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

8:05 start time.

Town Meeting Member Jane Howard played the national anthem.

Town Moderator John Leone lectured everyone and specifically the Board of Selectmen for not having votes ready for town meeting, forcing lots of postponements. Selectman Greeley was clearly displeased and spoke in the Board’s defense.

We’ll return on May 10 for our next session.

Article 3 taken from the table (belatedly – we almost forgot to take it off the table).

• Al Tosti – make sure you look at the Town Manager’s Financial Plan for 2011 online.
• Carol Kowalski – May 13 7:30-9 in Town Hall auditorium there will be a hearing on the feasability of reconstruction of Cook’s Hollow Conservation Area.
• Diane Mahon thanked town and school employees for helping the town get through the water crisis.
• Bob Tosi – US Postal Service food drive on Saturday, leave out non-perishables.
• Charlie Foskett – Capital Planning Committee report is delivered. He also asked that the meeting act on the capital plan (Articles 53 and 54) on the same day as the Special Town Meeting. The Special Town Meeting has two capital articles, and it makes sense to do the regular capital articles and the special capital articles together.  This is a key announcement – if you’re a Town Meeting Member, I hope you heard it.  Be ready to discuss the capital budget!

Article 13 – Symmes. Selectman Mahon reports that the Selectmen had endorsed Paul Schlictman’s subsitute motion. Schlictman reviewed the history of the Symmes transaction, specifically that the town had embarked on the purchase of the Symmes site partially to keep a medical facility available at the site. Here we are nine years later, and there is no viable plan that gets us medical offices up there. He urged that we focus on financial imperatives and give up on the medical requirement. Chris Loreti asked for and did not get five minutes extra time. He reviewed more history, that in 2007 the plan for the site went from condo to rental, and the development was sold. In 2008 the new owners couldn’t get loans and stopped making payments. The Special Permit to build is still valid – the permit is unrelated to the medical site. ARB is coming back to seek advice and consent on what alternative uses should be permitted. Loreti proceeded to complain that Schlictman’s motion was flawed because it referred to 2001, and ignored all of the changes made in 2004, 2007, 2008, and so on. This speech by Loreti was incredibly frustrating to many of us. Schlictman provided his motion in writing last week. The Finance Committee endorsed it on Monday. The selectmen endorsed it today. And Loreti waited until today, on the floor, to explain why it is flawed! It would have been far more productive if he had talked to other interested people and sought an improved amendment.  This was unnecessarily dramatic and painful – it could have been much smoother with better communication. Al Tosti moved to table the article for a few minutes while the problem was worked out.  Tabled on voice vote.

Articl 18 – Bylaw amendment – Junk Dealers and Collectors. Mark Streitfeld gave his amendment to the proposed bylaws. His intent is to make it so that non-criminal activity is not tracked by the government – only when it’s linked to a crime would the information be turned over. After a question, it was noted that it does apply to used clothing. The chief’s opinion of the amendment is negative – it would make it much harder to track criminals. Several rose both in favor and opposed to the amendment, weighing civil liberties versus the pursuit of criminal activity. I rose to ask that debate be terminated, and it was terminated. Amendment failed 76-100. The main motion (unamended) was approved on voice vote. This was the first time I’ve spoken this year at town meeting.  When I got on the list I planned on speaking in favor of the amendment, but by the time I was called the points had been mostly covered.  So I moved the question.

Article 37 – Compensation of Selectmen. No action.

Article 38 – Electronic Pest Control Devices. Selectman Diane Mahon explained that the BoS had been convinced that this problem was not being solved by neighbor negotiations. Louise Poplin, the proponent, spoke about her inability to sleep because of the loud zapping 20 feet from her bedroom.  Several speakers were opposed because bylaws should not be used to settle personal disputes. Gordon Jamieson moved an amendment to change it to 8AM on weekdays. Selectman Annie LaCourt explained that the Selectmen thought this was a reasonable extension of the noise abatement bylaw. Several speakers were concerned about the enforceability of “audible at property line.” Debate was terminated. Amendment failed on voice vote. 102-78 the bylaw change was approved. I was in favor of this.  I have been opposed to other, similar bylaws like the one about lights at night.  But on this one, I think it’s a reasonable extension of the noise bylaw.  I don’t want to hear a chainsaw at 3am, and I don’t want to hear a bug zapper either.

15 minute break.

