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.

Arlington Town Meeting of 2012 was called to order by Moderator John Leone.

The meeting sang the National Anthem led by Menotomy Minute Men.

Lieutenant Michael Harper of Salvation Army gave the invocation.

John Leone welcomed new Town Manager Adam Chapdelaine and new Selectmen Joe Curro and Steve Byrne.

The moderator reviewed the meeting speaking rules.  He reviewed the rules of how business is conducted; specifically he reminded everyone that the proposed vote is what matters, not the language of the original warrant article.  He talked about Article 73 and how he disagrees that such political resolutions should be on the warrant.  He proposed limiting debate to a single pro and con speaker.

The annual vote about seating rules was made.  The only people allowed “on the floor” are Town Meeting Members and various officials; guests and observers should watch from the balcony.

We voted to reconvene on Wednesday.

Article 2 – State of the Town

Chairman of the Board of Selectmen Kevin Greeley gave the state of the town.  He asked the members to give their own assessment of the state of the town, and talked about the next century of Arlington.

Announcements and Resolutions

• Dick Smith announced a May 15th Citizens United discussion.
• Sean Harrington Pct 15 asked for a moment of silence in honor of the passing of Town Meeting Member Ken Marquis.

Article 3 – Reports of Committees

Many of these reports can be found on the town website: http://www.arlingtonma.gov/public_documents/ArlingtonMA_TownMeet/2012ATM/reports/index

• Town Government Reorganization Committee final report was provided by Al Tosti. He said that the committee had made progress on a number of issues, but some of the issues did not progress as far as hoped.
• Zoning Bylaw Review Committee report given by Jim Doherty. They are looking for new members.
• Arlington Redevelopment Board report was entered by Bruce Fitzsimmons.
• Finance Committee report was given by Al Tosti. He talked about the proposition 2.5 override. He thanked the many people who helped the process of getting the town into the GIC health plan. He noted there are still several financial challenges to the town, including federal and state budgets. He noted the passing of Erin Phelps.
• Board of Selectmen report was given by Kevin Greeley.
• Al Tosti moved to incorporate the motions in the various reports as the main motions for the various 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.  

Article 3 was tabled.

Article 4 – Measurer of Wood and Bark

Harry McCabe asked the meeting to thank John FitzMaurice for his past service.  He moved that Elsie Fiore be appointed, and she was.

Article 5 – Election of Assistant Town Moderator

Michelle Durocher nominated Jim O’Conor.  No other nominations.  He was elected.

Article 6 - Zoning Bylaw Amendment/Amend Sign Definition

Bruce Fitzsimmons introduced Don Benjamin of the Planning Department.  Mr. Benjamin showed several examples of public art that this could enable.  The current town bylaws would seem to prohibit these examples of public art.  He described the support he’s found for this change.  There were speakers in favor and one against it.  Paul Schlictman moved terminating debate, which carried by voice vote.  The motion passed by 2/3 vote – a non-unanimous voice vote.  In previous years, this vote would have required a standing count.  With last year’s rule change now kicking in, the moderator was free to declare this a passing vote.  If more than 5 people had stood up in protest we would have had a standing vote.  In this case, no one did – it was pretty clear this motion had more than 2/3 support.

Article 7 - Zoning Bylaw Amendment/Business Use

Planning Director Carol Kowalski gave the article’s explanation. Today, property owners in certain business districts can convert the property to residential use. In some cases that conversion is “by right” and in some cases by “special permit.”  This change would create something called “mixed use” where the first floor is for commercial or light industry, and upper floors are residential.  The permitted residential would be relatively high density.  The mixed use would require a Special Permit process and an Environmental Design Review.  The higher density is controlled by parking requirements and other requirements. Higher density is only permitted when there is business and residential.  The intent is to keep business usage in a situation that would otherwise be going all-residential. Chris Loreti asked for three extra minutes and was denied. I voted in favor of the three extra minutes.  I will always vote to permit speakers extra time, unless they are abusive of the privilege. He called this a major change. He said he is in favor of mixed use, but not this one. He showed slides with potential developments that he feared might happen, including a 50-foot building next to a home.  He talked about reductions in protections for neighborhoods.

We took a break for 10 minutes.

A speaker asked if this was proposed because of demand? Answer: there haven’t been specific requests for this mixed use, but there have been related requests. Adam Auster spoke in favor of this. He thinks this is the way for the town to grow and support businesses, and several speakers agreed.  Two speakers asked questions relating to Chris Loreti’s slides.  The answers to the questions said that the slides were impossible – those projects would never be approved by the Special Permit process and an Environmental Design Review process.  I think that this discussion was helpful in putting some perspective on Loreti’s examples.  They were good rhetoric, but not on point.  Jim Doherty made a motion to include B1 in this change.  There was further discussion of the controls in the Special Permit and Environmental Design Review process.  There was discussion of how this would interact with a future Master Plan process.  It was noted that there would be pressure to build residential whether we approve this or not. John Deyst moved to terminate debate, approved.  Doherty’s amendment fails on voice vote.  Main motion defeated on voice vote. I voted in favor of this.  I have been very unhappy as our business districts have been converting to residential.  I thought that this was a smart way to stem that tide.  Unfortunately, I think the complexity of the change and fear of the unintended consequences kept us from moving forward with it.

