs I could read, it looks like mostly parents of Thompson students who are advocating for the Thompson rebuild. Many of them stuck around through the later votes.

Article 3 – Reports

On motion of Al Tosti, we took the article from the table.

• Lawrence McKinney – Mr. McKinney gave a detailed report of the Uncle Sam Committee. They are looking to create an Uncle Sam Plaza. He led the meeting in a round of his song “But He Came From Arlington.”
• Jane Howard – Mrs. Howard gave the report of the Vision 2020 Committee. Part of the report is in the water bodies article, and part is in our hands in the report on the annual survey. Mrs. Howard reviewed the survey results.
• Stephen Gilligan – He gave a précis of the Report of the Treasurer to Town Meeting.
• Sally Naish – She gave the report of the Arlington Tree Committee. She talked about planting trees and the budget challenges of the program.
• Cindy Starks – As Chair of the School Committee, she started to read her report. The Moderator interrupted her and asked her to give highlights, not read the entire report. I understand and agree with the moderator’s position that reports shouldn’t be just read. In this case, though, what she was presenting was an overview of a much bigger report. If she’d had more references to the overall report, it would have perhaps been the right mix of reading and overview. It’s a tough line to walk, though. She noted the importance of approving the override on June 7th, and the cuts in school teachers and programs if the override is not approved. Mr. Caccavarro stood and complained that she was talking about the override. He said that it wasn’t the report of the school committee, but an override debate. I don’t know what Mr. Caccavarro is hoping for – you can’t talk about the budget without talking about the override. There are two budgets being considered. One budget is with an override, and one budget is without an override. You can’t stick your head in the sand and pretend there is no override being voted in three weeks.
• John Cole – He reported on progress on the Highland Fire Station, the Central Fire Station, the Community Safety Building, and a bit about Thompson and Stratton. He commended Chief Bobby Jefferson and the School Department CFO Diane Johnson for saving the towns a lot of money in the construction process.

Article 3 was tabled.

We tabled the article in progress, and moved to:

Article 57 – Capital Plan.

Charlie Foskett gave the report of the Capital Planning Committee. He noted that this year’s capital spending is somewhat more conservative than past years. He reviewed the debt service that was being taken on. He talked about how the entire plan was kept under 5% of the budget. He mentioned the Green Schools plan and how it might save the town money. He announced the creation of a Maintenance Committee, separate from the Capital group. He noted the town has fewer copiers, and needs a new document management plan. There was a modification of the text that Wellington tennis court is being worked on, not the playground. There were questions about how grants are reported. The budget was passed, in all votes, unanimously by voice vote.

We moved to the Special Town Meeting

Article 4 – Capital Budget. Voted no action.

Article 5 – Thompson School.

Charlie Foskett asked for an hour to give the presentation, and he was given it by the meeting.  They only used half that, in the end.

We took a 10-minute break before the presentation started.

School Committee member Jeff Thielman started the presentation. He gave the report of the Thompson School Rebuilding Committee. He recounted the school rebuilding debt exclusion override votes of the late 90’s. Thompson and Stratton are the two remaining schools. Stratton has a repair plan; Thompson is slated to be rebuilt. Thompson was built in 1955 and most mechanical systems are failing. We expect 47.2% reimbursement from the state. Demolition would start this fall. The new school could open in fall of 2013. As a part of this plan, we’ll have to re-district. Thompson students will be accommodated at other elementary schools. The central kitchen will be at Thompson. He talked about various cost factors, prices, and ways to manage the building project.

Charlie Foskett gave a report on how the project will be paid for. He talked about the votes of the town and the state funding process. $6.7 million will come from the debt exclusion override approved in 2000. $8.5 million will come from the state. $3 million will come from the sale/lease of Parmenter and Crosby. There is an additional $2 million from smaller sources.

There was a question about salvage of the old building. There was a question about how to keep the project on track. Jane Biondi, the Thompson PTO president, spoke in favor of the project. She got a big round of applause. I agreed with her speech, and it was well delivered, but I don’t think that applause or booing is appropriate. If you’re watching at home, it’s not that I disagreed with Jane – I just think that Town Meeting suffers when there is cheering and booing. A couple parents spoke in favor. There were questions about food service during reconstruction. Mr. Maher moved the question. Debate was terminated. The motion was approved unanimously. There’s still work to be done, but this is the last big step – I think we’re getting a new school!

Special Town Meeting was dissolved.

We took the articles off the table.

Article 24. Public Records Law, continued.

Jill Snyder said that she’s a records manager. She noted the importance of records management. Chris Loreti spoke again. He rose to contradict some of the statements made last week. Among other things, he said that the $1.5 million school budget error of last year was brought to light by a public records request. This is incorrect. The issue was found by the town auditor. The auditor is the one that figured out that the school department was paying FY10 salaries with FY11 money. Saying that the error was discovered by an information request is like saying the Red Sox score was discovered by the Boston Globe. A couple of speakers were against the resolution on the basis that the changes would be too time consuming or expensive. Eric Berger described several times where requests for information took longer than 10 days. Chief Technology Officer David Good spoke. He said that he was a public servant, and he served the public. When he gets an information request he must protect the rights of the people in the records he holds as well as serve the public. The requests he gets often include names, and those names are linked to retirement and health records that are private by right of the individual.  He, or someone else, has to read each of these messages to make sure there isn’t an inappropriate release of information. He noted that when Chris Loreti made his records request, he still had 24 months of email data to convert to the new system. He offered to provide the information after the conversion, but Loreti wouldn’t wait. Loreti appealed to the state. Good said that the state did not set the new $200 price, but that he did – it just took time to convert the data. I think that David Good’s statement was excellent, and very valuable to the debate. I hope that it helps change the tone of the debate. If this article is about “us versus them,” about the town hiding things from residents, then we’ve all messed up. As has been said before, there is no “us and them” – there is only us, the town, its employees, its volunteers. We’re all working to make the town a better place.  Good put a lot of the previous statements from many speakers in perspective.

The debate didn’t change my mind. I’m going to vote in favor of the resolution, as it is written. But I’m not voting for it because there’s something that was done wrong in the past. I simply agree that public access to records is a good thing. The other story lines in this debate are just unnecessary and unpleasant distractions.

Meeting was adjourned for another night.

I take notes during Town Meeting. They are not official in any way. As I listen to people speak, I type notes. I’m sure that, at times, I mishear or misunderstand the speaker, but my notes represent what I hear at the time. I then publish the notes every night after the meeting. I do go back and make a few edits as errors are pointed out to me.