Article 13 – Symmes, again. We took the article from the table. Mr. Tosti made a new version after consultation with ARB and Selectmen. It uses the language from the original Board of Selectmen motion, but it does what Schlictman wanted to do – it removes the medical requirement from the Symmes redevelopment. There were questions about the land and possible uses of it. Andrew Fischer moved to postpone to the 12th, and it was defeated. Schlictman’s substitute motion went down (it was largely moot at this point). Tosti’s amendment passed. Selectmen’s vote as amended passed on voice vote.

Article 39 – Restrictions on Local Option Votes – John Leonard asked for an explanation. Selectman Mahon explained that the BoS was going to do the requested notifications, but not in a bylaw. Voted no action.

Article 40 – Field Lighting Timing. No action unanimously.

Article 41 – Sound Amplification System. No action unanimously.

Article 42 - Field Closing times. No action unanimously. There was an email on the Town Meeting list requesting a postponement of this article, but there was no attached substitute motion.  I don’t think anyone wanted to postpone when there was no real counter-proposal being pushed forward.

Artcile 43 – Field Light Configuration. No action unanimously.

Article 44 – Limit Night Baseball Games. No action unanimously.

Article 45 – Revolving funds. Gordon Jameison went through a long series of questions. His point was that some of the money in revolving funds should be applied to the general town funds, and it’s being sequestered in these revolving funds. Question about library vending machines. There was a question about the Gibbs energy costs – this was so we can get the tenants to pay energy bills without the town fronting the money. Approved.

Article 46 – Community Development Block Grants. Selectman Jack Hurd reported that the plan is now supported by a 5-0 vote. Questions about the spending on planners. Questions about if we can fund the economic coordinator through the CDBG. Complaints about ADA-compliant curbcuts on Broadway. Schlictman terminates debate, approved. Approved.

Article 47 – Collective Bargaining. Town Manager Sullivan – one group from fiscal ’09 (police ranking officers) is here tonight to be approved (the agreement also covers FY10). 2.5% increase in ’09, 0% in ’10. For FY10 there is another 0% settlement with patrolmen. Other groups are in negotiation, with a target of wage freeze. Diane Mahon as a town meeting member commended the manager and the unions for coming to a 0% agreement. Question about if there is any merit increases – no, the raises are across the board regardless.  Approved by voice vote.

Article 48 – Funding Future Collective Bargaining. Voted no action. This makes the Town Manager’s negotiations on wages easier – he can point to this vote and say that there is no money in the budget for raises.

Article 49 – Salary Adjustment Elected Officials. Voted no action.

Article 50 – Position Reclassification. Approved.

Article 51 – Amend Personnel Bylaw for Vacation Time. Selectman Mahon explained that the board was satisfied that this does not have conflict with collective bargaining. Approved.

Article 52 – Town Budgets. At this point, 9 minutes before 11, we adjourned.  We weren’t going to get the budgets done that quickly.

I gave notice of reconsideration on Article 49.  I didn’t hear any other notices.

90% taken on the laptop, and 10% on paper, tonight.  I take notes during Town Meeting. They are not official in any way. As I listen to people speak, I jot 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

8:07 start.

Charlie Gallagher played the piano and lead the meeting in the national anthem.

The next meeting was set for May 5th.

• ARB member Chris Loreti announced that the Redevelopment Board’s Special Town Meeting report is on everyone’s seats, and will be officially reported at next week’s Special Town Meeting.
• The Spy Pond Trails Day was announced by Jane Howard.
• John Worden made a resolution honoring the passing of former town meeting member Margaret Peggy Nichol.
• After the Moderator’s announcement, there was a round of applause for Josh Lobel’s work on adding visual presentation.  He’s hung a couple projectors to make it easier to incorporate presentations and updates into the meetings.
• Moderator says that future controversial resolutions need to be in the warrant so they can be debated – we were too hasty with the first night’s stand against racism motion.  I think he’s correct.  The non-debateable resolutions should be restricted to items that are relatively free of controversy.  I’m glad he’s making that change.

Article 3 – Reports. Al Tosti moves to take Article 3 from the table.  Town Governance Interim Report is recieved from Mr. Tosti.  The article is tabled again.

Article 13 – Symmes.  Clariss Rowe moved a postponment to the 5th.  She did this because Paul Schlictman had provided a substitute motion, and they were waiting for 48 hours to elapse.  It’s worth noting that earlier in the evening the Finance Committee endorsed Schlictman’s motion by a 10-1 vote.