Article 8 and 9 were tabled.  With only 18 minutes left in the meeting, those issues were too much to bite off.  I think the Moderator made a great choice here – we kept working productively up until the close.

Article 10 - Zoning Bylaw Amendment/Banners For Historic Sites

Andy West introduced the article.  He said that it would clarify some current confusion about what signage is permitted to direct visitors to and inform visitors of historic sites.  Chris Loreti asked a large number of questions about why this change was needed.  He wasn’t sure if he was opposed or supported it.  Sean Harrington moved to terminate debate.  The change was approved by voice vote.

Meeting was adjourned.

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.

Town Meeting Member Charlie Gallagher led the Town Meeting in the national anthem.

Moderator John Leone said that he was taking his jacket off because of the heat. I had already taken my jacket and tie off – Town Hall is not a cool room! I resisted changing to shorts.

Moderator John Leone said that we could be done tonight if we finished.

We voted to return Monday 13th if we don’t finish tonight. Thankfully, this vote was rendered moot.

There was a presentation made to Harry McCabe and Elsie Fiore in recognition of their 50 years of membership in Town Meeting.

Clarissa Rowe and Cindy Starks thanked the town for their vote in the override.

Sheri Baron gave the Human Rights Commission report.

Article 7 – Cemetery Use in Open Space

David Bean moved reconsideration of the article. He said there were scheduling issues with the original date and wanted to explain the article. Paul Schlictman opposed reconsideration because he thinks the original idea is still flawed and needs to be revised. Reconsideration failed 68-73 (required 2/3 – wasn’t even close). I waffled on this one. Part of me wanted to hear the issue, but part of me knew that the article had no chance without further revision.

Article 31 GIC

No action, approved by voice vote.

Article 34 Pay As You Throw

Clarissa Rowe gave the recommendation of Board of Selectmen of no action. Pete Howard had a resolution as a substitute motion. He requested extra time for a longer presentation; the request was denied by voice vote. The vote wasn’t even close. It was a sign that town meeting wanted to finish, and was a bit impatient. Howard and others gave a presentation about how PAYT would be implemented. They provided the framework of how the costs of the program might be implemented. Patricia Worden spoke against the plan. A speaker spoke against some of the details of the framework on the basis of pennies per pound. This was very disheartening, and really speaks to why I didn’t want this debate tonight. The proposal was a loose resolution, and it didn’t have unified support of the town’s leadership. The result was predictable – a debate without a common framework, without common facts, that simply wasn’t productive. Half of the arguments were made against strawmen that simply weren’t a part of the proposal, but couldn’t be meaningfully debated because there was no firm proposal to compare it to. Mr. Worden spoke against. He offered an amendment to the resolution to make it include a vote of the town. Several speakers were in favor and against the resolution. I spoke against it. Al Tosti reported that Finance Committee thinks that a revenue-producing PAYT needs a vote of the town. Carl Wagner moved to terminate debate. Worden’s amendment approved by voice. Howard’s motion down by voice vote. No action on the article was approved. This issue was a tough one for me, and the debate was torture. As I said in my speech, I think that PAYT is a good idea. The challenge is that people are very passionate about it, both for and against, and we need to be delicate, careful, and deliberate in how we get PAYT done. Furthermore, I don’t think we can implement PAYT as a revenue source during the 3-year plan that we just kicked off with the override. However, I think we can do it in a revenue-neutral way. I’m committed to working on that over the next year. I just wish we could have skipped this whole painful debate. The result was predicted, and it just hurt.

Article 35. No action.

Article 54. Collective Bargaining.

Town Manager Brian Sullivan reported on the agreements for FY10 and FY11 that had been reached. He outlined the terms of the deal. Al Tosti reported the strong endorsement of the agreements of the Finance Committee. Terminated debate. Question on the language of the article from Harry McCabe. Approved by voice vote.

We took a 10 minute break.

Article 56. Budgets.

We had “holds” for discussion on the Selectmen budget, Town Manager, Personnel, Planning, Public Works, Community Safety, Education, Libraries, Health and Human Services, Insurance, and Water and Sewer.