I do not try to reproduce my entire notes for this online version. Sometimes I relay a quote from a specific speaker. Most of the time I only summarize the discussion. At points I give a purely personal opinion; those are clearly labeled like this: Personal note.

The MBTA Red Line totally failed tonight. I left work at 6:10 – plenty of time for me to get from Kendall Square to Town Hall before 8PM, right? Well, we left Kendall at about 6:20, got to Harvard at about 6:30. And then we sat for half an hour. And then we went a few hundred feet down the track. And then we sat for half an hour. And then we came BACK up the track to Harvard. At that point it was 7:40. I was riding with a colleague, and she called her husband, and he picked us up at Harvard and took me to Town Hall. Thank, Jared and Karen! And, MBTA – no, I will not be patient.  You totally failed, again.

I apologize to anyone who was upset that I was dressed in jeans with my jacket and tie. I had the luck to leave a change of clothes in the Selectmen’s office, but not dress pants.

I arrived with the continuing debate of Article 21.

Article 21 – Closing of Warrant, continued.

I understand that Al Tosti proposed an amendment that would close the warrant on the 3rd Friday in January rather than a week later. I heard a number of speakers in favor and against of having a warrant closing date specified in the bylaws. There were concerns about how long it takes to do hearings of the various committees. There were concerns that it didn’t need to be a bylaw. There were questions about when hearings could and couldn’t happen. There were questions about the process on the warrant hearing process. There were detailed questions about what dates might happen in certain years. Mr. O’Conor noted that his charge was to make Town Meeting more attractive. Unfortunately, I think the hour-plus debate about whether or not there is a firm date for the warrant to close is not an attractive debate at all. Irony, I guess. Brian Lavalle moved to terminate debate, and it was, by voice vote. I fundamentally agree with several of the roots of the issue. I think that the warrant should stay open reasonably late. I think that the Selectmen should be more forthcoming with drafts of the warrant (something that I’d like to change next year). I think that there is room to improve on the calendar of hearings. But, in the end, I’m unconvinced that a bylaw is the right way to make this happen. It’s the wrong tool for the job. I voted no. Tosti’s vote went down, 61-110. O’Conor’s motion was approved by voice vote.

Article 17 – Temporary Seasonal Signs on Athletic Fields, continued.

Michael Cayer of the Arlington Redevelopment Board spoke, and he proposed a new version of the vote that had been approved by the Redevelopment Board. He said that the language looks very different, but it does the same thing. It permits the schools to put up advertisements at Peirce Field. Stephen Harrington was the original proponent, and he supports it. There was a question about the content restrictions that were removed in the new draft. Mr. Cayer said it was because of legal restrictions. School Committee member Bill Hayner said the School Committee would be looking at content of signs. Chris Loreti is concerned about whether the Zoning Board of Appeals can grant a special permit that allows signs. He wants this change to be approved so as to make that ZBA decision to be rendered moot. There were concerns about where the money should go. There was an attempt to amend this to say Peirce Field, but that was rejected as being spot zoning and therefore not legal. There was a concern about First Amendment lawsuits. There were several questions about the Summer Street fields and if they would have signs (the answer was no). There were several questions about who was responsible for sign vandalism.

We had a 14 minute break.

We brought Article 60 up, out of order, because the Superintendant of Minuteman, Ed Bouquillon, was available and present. Article 17 (and others) were tabled to do so.

Article 60 – Minuteman High Budget.

Finance Committee member Stephen Decourcey reported Finance Committee’s support of the Minuteman budget and appropriation. He noted that the assessment per pupil is going down and enrollment is going up. Dr. Bouquillon reported on a number of enrollment and trends at Minuteman. He noted that 100% of 10th graders passed the English MCAS this year, among other things. He said that next year he anticipates a waiting list for non-member town students. That’s a big step – I’m very impressed that they’re ready to turn that corner. Dean Carmen stood and praised the budget and Dr. Bouquillon. Paul Schlictman also praised the new direction of Minuteman. He noted that the overall district governance was still worrisome because of inequitable representation on the Minuteman School Committee. Dr. Bouquillon shared the results of the enrollment study, and is looking to investigate a renovation that might come forward in 2014 or 2015.  Carl Wagner moved to terminate debate, terminated on voice vote. Passed unanimously.

The various just-tabled articles were taken from the table.

Article 17 – Temporary Seasonal Signs on Athletic Fields, continued, again.

There was a series of questions about what the signs might look like – it depends on the special permit process. Carl Wagner moved to terminate debate. Terminated by voice vote. We substituted the updated motion by voice vote. Carl Wagner is the “article executioner” of 2011! The as-substituted motion was approved 133-3.

Article 22 – Standing Vote Not Required for 2/3 Vote.

Jim O’Conor said that the Town Meeting Procedures Committee supported this. Moderator John Leone explained that currently the moderator can declare a unanimous or majority vote. When there’s a 2/3 vote, he can’t just declare a winner if it is contested. By passing this, when there is a lopsided vote, the moderator can simply declare it passed. It’s still easy to request a standing vote if the result is in doubt. He noted that 11 such lopsided votes had happened so far at town meeting. The change was approved by voice vote.

Article 24 – Bylaw Change. Public Records.

Chris Loreti proposed a resolution. He wants public records to be more available because they are owned by the public, not the town. Loreti went through his proposed resolution at length. Joe Tully agreed that public records requests are treated politically. Town Manager Sullivan said that the town takes public information requests very seriously. He said that Mr. Loreti had mischaracterized the public information requests. He said that Mr. Loreti had made a number of appeals to the state, and they had been denied. He said the town was following the law. Annie LaCourt asked that town meeting consider this article, but not as an attack on town employees, but as encouragement to create a more formal policy.  I think that this particular article is being driven by some ugly personal issues, and I think the town is harmed by the negative and combative elements of the debate.  That said, I think the text of the resolution itself is fine, and I’ll be voting for it.

Town Meeting adjourned for the night.

I take notes during Town Meeting. They are not official in any way. As I listen to people speak, I type notes. I’m sure that, at times, I mishear or misunderstand the speaker, but my notes represent what I hear at the time. I then publish the notes every night after the meeting. I do go back and make a few edits as errors are pointed out to me.

I do not try to reproduce my entire notes for this online version. Sometimes I relay a quote from a specific speaker. Most of the time I only summarize the discussion. At points I give a purely personal opinion; those are clearly labeled like this: Personal note.

The meeting was called to order at 8:03.

Town Meeting Member Jane Howard played the piano and led the meeting in the Star-Spangled Banner.