Article 22 – Additional 2 Alcohol Licenses. Moderator Leone reports that he did represent one of the liquor stores 2 years ago, but has not represented them since and has not spoken about this article with them at all.  Good for him – this is conflict of interest disclosure working exactly as it should. Selectman Greeley explained that he would like to have two more licenses available, and he had promised to bring the question up at last year’s town meeting.  He wants a liquor store in the heights.  Selectman Mahon voted against because of concerns of density and concerns about supply and demand and want to hear about what the vote result is on all-alcohol.  Over the course of the debate the timeline was reviewed: on November’s ballot will be a binding question on whether the town should permit all-alcohol liqour licenses.  Today’s question, for two additional licenses, would likely appear on the ballot in April.  The two questions are independent of each other.   Maria Meg Moloney Pct 1 noted that  Menotomy beer and wine supports Arlington schools.  Neal Duggan of Menotomy Beer and Wine (Arlington resident) spoke.  Raised $12,000 for charities.  Paid back $20,000 of $200,000 that they owe in startup costs.  Competition would make him lay off employees. He’s explicitly asking for market protection. I like his store and I appreciate the work he does for the community, but that is not justification for government protection of his business. Annie LaCourt and Diane Mahon disagreed about whether there was data to back up the statement about how many liquor stores are supported on average in neighboring towns.  Town Counsel Julianna Rice explained Nov 09 TM approved the home rule to put all-alcohol on the ballot, and the state just approved it.  If that ballot question passes, the BoS will be authorized but not required to convert up to 3 of the existing licenses into all-alcohol.   Greeley corrects Mahon that 5 people requested alcohol licenses, not 3.  LaCourt contradicts Mahon’s statement that the license must be put out.  Town Counsel Rice supports LaCourt – yes, if the BoS denies a license, we might get sued, but a well-reasoned decision that explains why the public need is not met by the license will prevail. This question was a recurring theme in later questioning, and I think that Mahon’s statements were not accurate and not helpful.  She repeatedly said that “if the applicant meets our requirements then we have to approve the license.”  Town Counsel Julianna Rice contradicted this and said that one of the things that Selectmen can consider is whether or not the license “meets a public need.”   Mahon kept talking about “meeting requirements” and made no mention of the legal standard that Rice did.  I was on the list to speak, and I wanted to clarify the argument, but I didn’t get a chance to speak.  If you read the case law, the ultimate decision goes both ways, but the legal standard is clearly public need – not “meeting requirements.”  Here’s an example. LaCourt explains that she wants this as a future option – new licenses can be used to support a future development.  We can’t possibly have these new licenses for another 18 months anyway – Mr. Duggan will get the protection he’s looking for.  A speaker was opposed to booze in general.  A couple wanted to go slower.  The debate itself was questioned – why is alcohol so special?  We don’t debate sushi or Indian food or pizza places or nail salons.  “If you think this town meeting is the right body to debate how many stores we can support, you’re deluding yourself.”  Several speakers opposed protectionism and wanted to let the market speak.  The motion failed on voice vote.  I voted in favor of this.  I also would have spoken, but it didn’t come to me before debate was terminated.

Article 23 – Home Rule Legislation Noelan Corbett. Diane Mahon explains that this doesn’t give him a job, it just gives him the option to apply for the job, despite the fact that he’s 33.  A speaker says it’s a “young person’s job.”  I disagree – it’s a job for a healthy fit person.  The age of the person shouldn’t matter. Failed on voice vote.

Article 24 – Council on Aging Donation. Harry McCabe asked for postponement to the 12th.  He said he’d have a substitute motion.  The moderator told him to provide the paper 48 hours in advance, on the 10th.  He didn’t actually say he’ll have paperwork, so this will be an issue, I’m sure.  Also, this was the second postponed article of the night.  As you’ll read below, this was a recurring theme – people just not ready for Town Meeting.  The Finance Committee heard the Council on Aging on this article on February 24th – more than 60 days ago!  I do not understand why, more than 60 days later, they don’t have a substitute motion ready.

Article 25 – Texting While Driving. Voted no action.  Paul Schlictman wanted to ask a question, which is really pretty pointless because there is no action to be done here; people rudely shouted while he was speaking.  In my opinion, all parties should have held their tongues.

10 minute break.  And it really was 10 minutes!  Great work by the moderator.