Selectmen question on elections – yes, they are budgeted. There was discussion about the deputy town manager. There was an explanation that the Personnel budget is increasing so as to handle the anticipated plan design changes. Question on where computers are purchased – from capital, not from this budget. There was a question about changing the assistant planning director position to an economic development position. Planning Director Carol Kowalski explained that this will expand business opportunities in the town. There was a question about why the Conservation Commission budget was in Planning. Question on the amount of salt used. Question on adding weekly recycling – maybe during next negotiation. Paul Schlictman with questions about parking. He also had a question about fire staffing – “Do we need these add backs, since some firefighters on the Arlington email list don’t think we need them?” Chief Jefferson said they were needed. Question about patrolman v. ranking officers – more of the former, fewer of the latter. Questions on number of firefighters – 76 next year. Question on police overtime – it’s higher, but reflects actual expenditure.

There were many schools questions. Question on traffic supervisors – same number in FY12 as FY11, which is 13. There was a long thread about  adding grant writers to get more grants. Questions about maintenance. Question on special education management. There was a question about last year’s budget problems, and budget controls. The first answer out of the CFO’s mouth was “It’s not an overrun in spending, we just didn’t have enough revenue.” It was a frustratingly tone-deaf answer. I know that it’s frustrating to keep coming back to the same problem, but it has to be done, and it has to be handled properly.  Thankfully the second half of her answer was much better – she talked about the systems changes that have been implemented to make sure the budget problems don’t recur. There was a question on Thompson. Lyman Judd asked questions that were answered in the budget book. Paul Bayer moved the question on education.

Libraries question was asked without a clear answer.

Gordon Jamieson passed on questions on Insurance and Water and Sewer. This was gracefully done – we were so close to getting done.

Budgets were approved.

There were two different motions to adjourn voted down. It’s so much better to stay a little late and not have to come back on Monday!

Article 68 – OPEB

Charlie Foskett walked through the OPEB partial payment and how it’s funded. Substitute motion from Al Tosti made. Passed on voice vote unanimously.

Article 69 – COLA Base

Charlie Foskett explained how this vote would be an increase in the amount of salary that gets a COLA increase. The COLA now applies to the first $12,000 of salary; this would include an increase of $1000 in the base per year for three years. He explained that this is part of a complex deal with FinComm, Retirement Board, and the Town Manager. Motion substituted by voice vote, approved by voice vote unanimously.

Article 75 – Override Stabilization Fund

Tosti made a substitute motion. There was a question on how to protect this from losses like the last override savings, which was answered by Treasurer Stephen Gilligan. Approved.

On motion by Al Tosti, the meeting was dissolved.

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 Town Meeting in the national anthem.

Moderator John Leone asked for a moment of silence for the victims in Joplin Missouri.

If we don’t finish tonight, we’ll come back Weds May 25. This vote was modified later in the night.

Announcements

• Harry McCabe invited everyone to a health fair on June 18th 12:30-4:30 in Town Hall.

Article 39, Crosby, continued.

John Worden moved an amendment. He would like to further restrict the sale of the property with additional deed restrictions. He wants the deed to restrict use to educational use for at least 30 years. He remains opposed to sale of the school. He talked a lot about 40B. He suggested that if town meeting wants flexibility, that we should amend his amendment to make it revocable by 2/3 town meeting vote. I had asked about that earlier in this process, and I’m told it’s not possible. The deed restriction is permanent and not revocable. That is why I’d prefer to make the restrictions in a land disposition agreement rather than a deed restriction, and therefore opposed his amendment. Harry McCabe is opposed to the sale. He gave a nice speech, stating that everybody was acting in good faith. He encouraged everyone to treat everyone else with respect. I really appreciated this statement. It’s gotten a little hot in the seats up front this town meeting, and some of the jabs were sharper than I think is warranted. His kind thoughts were very welcome. Joyce Radochia spoke in support of the Crosby School. She introduced Dr. Ted Wilson President of Schools for Children. Dr. Wilson talked about the history of the relationship, the school’s finances, and the building’s condition. He said that his school can’t afford increases in rent over the CPI. Eric Berger moved an amendment that would give the right of first refusal to the current tenant. He is in favor of selling the property. I hadn’t seen the amendment in writing. I realize now that what happened is that it was distributed, but to the seats at the front of the room. Mr. Berger came up and apologized for that afterwards, which was nice of him. Paul Schlictman moved the question, and the vote failed, so debate continued. A speaker was opposed to selling the property. A speaker was in favor of selling the property. Mr. Ruderman moved to terminate debate. Terminated by voice vote. Mr. Berger’s amendment was defeated by voice vote. Mr. Worden’s amendment was approved. 125-44 permission to sell was approved.

Article 49 – Long Term Financial Planning Committee

The motion of the Board of Selectmen was no action. Al Tosti moved a substitute motion of the Town Government Reorganization Committee. He explained that this committee would not have power, but would serve to make recommendations. Alan Jones reported on the unanimous no-action recommendation of the Finance Committee. They believe the committee would be redundant. Gordon Jamieson moved to terminate debate, and it was terminated. Substitute was voted down. No action passed.