Town Moderator John Leone said that he hoped we’d be done with Article 51 by the break, and if we’re not then we’ll convene the Special Town Meeting at the break.

The Moderator noted that things had gotten heated last week, and reminded everyone that Town Meeting was not a place for ad hominem attacks, and asked everyone to be polite. He apologized for a comment of his own last week.

The Moderator gave a significant statement about written notice of amendments and substitute motions. He put up the text of the written notice rule for everyone to review. He reminded everyone that the motivation was to keep people from proposing sweeping changes at the last minute that could have been shared earlier, and it was not to stifle debate. The rule is meant to advance debate. If the amendment is simple and easily understood, he will let it in. Town Meeting does not exist to ramrod recommended votes in the books. Town Meeting is to debate and create the best possible outcome. I could not agree with him more. I was very glad and thanked him for making this clarification.

We voted to come back Wednesday for the next meeting.

Announcements

• Cindy Friedman announced that Tuesday May 17 Senator Donnelly is hosting a budget forum. “Why Cuts In Service Should Matter To You.” Memorial Library in Lexington.
• Harry McCabe. Appreciates the calls while he was out – he was fine.
• Hugh McCrory. He wanted to thank Richard and Donald Briand  for repaving a sidewalk on Dundee Rd. Thanks to them. Town Meeting applauded.
• Al Tosti. On the 11th the Superintendent of Minuteman School District will be here at 9am. He would like to take the budget out of order at that time.

Article 51, continued. Consolidated School and Town Finance.

John Maher briefly presented his modified amendment. He creates options. Jeff Thielman move to terminate debate. 108-73, not 2/3. John Deyst urged us to be less emotional and come together as a community. We need articles to be brought forward next year so that we can have a real debate. Joe Tully supported Mr. Maher’s amendment. He does not think we should tinker with the Treasurer’s department, though. Jim O’Conor likes the amendment and likes the debate. He’s proud of the fact that we’re taking this long on this important issue. Treasurer Stephen Gilligan reiterated his qualifications to be treasurer. He again accused the selectmen of having divisive and self-interested motives. I find it very unfortunate that Mr. Gilligan is unable to have a more dispassionate debate, one that is less personal and more focused on the facts of the debate. Mr. Gilligan asked for John Bilafer to have five minutes of time, but here were only 2 minutes remaining on the clock. John Bilafer asked for and received five minutes to speak. It’s very much of a sign of the respect that he’s held in that he was granted those five minutes. Most anyone else wouldn’t have been granted the request after 4 hours of debate. Mr. Bilafer reported about a treasurer’s race in the ’50s, and talked about the qualifications of treasurers. He argued that the treasurer was more than an administrator, and is a policy maker. He said that “allowing a study would disrupt the balance of power.” I think that is silly on the face of it. Studies don’t change the balance of power. Any power that can’t survive a study is already unworthy of the power it wields. About 70 people have asked to speak, about half of them have spoke already. Lyman Judd thinks that people are set in their ways. He wonders if we need an auditor. He moved no action. Cleinman moved the question. Passed 2/3 on voice vote (third time is the charm). Mr. Maher’s substitute passed 149-44. The main motion passed 128-69. I voted in favor of Mr. Maher’s substitute and the main motion.

Mr. Ruderman served notice of reconsideration.

Annual Town Meeting is declared in recess. The Special Town Meeting was opened.

We passed the seating rules for Special Town Meeting. (Same as regular town meeting – Town Meeting members and officials on the floor, visitors upstairs in the gallery).

The Town Clerk certified that the Special Town Meeting had been correctly called.

If the meeting is not done today, we’ll come back May 11.

Reports – Moderator said that the Finance Committee and Selectmen Reports are already accepted.

Article 2. Amendments to FY11 Budgets.

Christine Connolly explained how in FY11 that the Arlington Youth Services had restructured itself. They were doing more for-fee work, and are billing insurance companies. That results in a need to change the budget. In response to questions, we found out the waiting list has gone from 40 to 16 families. Two speakers in favor. Lyman Judd asked where the money for this budget came from. The question was already answered, and she repeated her answer that it was billing insurance companies. Article passed on voice vote.

Article 3. Arlington High Rehab.

Town Manager Brian Sullivan explained that there was a burst water pipe, and this was to cover the deductible under our insurance. Article passed on voice vote.

Article 4 and 5. Al Tosti moved to postpone to May 16 until Mr. Foskett is back in the country.

Article 6. Appropriation Unpaid Bills.

Superintendant of Schools Kathy Bodie explained that two invoices came in more than a year after services was rendered. This is to pay the bill – ordinarily you can’t do it after the fiscal year has closed. There was a question what happens if we say no – the answer is that they don’t get paid. A speaker was opposed to paying. There was a very detailed question about how many hours we were being asked to pay for and what the rate was. They are two, two-day arbitrations. There were questions about whether there was a contract or not. Lyman Judd suggested we send a sharp letter. Gordon Jamieson asked about the effect on the bond rating, and the answer was none. Two speakers were in favor of paying. A speaker asked for a policy so that this won’t happen again. This is where Town Meeting leaves the rails – there’s just no way you can make a policy to suggest someone not be dumb. We can’t enforce when someone sends a bill; we can only set a policy about what happens when a bill is sent late. We have a policy for that, and it’s outlined in state law. When someone sends a bill that late, it requires a vote. Town Meeting can’t set a reasonable policy on a $4000 bill in a $110,000,000 budget! We agreed to pay the bill, 175-10.

9:35 went on break.

Article 7. Easements by Eminent Domain.