Article 26 – Double Pole Regulation –  Voted no action.

Article 27 – GIC home rule petition. Postponed to 5/17. This is where the postponements started getting silly.  The facts of this issue have been available for months.  The teacher’s union refuses to negotiate with the town about the GIC.  The only way for us to get to the GIC, therefore, is through this home rule petition.  There is no reason that the Board of Selectmen had to wait this long to put out their recommendation.

Article 28 – Pension Liability. Al Tosti explained that the state legislature was moving very slowly on this bill, and until it’s done, this article might be needed.  He wishes to lay it on the table where it can age while the Senate considers it.  The meeting need not consider it at all, hopefully.  Tabled.

Article 29-32 – Parmenter and Crosby Schools. Postpone 5/12.  This one you can blame on the School Committee.  They only voted on this article last week, after Town Meeting had already started.  The Board of Selectmen took a vote promptly at their next meeting. Selectmen will provide a recommendation in paper on Weds; vote next week.

Article 33, 34 – Combining School and Town Functions. Moved to postpone to 5/12 by Stephen Gilligan.  Postponed by 109-36.  This vote was in the Selectmen’s packet, so I don’t understand why Mr. Gilligan wanted it postponed.  At this point the meeting was getting annoyed with all of the postponements.  It was a fascinating vote where the front (establishment types) and the back of the room (anti-establishment types) voted against the middle of the room – but the middle is bigger.

Article 35 – Conflict of Interest. Voted no action.

Article 36 – Canine Control. Sue Doctorow asks for a tabling because the selectmen had just had a re-hearing and had run out of time.  92-63 vote to table failed (required 2/3).  She moved a substitute motion dated April 28th.  This is a moment where the 48-hour policy inhibited debate.  There was a clear intent to provide a substitute motion. The version dated 5/3 was cleaner and more clear, but was functionally identical to the 4/28 version.  In this case the policy meant that we were forced to debate an inferior motion.  An exception would have been a better choice. She talked about an 8 year debate, 3 at Town Meeting.  Green Dog was rejected by 5 votes last year, and it was deemed too complex.  This motion is much more simpler.  This motion complements the work of the dog park fences committee.  She noted that “Owner control” is a very powerful phrase.  Parks and Rec Commission gets to make decisions in the end.  It’s also cheap.  Parks and Recreaction approved this language.  Several speakers talked about decisions based on fear, dogs and children, and people attacked by dogs.  Leslie Mayer explained that Parks and Rec agreed that there was demand for dog recreation, and the town was not meeting that need, and that was why they supported this.  There were discussions about responsible and irresponsible dog owners.  After more than an hour of debate, Mr. Fuller moved to postpone to 5/12.  That was debated.  65-79 adjournment vote fails.  Finally the postponement question was moved, and by 80-67 the article was postponed.  The good news about the postponement is that we get to consider the better motion.  The bad news is that we didn’t get the job done.  I voted against postponement; I was prepared to vote the current language, as-is.

The meeting was adjourned.

I did something different tonight and took the notes on my laptop, rather than raw paper notes that I then rewrite.  I hope it saves me time, but I’m wondering how it will change the notes.  Feedback is welcome.

I take notes during Town Meeting. They are not official in any way. As I listen to people speak, I jot 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.

8:08 the meeting was called to order by Moderator John Leone.

Town Meeting Member Jane Howard played the piano and led the meeting in the national anthem.

The moderator announced there are still vacancies in town meeting – Precinct 5 has one vacancy and Precinct 6 has 3 vacancies. He noted that tonight is organization meeting for precincts 1-7 where they elect chairs and clerks. He announced that the 2nd floor has the kindergarten through 8th grade art work installation.

He swore in a few new members – either newly appointed or missed it on Monday.

The meeting will reconvene on May 3.

Gordon Jamieson announced the upcoming town Ecofest.

We put Article 3 on the table. It was already on the table, but it can’t hurt to keep putting it there.

Article 5 – Assistant Moderator Election. We heard from the two candidates. Bill Logan went first and mentioned his experience on the Zoning Bylaw Review Committee and 1995 town meeting. He has a law practice in Arlington. Good relationship with the existing moderator.  Jim O’Conor next talked about his work as a tax consultant. 1998 town meeting. Warden for precinct 20. Would conduct meeting in same manner as Leone if Leone wasn’t there.  The election was held later in the meeting, and by 109-60, O’Conor won.