Michael Rademacher, head of DPW, explained that in the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Mass Ave Corridor, there will be the need to temporarily enter private property. Specifically sidewalks, steps, lawns, etc. that abut the project will be touched by the contractor. There are 6 permanent easements where there are handicap ramps that will need more room than they currently have. We’re not taking land taking, we’re just getting easements. The money comes from Chapter 90, but not the tax roles. There was a complaint against bumpouts. Scott Smith put up a number of photos showing the decaying condition of the sidewalks that are being replaced. Joe Connors suggested that if this is killed, then the Mass Ave Corridor project is killed. Everything I know says that’s incorrect. Paul Schlichtman says that Mr. Connors was incorrect. He said that the road is going to be done anyway. “Vote no if you want crappy sidewalks. Vote yes if you want good sidewalks.” Eric Berger suggested that there is no limit to the financial exposure. He thinks we can’t afford it. He said that the most irresponsible part of this is that the authorization is being given now, before project is approved. Harry McCabe sought clarification about what the vote we’re taking is – it was clarified that it’s listed as Article 58/Special Town Meeting Article 7, page 26 of the Selectmen’s report. Mark Streitfeld pointed out that the vote doesn’t appropriate money, and the concerns of previous speakers about the cost were moot. There was continued debate about whether or not stopping this would stop the Mass Ave project. Adam Auster pointed out that we did this last year when we re-did the sidewalk at Dallin School. He asked everyone including the Mass Ave Corridor opponents to vote yes so that pedestrians and businesses can get first class treatments. Mr. Cook says that the “selectmen want this money like he wants wings on game day.” I disagree with his characterization. I want the improvements the money brings, and I want to bring them without impacting the town budget. I’m splitting a hair, I suppose, but I like my motives better than the motives that Mr. Cook suggests I have. The ramps are ADA compliant. Mr. Logan thinks we don’t need the easements. Town Manager said that we have a million dollars in state money to do the sidewalks, and if we don’t use their appropriation, we’ll have to appropriate the money ourselves anyway. We owe it to East Arlington and the town taxpayers to get this done, he said. Paul Bayer moved the question. Terminated debate by voice vote. Passed 135-32.

The Special Town Meeting is then recessed.

The Town Moderator admonished Lyman Judd for repeated outbursts and meeting interruptions. I think this was appropriate. The moderator has given Mr. Judd a number of warnings, and Mr. Judd continues to act as if the rules of the meeting are beneath him. If we all acted like Mr. Judd, the meeting would never be in order.

Article 18 – PODS/Dumpsters, continued.

Chair of the Selectman Clarissa Rowe reported that the Board of Selectmen have voted to set the fee for PODS and dumpsters at $24. A number of speakers on the list passed, then Annie LaCourt moved to terminate debate. Terminated by voice vote. Amendment passed by voice vote. Approved, as amendment, by voice vote.

Article 21 – Closing of Warrant.

Town Meeting Procedures Committee member James O’Conor proposed a substitute motion. He wants a bylaw to say when the warrant opens (early December) and closes (late January). He went into the history of the debate of the issue in Town Meeting.

Al Tosti gave notice of reconsideration for articles 2, 3, and 6 of the Special Town Meeting.

We voted to adjourn.

I take notes during Town Meeting. They are not official in any way. As I listen to people speak, I type notes. I’m sure that, at times, I mishear or misunderstand the speaker, but my notes represent what I hear at the time. I then publish the notes every night after the meeting. I do go back and make a few edits as errors are pointed out to me.

I do not try to reproduce my entire notes for this online version. Sometimes I relay a quote from a specific speaker. Most of the time I only summarize the discussion. At points I give a purely personal opinion; those are clearly labeled like this: Personal note.

The meeting was called to order at 8:05.

Charles Gallagher played the piano and led the meeting in the national anthem.

Moderator John Leone announced that Town Meeting sessions are now available for viewing “on-demand” at acmi.tv.

Two new members of Town Meeting were sworn in.

If the meeting does not finish tonight, we’ll return on Monday May 9.

Announcements

• Jane Howard introduced Ryan Katofsky Sustainable Arlington. He announced the Home Energy Check campaign. It is free energy checks for homes in Arlington. Learn more and sign up:  www.homeenergycheck.org
• Diane Mahon – May 14th is Postal Carrier Food Drive.

Article 3 – Reports. Taken from the table

Barbara Cutler gave the report of the Commission on Disabilities. She reported on progress of the commission and support from other parts of the town. Among other things she complained that the Disability Commission’s warrant articles were not printed as originally submitted. The moderator told her to take that issue up with the Selectmen. The text of the warrant article was modified because it wasn’t in a legal or proper format. She didn’t like the new language, but it had the same legal effect as her language – that’s why it was changed. This was explained to her at the time. Her report ran long. It’s the first time we’ve seen the new timer technology hit 10 minutes. Good to get a live demo, I guess.

Article 38 and 39, Crosby and Parmenter. The articles were postponed – concerns about the deeds that need to be resolved.

Article 51. Consolidated Town and School Finance.

The article was taken up out of order. Clarissa Rowe introduced Alan Jones, who gave the presentation in support of Article 51. He explained that the article called for research for future decisions. He advocated for merging the finance function of the town into one office. He noted that the merger wouldn’t actually happen without future votes of Town Meeting, the School Committee, the Selectmen, and a town ballot. Treasurer Stephen Gilligan spoke next and said the proponents were “long on rhetoric and short on fact.” I found this statement ironic given that in his speech he accused the board of selectmen to be engaged in a “power grab” and used other loaded words like “disguise.”  Watch the replay on TV and decide for yourself who is long on rhetoric. Maria Romano spoke against the article and in favor of protecting democracy and respecting people. She questioned the truthfulness of the proponents. Maria’s facts were bad – she said that the vote changes government and the Town Manager Act, when it clearly does not. The article advocates for change, and it might lead there with future votes, but there is no actual change with the vote. School Committee member Bill Hayner is opposed. He’s concerned about budget authority for school committee. Mr. Healey was next, and he is also opposed. He introduced former treasurer John Bilafer. Mr. Bilafer said that the tension between the selectmen and treasurer is healthy separation of powers, and opposed the article. Mr. Bilafer’s words were a welcome relief after several of the previous speakers in opposition. Mr. Bilafer made his case without insinuating malicious intent or otherwise attacking the character of anyone in town. He simply made his case.  Reasonable people can disagree on Article 51, and he’s proof of that.  It doesn’t have to devolve to accusations about motive or character. Annie LaCourt supported the change. She described the ways it will make the town more efficient in how it uses resources. Ed Trembley opposed. Tom Fitzgerald is opposed – this won’t fix the school committee, he argued. Ted Paluso said that the town’s biggest problem is its divisiveness. Selectman Diane Mahon spoke. I’m fairly confused about what Diane said, and can’t quote it accurately. There was a point of order asking if the report of the board of selectmen was correctly printed. The answer was that it was. Andrew Fischer gave a statement. He was opposed to the article. He said some things that were entirely untrue about the Mass Ave Corridor project – he claimed that a professional speaker said we’d all be riding bicycles in 2030 – and no such thing was said.

We took a 10 minute break at 9:30.