Article 13 – Symmes. Clarissa Rowe reported the Board of Selectmen’s recommendation, which was just made available, was to modify the permitted medical uses on Symmes property.  As of this writing, I can’t find the report online, though it was given on paper tonight. Paul Schlictman rose and called it disrespectful to have such a substantive (and long) motion be made available with such short notice and moves it be postponed to Monday 3rd.  It was postponed.

Article 14 – Stretch Energy Code. Selectman Diane Mahon reported that the Board of Selectmen endorsed it. Planning Director Carol Kowalski requested 30 minutes for the presentation, which was denied. She requested 20 minutes and that was granted. That was pretty unusual, both to get such a long request and to have it denied.  I think 20 minutes was about right, and it could have been done in 15. She explained that the town was trying to qualify for a state green designation. $10 mill annually awarded to towns that are designated as green communities. $7m is available this year if we qualify. We could qualify for up to $1m and use it for things like energy efficient street lights, programmable thermometers, better boilers, etc. Michal Byrne Director of Inspectional Services introduced Ian Finlayson – Mass’s manager of buildings and climate programs. He said that building codes are changing in the state. 18 towns have adopted the stretch code. The residential stretch code is based on Energy Star. He showed details on how the code was written, is monitored, is tested, and what it is applied to. The 3rd party performance-based testing involved in the code will enable a buyer to be sure about the quality of the house’s energy efficiency. Over a 30-year mortgage, the home owner will save money.

Peter Howard asked for Sustainable Arlington member Sally Molton – 164 Scituate St. Her speech was largely repetitive of the points already made, including reading from a document that we all had in our hands. Martha Scott asked for Maria Romano to speak. The moderator is asking for the meeting’s consent for town residents to speaker – but if you’re a resident, there doesn’t have to be a vote, at least as I recall it.  But I also can’t recall where that policy is written! Maria Romano thinks we should slow down – the code is too new.   John Belskis notes that 40B developments don’t have to follow the stretch energy code, although later speakers refuted that. Andrew Fisher asked when the stretch code would become law that wasn’t optional. Inspector Byrne said in 2012 we will have to meet the stretch code anyway. He noted the low cost effect on remodeling, and only 11 or 10 new homes were built per year in the last couple years. Andrew Fischer to vote yes. O’Conor noted that the state money isn’t guaranteed but worth trying for. Gordon Jamieson is in favor. Annie LaCourt asked what the town spends on energy. $3M per year on energy costs says the Town Manager, and he’d spend grant money on street lights. He thinks we might save 25% of the town’s energy costs. Gary Horowitz says 40B is not exempt from stretch code. Ed Trembley notes that it costs $750-1500 to have the house rated, and half of that is paid for by Energy Star. Energy Star is paid for by your power bill and by the regional cap-and-trade carbon auctions. Another question about whether it would cost the town money, and the answer was no. Clarissa Rowe urged support. Cayer Pct 12 moved the question. It was approved on voice vote.

Article 15 – Nuisance Fire Alarms. Town Manager Sullivan said this is aimed mostly at institutions, not homeowners. He outlined when the fines kick in. Ed Trembley was concerned about fines for places that were having difficulty with their fire system. The Germaine Lawrence School comes up, and it’s clearly a target of this law – 156 false alarms last year. The time frame is number of infractions in a calendar year. Fines are in line with other communities.

15 minute break.  It ran long because of ballot counting.

It was noted that cutting down on false alarms saves lives of pedestrians, motorists, and fire alarms. A comment is made that Germaine Lawrence won’t really be able to solve the problem. Chad Gibson Pct 4 moves the question. Approved by voice vote.

Article 16 – Public Consumption of Marijuana. Town Counsel Juliana Rice explained that last year’s bylaw was partially disallowed by the state, and this proposed change would permit the non-criminal prosecution of marijuana. Lawrence McKinney offered a change to also make it legal if it was prescribed by a legal doctor. Moderator John Leone ruled his amendment as out of order because it changed the definition of marijuana. Leone was absolutely wrong to rule that motion out of order. The Town Warrant reads “To seek if the town will vote to amend Section 2 of Article 7. . . or take any action related thereto.” McKinney was offering a modification of the appropriate article.  The motion should have been allowed.  I was tempted to stand up and argue, but decided it wasn’t worth the wasted time. It was pointed out that the penalty for smoking pot is the same as pulling 6 fire alarms. Bylaw change passed.