Lawrence McKinney was opposed. Jenifer Watson said that we are giving up democracy if we support this. Paul Schlichtman is in favor. He wants to see the report that will result. He knows that the school committee will be able to retain the power it needs. Al Tosti says to look at the words of the article. He answered his own question: who owns the town finances? No one. It belongs to a half-dozen different departments. It needs to be more organized. He noted many towns that are nearby that have appointed treasurers and assessors. He talked about the difference between electing full-time employees versus part-time employees. John Maher spoke in favor, and made an amendment. He suggested that the part of the article that indicated “support” be removed, but the part that asked for future information and articles remain. Several people jumped up and objected that the amendment wasn’t prepared in writing, and the moderator agreed, and ruled it out of order.

I spoke. I came up right after the amendment. I ad-libbed a statement which regular readers of my blog will recognize. I said that I strongly agreed with the moderator that large, confusing amendments and substitute motions should be delivered in advance. However, I said, Town Meeting is a place for debate and legislation. Legislation means amendments and modification. We need to be able to make amendments. If the moderator’s policy is taken to the extreme, then town meeting is nothing more than a series of up or down votes. There needs to be room for debate and room to improve articles from the floor of town meeting.

I then went on to talk about the article. I noted that some scary words had been used, like “power grab” and “disguise” and “giving up on democracy.” I invited everyone to open their booklet and read the words in the actual article. The actual words we’re voting on are “indicates its support,” “research the implementation,” “gathering input,” and future “warrant articles.” They’re much more benign than has been suggested. I said that payroll, benefits, invoices, etc. are all the same, no matter what department you’re in. We should have one department manage the money. We should take the next step and learn more.

Elsie Fiorie is opposed. Tommy Caccavaro is opposed – he thinks it’s removing his rights. He said that the point of this article is to remove Steve Gilligan. Welte read the original warrant article text from January aloud. I don’t see how that’s relevant – we don’t vote the original text. He suggested that this article gives up Town Meeting rights. Mr. Sandrelli spoke. He said it’s a step toward dictatorship and royalty. Michael Ruderman was curious what the FinCom members opposed to this thought. Charlie Foskett answered that he was opposed at the time, but had changed his mind. Eric Berger was opposed. He demanded to know what will be voted on next year. Brian Rehrig said that we’re having an uninformed debate about whether or not to have an informed debate. He noted several speakers were concerned that the town meeting was being asked to endorse something without enough information, but Mr. Maher’s motion would solve that. We should approve this article, collect information, and then have the debate, next year, with more information. Charlie Foskett supported the change because it’s going to save money. He asked the Town Manager if money would be saved by a financial consolidation. The manager reported that it would save 3-4 positions. Hugh McCrory moved that we adjourn. I was not in favor of adjourning – we’ve been sitting here listening to the debate, we should be the ones that vote. Dean Carman spoke in favor. He agreed that the financial department is a support organization, not a policy organization. He said we don’t have a town side, or a school side, or a treasurer’s side, or an assessors’ side. We have a Town of Arlington. I could not have said it better myself. He closed by reminding everyone again that this vote is not a binding vote – Town Meeting gets to decide next year. Stephen Gilligan says that several things were said about him were insulting and he wanted to respond. He was ruled out of order. Mike Cayer voted to terminate debate. 103-65, the motion to terminate debate failed (it requires 2/3). Leo Doherty spoke against. Martha Scott doesn’t think that she knows enough about the article, so she’s voting no. We voted to adjourn.

The moderator announced that he was ruling Mr. Maher’s restated amendment to be in order. That means that on Monday (after we open the Special Town Meeting) we’ll get to vote on the amendment and the main motion.  I’m obviously delighted that the moderator ruled this amendment in order.  I note that it really makes my case about permitting amendments.  If we don’t permit amendments, we’re going to be throwing out a lot of babies and a lot of bathwater.  Amendments from the floor, within reason, permit much better outcomes.

I’m disappointed that we didn’t vote tonight. We all heard 3 hours of debate, and I’d like that set of people to vote. Then again, maybe this debate needs a few days of cooling emotions and clearing heads. See everyone on Monday!

I take notes during Town Meeting. They are not official in any way. As I listen to people speak, I type notes. I’m sure that, at times, I mishear or misunderstand the speaker, but my notes represent what I hear at the time. I then publish the notes every night after the meeting. I do go back and make a few edits as errors are pointed out to me.

I do not try to reproduce my entire notes for this online version. Sometimes I relay a quote from a specific speaker. Most of the time I only summarize the discussion. At points I give a purely personal opinion; those are clearly labeled like this: Personal note.

The Selectmen met tonight at 7:15, and then we went to the Finance Committee meeting and met with them. We had a conversation about the override, health care savings, budgeting, PAYT, and other related issues. The meeting ran long and I missed the beginning of Town Meeting. I could hear the anthem from the hearing room. But, I did not hear what reports were given or what announcements were made. I heard at least one vote of postponement – so I missed at least one article being postponed. I’m told that this the only actual vote that I missed:

Article 29. Ballot Question for 2 More Liquor Licenses, continued. Voted 94-16.

The rest of the votes I was there for:

Article 26 – Bylaw. Motor Boats on Spy Pond.

My notes here are short as I was just getting settled. A Spy Pond neighbor whose name I didn’t get gave a substitute motion. She said that the residents and recreational groups (particularly the high school crew) had reached a compromise. One speaker stood up and said that there was no such thing as a launch without wake – he was a crew coach. I could have argued him on this point! There’s a company called Still Water Design that makes wakeless launches. The designer of these boats lives in Arlington on Pleasant Street. How do I know? I used to row crew, and Dicky Pereli was the boatsman. Small world. There were several speakers about rowing, wakes, and rule interpretation. It passed by voice vote. A parent from the crew was there, but she didn’t get to speak.

Article 30 – Home Rule. Non-Public Safety Civil Service.

Caryn Malloy explained the article. This is a request for very narrow special legislation that would remove certain positions from the civil service regulation. In answer to a question, she said there were two kinds of civil service, the Official Service (state) and Labor Service (town). The town’s Labor Service was the only change here, and the union in question agreed with the change. Voted, 161-11.

The Moderator announced that the Redevelopment Board was having an emergency meeting.

Article 31 – Home Rule. GIC.

Tabled because of ongoing issues. With active negotiations and the pending legislation on Beacon Hill, this can wait until after the override.

At this point Lyman Judd stood up and got in an argument with the moderator about tabling.  Unfortunately, this was a repeated theme this evening. Mr. Judd has a unique perspective on life, and he is not shy about sharing it.

Article 32 – Home Rule. HRA.