Article 17 – Solicitors. Voted no action.

Article 18 – Junk Dealers and Collectors. Chief Ryan explained that detectives are sharing stolen property information electronically rather than monthly via paper. This proposed change gets Arlington on the electronic transmission path. Mark Streitfeld proposed an amendment provided in paper. Leone ruled it out of order for insufficient notice (notice not provided within 48 hours before the vote). Leone gave quite the harangue on the topic.  My first reaction was that he was overly harsh, but on second thought, I can see why he wanted to make an example to drive future behavior. Streitfeld moved to postpone to May 5th which was initially ruled to have failed by voice vote. I stood to request a standing vote, as did others. By standing vote we postponed 103-60.

Article 19 – Paint Removal. Christine Connally explained that this changes the lead paint bylaws to comply with state and local laws. Sandrelli Pct 16 – questioned and answered that houses after 1978 don’t need the EPA requirements. Complaints voiced by Andrew Fischer that the current bylaw is not well enforced. Voted affirmatively.

Article 20 – Pay-As-You-Throw trash collection.  Selectman Mahon explained that Ms. Rowe was ready to go forward with PAYT, and that is why Rowe voted against the Selectmen’s main motion which was more advisory and linked PAYT to an override. Mahon asked that the vote by postponed to 5/10 to permit the recycling committee to prepare a substitute motion (one that presumably includes a PAYT proposal). Article was postponed.

Article 21 – Senior Citizen Safety Zones. Chief Ryan explained that there were too many accidents involving senior citizens. He listed a few areas he might apply this traffic zone to including the Senior Center and Drake Village. But it was noted that many senior residences in town are on “numbered routes,” so the point is moot in many areas – the law would not permit safety zones on numbered routes. A speaker asking how many of the accidents were senior-on-senior accidents, and if the problem was actually poor drivers. Questions about how it would be signed were made, and the answer is as designated by the Board of Selectmen. John Worden notes that his house would qualify based on the language in the law. There was a discussion of what a “functionally arterial” road would be. One speaker wanted to make it enforceable on Mass Ave. Gordon Jamieson asked if we could use yellow warning signs instead. I think this zone would be a really bad idea if it was applied to Mass Ave and Summer St and other big roads.  Roads are a balance between pedestrians and bikes and cars, and I value being able to get across town in a reasonable amount of time.  However, I’m fine with this law because it only applies on a few side streets. Passed 143-14.

I was opposed to adjourning early, but we did at 10:50.  Start late, long break, end early leads to town meeting lasting until June!

LaCourt gave notice of reconsideration on 14. Marian King 15. Gordon Jamieson 16. John Deyst on 15.

Out-of-town readers: Yeah, it’s Town Meeting time again. That means you get more Arlington information than any reasonable non-resident would want.  I’ll see if this gets me in a writing groove and it turns me on some more non-Arlington writing, too.

I take notes during Town Meeting. They are not official in any way. As I listen to people speak, I scribble 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 notepad 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.

Town Meeting was called to order at 8:05PM.  The Menotomy Minutemen (in Revolutionary War garb) led the meeting in the Star-Spangled Banner.

Town Moderator John Leone announced that his plan was to have a single invocation at Town Meeting, not every night.  Town Meeting Member Richard Phelps gave the invocation.

Moderator Leone gave some remarks.  He noted the importance of brevity.  He has copies of Town Meeting Time available for sale.  There is an information session on the “stretch code” tomorrow at 7pm.  There are 6 vacancies in town meeting, in precincts 5, 6, 11, and 12 that are all available for appointment.

Selectman Greeley and Sue Sheffler gave an introduction of our guests from our sister city in Japan and gave an overview of the schedule of events.

The new and re-elected town meeting members were sworn in together.  In the past, the new members were sworn in separately, and received a round of applause from their new colleagues.  Even though it’s a small thing, I always thought it was emotionally powerful.  As a new member, you feel welcome and special.  It loses a little of the “specialness” when the swearing is done in one group.  I hope that Leone returns to the two-group process in the future.

We approved the rules of the meeting. We permit specific non-town meeting members who are members of committees, town employees, the press, etc. to sit in the “enclosure” aka the main meeting floor.  Most  non-members must sit in the gallery above the floor.  We did a couple other minor items including noting that the meeting had been properly announced to the town and that we would reconvene on Wednesday.