Selectman Clarissa Rowe explained this home rule legislation would create a town-funded healthcare reimbursement account. In the event of an employee having catastrophic health costs, those costs would be funded by the HRA. Barbara Goodman, speaking for FY Arlington, explained that a few percent of GIC subscribers run into extraordinary expenses. This protects them from those expenses and removes a barrier to joining the GIC. Al Tosti said the Finance Committee supported the article. Debate is terminated. Passed 174-3.

Article 33 – Home Rule. Wireless Antenna Leases.

This is to renew the legislation we have used in the past to negotiate leases and use the money. There was a question about how the $250,000 cap got chosen – there was no specific reason. Chris Loreti was opposed. Why money to parks when it’s only a fire station? We don’t need legislation to do a long-term lease. Is the money spent on parks and rec? Yes. Has there been any that reverted to the General Fund? No.

Break for 15 minutes.

136-6 the article passes.

Art 34-35. PAYT. Tabled.

Article 36 – No action.

Article 37 – No action.

Article 38 and 39 – Parmenter and Crosby. Postpone to May 4th, waiting for Charlie Foskett.

Article 40 – No action.

Article 41 – No action.

Article 42 – No action.

Article 43 – No action.

Article 44 – Amend Town Manager Act.

Consolidated Town-School Human Resource Department. Al Tosti chaired the Town Government Reorganization Meeting, and he gave their report. He said the Selectmen had endorsed their recommendations except one, and that would be put forward as a substitute motion. He noted that the group had avoided talking about financial reorganization because the committee was very divided. Question about who does the hiring of teachers – in the end, it’s the principals. At this point Lyman Judd’s phone rang, and he took the call outside. There were a couple questions about whether it’s legal to have the HR department keep the personnel records of teachers. Town Counsel Juliana Rice said – “directors of personnel always must follow the law.” I spoke in favor of this article. This is how we spend our town monies wisely – by finding efficiencies where we can. We added a comma to the language. A couple more speakers were in favor. Passed 133-16.

Article 45 – No action.

Article 46 – Annual Finance Report.

Al Tosti explained that this was being done without a bylaw. No action.

Article 47 – Town Manager Act. Budget Submissions.

Al Tosti explained that the Town Manager Act doesn’t really say who should create the overall, balanced town budget. This bylaw centralizes that in the Town Manager’s office. Treasurer Stephen Gilligan in favor. Answered that it will not take more resources. Does Finance Committee still get a say? Absolutely – every line. Passed unanimously.

Article 48 – No action.

Article 49 – Al Tosti. Postpone to Wednesday. Waiting for Foskett.

Article 50 – Extend Town Reorganization Committee For One Year

We reviewed the charge of the committee. Adam Auster thanked the committee, and suggested that one if its actions be to consider recommending WHO could talk about the finance issues, since they couldn’t. After a couple questions, debate was terminated. Voted unanimously.

Several notices of reconsideration were given.

I take notes during Town Meeting. They are not official in any way. As I listen to people speak, I type notes. I’m sure that, at times, I mishear or misunderstand the speaker, but my notes represent what I hear at the time. I then publish the notes every night after the meeting. I do go back and make a few edits as errors are pointed out to me.

I do not try to reproduce my entire notes for this online version. Sometimes I relay a quote from a specific speaker. Most of the time I only summarize the discussion. At points I give a purely personal opinion; those are clearly labeled like this: Personal note.

Meeting called to order at 8:04.

Town Meeting Member Charlie Gallagher played the national anthem on the piano.

The Moderator swore in a few newly elected members.

We voted to reconvene on Monday. (Until then, I’ll be at Jazzfest!)

Selectman Clarissa Rowe thanked several elected public servants who had left office this year: Town Clerk Corinne Rainville, School Committee Member Joe Curran, and Selectman Jack Hurd.

Announcements:

• Roland Chaput announced a Saturday cleanup at Robbins Farm.
• Jane Howard announced several events – Spy Pond Information 2nd Floor of Town Hall Tuesday evening, a trails day by Spy Pond, and spillway cleanup. I didn’t get all the details written down fast enough.
• Jim O’Conor – Thanked the meeting for electing him as Assistant Moderator. He said he’s happy to help anyone with a question.
• Gordon Jamieson – Passed out recycling party favors, and gave lots of recycling info. More at: www.arlingtonrecycles.org

(announcements done at 8:17 – they were lengthy).

Article 3 Reports of Committees was taken from the table.

Town Reorganization Committee report was entered by Al Tosti.

Article 3 was tabled.

Article 18 – Bylaw Change. Portable Storage Containers

Clarissa Rowe explains that this is mostly a housekeeping article. The town governs dumpsters, but we don’t govern portable storage containers. Chris Loreti rose to contest whether the fee change was outside the scope of the warrant article. The moderator ruled that it was out of scope because it mentions a price. Clarissa Rowe offered an updated version that didn’t mention the price at all. There was a fair amount of confusion about the new version. Bill Hayner protested that we didn’t have the language on our chairs. Ms. Rowe noted that we only heard about the problem with the motion this afternoon. A speaker against – they don’t think the town should be regulating this. A speaker was in favor. There was much confusion about the fee being in or not. Juliana Rice explained that even though the bylaw had a fee in it, a state law that was later accepted by the town meant that the fee could be changed by the selectmen, regardless of the by law. This was a very excellent, clear explanation, and I found it very helpful. The article was postponed to 5/4.

Article 19 – Bylaw Change. Increase Fines for Unleashed Dogs

Clarissa Rowe explained this was brought up by a petition of registered voters. Christine Chelapatis is the voter who put forward this proposal, and she gave her presentation. Her mother was attached by a dog and her arm was broken, but all that happened was a warning. Michael Ruderman offered a substitute motion with much lower fines, and retained a warning for the first offense. There was a speaker against big fines – the problem is only on two parks. A speaker in favor noted that all parts of the town should be treated equally. Several speakers talked about personal experiences where there was personal injury. Gordon Jamieson offered an amendment to the main motion to change the first time fee from $75 to $50. Two speakers spoke against both article and the substitute and said that personal liability law was the right way to handle this. There was confusion about if this was fine or a fee – it’s a fine. Stuart Cleinman moved to terminate debate. A speaker challenged that Ruderman’s substitute motion was too complex and we hadn’t had enough time to consider it. The moderator called it simple enough. I think the moderator was absolutely correct. There were four lines changed in a table in the substitute motion. Town Meeting is quite smart enough to handle that change and assess it. Ruderman’s motion went down by voice. Jamieson’s went down 60-116. Main motion passed 140-35.

Article 20 – no action.