Article 2 – State of the Town Address. Chairman of the Board of Selectmen Diane Mahon gave the state of the town.  She kept it brief, less than five minutes.  She thanked retiring Town Clerk Corinne Rainville for her service. She touched on personal financial hardship and the town’s financial hardship. She encouraged further work on regional flood planning.  She encouraged a “collaborative” approach on controlling health care costs.  She talked about the town’s strengths.

Article 3 – Announcements and resolutions and reports were heard.  Dick Smith proposed a resolution endorsing “Stand Against Racism” that was endorsed.  The Board of Selectmen’s report, the Redevelopment Board’s report, and the Finance Committee’s report were accepted.  FinComm Chair Al Tosti spoke for a couple minutes about the budget processes and challenges.

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

Article 5 – James O’Conor of Precinct 19 and Bill Logan of Precinct 2 were nominated for Assistant Town Moderator.  The election will be on Wednesday.

Article 6 – Variance Application Review. Voted no action on Redevelopment Board recommendation.

Article 7 – Bracket Signs. Planning Director Carol Kowalski explained that the proposed bylaw change would make it permissible for businesses in certain districts (East Arlington, the center, the Heights) to have signs that stick out perpendicularly from their buildings.  It would make it easier for pedestrians to see the stores, especially on side streets.  There were several questions about sign dimensions, possible town liability, grandfathering, and how they would look.  One questioner suggested this change would be anti-business – that was a boggler.  The change was approved 162-21.

Article 8 – Research and Development. This article is the first of several that would get Arlington designated as a “green community” and be eligible for state grants.  This article would explicitly permit research and development of “green” industry in certain zones.  After a question about fire protection, it passed 178-5.

We took a 13 minute break.  The short break was great!  I hope we continue to be that disciplined.

Article 9 – Land-based Solar Panels. State law already permits solar panels to be on roofs.  This would permit them to be on the ground in industrial areas.  The change was approved unanimously.

Article 10 – Fencing Used as Screening. I’ll start by saying this was a botched presentation.  The presentation of the article included written, verbal, and pictured descriptions of “property owners and abutters.”  The obvious implication was that this was changing the regulation of fences between neighbors.   However, this was actually a change for something called a space buffer: “6.16  Screening and space buffers shall be required in any industrial (I) or business (B) district which abuts certain buildable residential lots.” The ensuing debate was largely spent sorting through this confusion in some cases, and was never understood by many people in the meeting. Roland Chaput gave the presentation. The proposed change would make it so the wall portion of those buffers could be more than a “solid” wall – it could be wood, iron, coated chain link, etc. if the abutters and the building inspector agreed to it.  Really, that’s a very narrow change when properly explained.  I’m scrapping all my notes on the debate because they’re just confusing. Change approved, 142-10.

Article 11 – Illumination for Signs.  Andrew West gave the presentation.  The proposed change would make explicit that signs must be “interior lit” like a plastic sign with bulbs concealed inside it or directly lit, like a spotlight shining on the sign on the wall.  Signs cannot be a “visible light source” like neon or LED.  In the discussion it was explained that neon “open” signs inside the building are still permitted.  Several speakers complained that if the intent was to regulate the lighting brightness, we should do so directly, and not try to tackle it through this indirect means. I had some sympathy for this argument, but my experience has been that trying to make technical regulations like that are also difficult.  The noise ordinance debates of the past are examples.  How and where you measure things and in what conditions makes it very difficult to write well. It was said that marquee signs (like at theaters) would still be OK.  This change was apparently driven by a LED sign at a gas station that the building inspector thought was legal, but the planning director did not, and this would clarify the rule.  Leo Doherty was concerned that the Chamber of Commerce hadn’t had the opportunity to weigh in, and moved to postpone debate for a week, which failed on voice vote.  The change was approved 116-32.

Article 12 – Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws. Bruce Fitzsimmons gave the basics.  The current board has 3 members, and a ruling requires all three to agree.  The change would increase the board to 5 members, and a ruling would require 4 to agree. Clarissa Rowe explained that the Board of Selectmen wanted the change on the advice of the people they had interviewed for the position during recent vacancies.  There were several questions about quorum and vote requirements.  The change was approved 147-4.

Someone who’s name I didn’t catch gave notice of reconsideration on article 12.  Brian Rehrig gave notice on articles 9-12.

The meeting was adjourned at 11pm.