Article 21 and 22 postponed to May 4 at the request of the moderator. Of course, by doing this, the moderator abdicated his moral authority to challenge people for not having their motions prepared in a timely fashion!

Article 23 – Bylaw. Snow removal.

Clarissa Rowe explained that this is a system for cleaning snow from private residences that aren’t getting the job done. It’s not used against elderly. It’s a tool for managing repeat offenders. A question was asked: how many citations/warnings given last year? Maybe 50 at the halfway point. There was a lot of anger about non-enforcement of the existing bylaw. I think a lot of this anger was misplaced. In some places, the problem is lack of enforcement. In other places, the problem is a lack of compliance. You can write as many tickets as you want, but tickets don’t melt the snow. This bylaw gives the town a way to actually remove the snow. It’s a solution to the real problem.

9:32 – 10 minute break.

Swore in new Town Meeting member who was elected during the break.

Mr. Worden suggests an amendment that the town must clean its sidewalks first before anyone else’s. Mr. Maher is opposed to the amendment – it eviscerates the article. A number of speakers were both in favor and against the article. There were a number of repeated statements about snow removal. The moderator said that he’d allow Mr. Worden’s amendment, but others had to be better about future notice. I disagree with the moderator to a degree. Town Meeting is there for debate. We’re not there to simply vote thumbs up and thumbs down on proposed votes. We’re there to debate, to modify, and to legislate. I agree with the spirit of the moderator’s intent – there should be as much as possible, and in all cases adequate time, to evaluate complex motions and amendments. But I disagree with the degree to which he’s trying to enforce it. We need to permit real debate. Worden’s amendment went down by voice vote. The main motion was approved by voice vote.

Article 24 – Bylaw. Public Records.

Clarissa Rowe was presenting the recommended vote of no action, but was cut off by the moderator because there was no motion to debate yet – you can’t debate no action. Chris Loreti has a substitute motion, but hadn’t shared it yet. He asked for postponement to May 11, and it was so voted. I’m very concerned that this article is going to be used as a vehicle to score personal points. If the discussion is simply about the merits of the article, it can be a healthy, valuable debate. Unfortunately, I suspect it will be much more personal and much less productive – not to mention unpleasant for everyone involved.

Article 25 Voted no action.

Article 26 Bylaw – Motorboats on Spy Pond.

A substitute motion is on the chairs. Postponed to 5/2.

Article 27. No action.

Article 28. Beer and Wine in Theaters.

Clarissa Rowe introduced Capitol Theater owner Richard Fraiman. He wants to be able to sell beer and wine to help increase the attractiveness of his theater. Two speakers against – concerned about underage drinking. Many speakers in favor – let the voters decide. Several speakers asked for support of small businesses. David Good had a question about the building – did it ever have a bar? He seems to remember seeing one decades ago. Mr. Fraiman wasn’t aware of one. Debate terminated. Passed 133-16.

Article 29. Ballot Question for 2 More Liquor Licenses.

Clarissa Rowe explained that there is a part of town that could use a liquor store, the heights. There was a speaker opposed to it. A supporter of small businesses was in favor. Several speakers in favor of letting the voters decide. There was a question about whether or not the market can support it. There was research looking at neighboring towns – probably yes, the market can support it.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:02.

I plan on continuing my Town Meeting note-taking as much as I can.  Now that I’m a selectman, there may be times where I can’t write.  I’ll do the best that I can – and I like doing it.

I take notes during Town Meeting. They are not official in any way. As I listen to people speak, I type notes. I’m sure that, at times, I mishear or misunderstand the speaker, but my notes represent what I hear at the time. I then publish the notes every night after the meeting. I do go back and make a few edits as errors are pointed out to me.

I do not try to reproduce my entire notes for this online version. Sometimes I relay a quote from a specific speaker. Most of the time I only summarize the discussion. At points I give a purely personal opinion; those are clearly labeled like this: Personal note.

The meeting was called to order at 8:00 by Moderator John Leone.

The Menotomy Minutemen marched in to fife and drum.  They lead the meeting in the national anthem.

Former Town Counsel and current Town Meeting Member John Maher introduce Major Carroll of the Salvation Army.  He’s retiring, and Mr. Maher gave a description of how he has served the town.  Major Carroll gave an invocation.

The Moderator pointed out some new technology that is available.  There is a new projector up on the stage.  There are new clocks that track the time limits of the speakers, and green, yellow and red lights.  I am completely delighted with the projector – it’s very visible, and it’s going to be very helpful at clearing up confusion later in the meeting.  I’m curious how well the clocks work.  I was initially worried that people would speak to fill the time, but the early returns were good.

The Moderator swore in new members of Town Meeting, and they were greeted with a round of applause.  He also swore in re-elected members as well.

Students from Dallin, Hardy, Ottoson, and Bishop Schools were introduced.  They were recognized for raising $16,000 in the name of our Japanese sister city for the Japanese Relief Fund.

We heard a word of thanks from the representative from our sister city, Nagaokakyo.

Article 2 – State of the Town

Chairman of the Board of Selectmen Clarissa Rowe delivered the State of the Town.

We voted to set the next session of Town Meeting for Wednesday at 8PM.

Announcements and Resolutions

• Ken Marquis objected to the use of term “unanimous vote.”
• Eric Helmuth (Pct 12) announced the campaign kickoff for Yes For Arlington will be on Sunday 1-3 at the Masonic Lodge on Academy Street.  Learn more at www.yesforarlington.org.
• Town Manager Brian Sullivan presented the text of a motion under Article 31.  He asked that Town Meeting vote on this on Wednesday, taking the article up out of order.  Clarissa Rowe noted that the Board of Selectmen voted to support this 4-1.
• Joe Marshall from Precinct 4 introduced Sean Harrington.  He announced the anti-override group would meet Thursday at Jefferson Cutter House.

Article 3 – Reports of Committees

• Selectman Clarissa Rowe provided the Board of Selectmen’s report and supplemental report.
• Finance Committee Chair Al Tosti entered the Finance Committee report.
• Capital Planning Committee Chair Charlie Foskett provided the Capital Planning report.  He noted that he would be out of town on the day of the Special Town Meeting (May 9).  For that reason, he asked that the capital budget articles of the regular and special town meeting be postponed to May 16th.  May 16th would be our 7th meeting.  An optimist would say that could be our last session of town meeting.  A pessimist would call it the halfway mark.
• Bruce Fitzsimmons, Arlington Redevelopment Board gave the ARB report.
• Clarissa Rowe did introductions of the elected and appointed officials and town employees at the front of the hall.
• Al Tosti stood to say that the FinCom supported the resolution on Article 31 unanimously.  His main report of the Finance Committee will come later.
• Town Meeting then voted to make recommended votes within the various reports be the main motions considered under the respective articles.  This vote is very quick and easy, but it’s very important.  If we didn’t make this motion, at the start of every article, the Moderator would have to call on someone to start the debate process by making a motion under that article, find a second for the motion, etc.  Instead, through this vote, we automatically start each article with a motion already made and ready for debate.  Of course, this also has the effect of making those various reports very important.  The proposed motion is available for all to see in the report, far in advance.  Unless, of course, the board has chosen to say “will report” and leave it up in the air. . . .

Article 3 was tabled.

Article 4 John FitzMaurice was appointed Measurer of Wood and Bark.

Article 5 – Election of Assistant Town Moderator

Christine Deshler nominated Jim O’Conor.  No other nominations.  He was elected.

Article 6 - Zoning Map Amendment. Voted no action.

Article 7 - Zoning Bylaw Change.  Cremation Remains in Open Space.

Andy West of the Arlington Redevelopment Board explained that it would mean no gravestones, mausoleums, or things like that – just small cremains in areas approved by the Conservation Commission and the ARB.  Paul Schlichtman spoke against it.  He argued that this is a change for perpetuity – you can never take back a cemetery, like you can any other zoning change.  He thinks Town Meeting should not give up its rights to make these decisions.  He worries about additional cemeteries sprouting up in other conservation lands – Mt. Gilboa, Turkey Hill, etc.  Clarissa Rowe explained that it’s a joint work of the ARB, Conservation, and Cemetery commission.  Mrs. Fiore agrees with Mr. Schlichtman.  Five of the parking spaces at Public Safety belong to Cook’s Hollow, not public safety.  Several speakers noted that it was a long time process and asked that we trust the boards.  In answer to a question, there were some slides projected.  The cremains would be put into low walls installed at Cook’s Hollow.  Roland Chaput: I wanted to be buried there.  Harry McCabe noted it was the 50th anniversary of being in Town Meeting with Elsie Fiore, though he disagreed with her in this case.  He wants more cemetery space and is in favor.  Fifty years is a noteworthy anniversary – I’m very impressed with their dedication to the town and the institution. There was a question on how many cremains – maybe 76?  Would you have to pay to be put there?  Yes.  Judith Phelps Pct 16 moved to terminate debate.  Debate terminated by voice vote. Article failed with 122-67 – it required 2/3 vote and missed by a few votes. A few misguided town meeting members applauded, but were reminded by the moderator that the applause wasn’t appropriate.

We had a 14 minute break.

Article 8 -Zoning Bylaw Amendment.  Wireless Communication Facilities.

Redevelopment board explained that the ZBA is better suited for these cases – special permits and environmental reviews aren’t very useful.  Questions about the criteria that ZBA will be using.  We changed the word “vote” to “votes” in the actual vote.  Can the town review on a health basis?  No, driven by FCC. Passed 168-4.

Article 9.  Zoning Bylaw Amendment.  Minimum Lot Size. Bruce Fitzsimmons explained the intent of the bylaw is not to block rebuilding on a lot, but to make sure that rebuilding on a lot is covered by Section 9, and NOT Section 6.  I think he did a great job explaining a reasonably complex vote. Gordon Jamieson questioned about lots and sizes.  There were other questions about setbacks and side yard setbacks.  There was a question about modifications on the plot, like driveways.  Is there a grace period – essentially none, unless you have a lot over 7500 sq ft.  Passed 166-12.

Article 10.  Zoning Bylaw Amendment.  Floodplain/Wetlands. Bruce Fitzsimmons explained that this will make it easier for an applicant to make their case – save the applicant from going to two boards for the same project.  The Conservation Commission still hears the case. 167-2.  There were no unanswered questions, and no speakers against the article – I don’t know what the no votes were about.

Article 11.  Zoning Bylaw Amendment. Floodplain District. Carol Kowalski explained that last year we inadvertently weakened the bylaw when we did the flood insurance map changes.  This new language would restore the bylaw.  There was a question about the wording of the article, but Town Counsel Juliana Rice said that she had written this article, unlike the other ones, and she was sure it was well written. Juliana got the best laugh of the night with that line. 171-1.  Again, there were no unanswered questions, and no speakers against the article – I don’t know what the no vote was about.

Article 12.  Zoning Bylaw Amendment.  Wetland and Floodplain Overlay Map. ARB member Mike Cayer explained that the rights and responsibilities of the land owner are not changed by this; it’s just updating the map.  There was yet another discussion about whether or not the language of the vote was well written.  I missed the vote count, but I know it passed. I think the discussions of whether or not the language of consecutive articles was parallel or not was and irrelevant.  We don’t get points for style.  The only question is if the language is sufficient – then we need to just move on.

Bill Hayner asked to pull Article 22 out of order.  It’s not ready for debate, replied the Moderator. The effect of Article 22 will be to make these clear 2/3-vote voice votes go faster by skipping the vote count.  When the vote is 171-1, it’s a clear voice vote that 2/3 are in support; the standing vote is slower and in some cases not needed. It depends on the language, but when Article 22 comes, I’m likely to vote yes.

Article 13. Voted no action.  There was yet another question from Lyman Judd about language.  As the moderator so eloquently said: “Dude, it’s no action.”

Article 14.  Zoning Bylaw Amendments.  Affordable housing and assisted living. Bruce Fitzsimmons of the ARB explained that you can’t make assisted living subsidized without making the health care also subsidized, and that is financially prohibitive.  This vote would remove the requirement that assisted living have an affordable housing component.  Voted unanimously.

Article 15. No action

Article 16. No action.

Article 17.  Zoning Bylaw Amendment.  Outdoor Advertising at Peirce Field. ARB member Mike Cayer explained that if this was passed, the School Committee would come to the ARB and get a special permit.  The schools would manage the signs.  There was a question about graffiti – the property owner (the town) would be responsible for cleaning.  Question asked: is this spot zoning?  Julianna Rice – yes, this might be spot zoning.  A couple speakers talked about the benefits of this as a funding source for sports.  Because of the dubious spot zoning language, Schlichtman moved to postpone until 5/2.  The hope is that better language can be proposed. Postponement was approved.  In general, I think this is a good idea.  If better language is not put forward, I’ll probably still vote for it.  If it gets struck down, we can try again next year, and if it passes muster, we get what we want.

A few notices of reconsideration were made – I missed the details.

The meeting was adjourned at 10:55.