Article 52 – Revolving Funds

Town Manager Brian Sullivan noted that this is a regular article, with the addition of a small fund for $15,000 for cemetery chapel. Gordon Jamieson had questions on ambulance funds and how they are used. He asked other questions on three other funds. There were a couple more questions. Passed unanimously.

Article 53 – CDBG

Annie LaCourt. She noted Mr. Hurd’s contribution in the past. She updated one change – there was in an increase in funds designated for high school athletic scholarships of $35,000. Paul Schlictman noted that Town Meeting can endorse, but not change the numbers. Question on the funding of planning positions – it has been in the budget for years. The Council on Aging is concerned with their budget cut, but it was noted that there is reserve fund available if necessary. Carl Wagner moved to terminate debate. Terminated. Passed.

Article 54 – Collective Bargaining

Al Tosti said he was going to skip a long speech this year, and asked people to read the Chairman’s report in the Finance Committee report. Having spent as long as 20 minutes to debate a few thousand dollars earlier in the meeting, we subsequently approved $3.2 million in minutes. It’s just the way Town Meeting works.

He moved to table the article. Negotiations are ongoing, with an approved breakthrough with the teachers’ union already.

Article 55 – Position Reclassification

Unanimously approved.

Article 56 – Budgets

Al Tosti moved to postpone to June 8th. Postponed.

Article 58 – Sidewalks

No action – did it in the special town meeting.

Article 59 – Sewer.

Passed unanimously.

Article 60 – Water Mains

Passed unanimously.

Article 62 – Committees and Commissions

Passed by voice vote.

Article 63 – Town Celebrations

Passed by voice vote.

Article 64 – Miscellaneous

Passed by voice vote.

Article 65 – Water Bodies

No action.

Article 66 – Water Bodies

Approved unanimously.

Article 67 – Accidental Disability Adjustment.

Unanimously.

Article 68 – OPEB

Al Tosti moved to postpone to June 8th. Postponed.

Article 69 – COLA Base Pay

Al Tosti moved to postpone to June 8th. They might want to revisit in light of negotiations. Postponed.

Article 70 – Survivors Benefits

Passed unanimously.

Article 71 – Local Options

No action.

Article 72 – Tip Fee Stabilization

Approved unanimously.

Article 73 – Cemetery Fund Transfer

Passed unanimously.

Article 74 – Overlay Reserve

Approved unanimously.

Article 75 – Stabilization Fund.

Al Tosti moved to postpone to June 8th. It depends on the override. Postponed.

Article 76 – Free Cash

Approved.

We adjourned until Wednesday June 8th at 8PM, the day after the override.

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.

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

We voted to come back on Monday. Moderator John Leone noted that we might finish tonight, and then recess until after the override. Alas, it was not meant to be.

Announcements

• Al Tosti stood up and made a correction the report of the Finance Committee. On page B7, the All Public Works section, the sub-total sections were corrected. The actual total is $7,195,729, an increase of 77,375, or 1.08%.
• Ann LeRoyer. Open Space committee. She noted the display in the front hall and remarked on existing and potential open spaces in town. She talked about possible enhancements of Mill Brook.
• Roland Chaput. Friends of Robbins Farm Park are doing a fundraiser to replace the slides. http://www.robbinsfarmpark.org/

Article 3 – Reports

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

Angela Olszewski. She gave the report of the Tourism and Economic Development Committee.

Article 3 was then tabled.

Article 24. Public Records Law, continued, again.

Clarissa Rowe was next. She moved to terminate debate, done on voice vote. Loreti’s resolution was substituted 81-76. The motion, as substituted, was approved 83-79.

Article 38. Parmenter School.

Brian Sullivan explained the article. The Parmenter and Crosby are no longer needed by the town. The town needs the money from these properties to fund the Thompson School. Parmenter is 85 years old. There is a lot of deferred maintenance. He is concerned that the buildings distract the town from its core mission. Clarissa Rowe moved the substitute motion – very similar to the original, but with more limitations on the sale. Patricia Worden gave speech against the sale, accusing “the administration” of “smoke-and-mirror arguments,” “imaginary facts,” “dubious maneuvers,” and “bait and switch,” and “greed.” Mrs. Worden’s rhetoric was over the top and did a disservice to Town Meeting. There is no need to be insulting while making your point. A speaker was concerned that we should hold on to property in case we need it in the future. John Worden was concerned that if sold, the properties might be later re-sold inappropriately. He moved an amendment with further deed restrictions. Chris Loreti asked if the selectmen currently have the power to enter a long term lease. The answer was ambiguous. He asked if we can we use the full $34M or the 2000 debt exclusion. Charlie Foskett answered legally yes, but not within the agreement to the voters. There was concern if the potential sale is legal because of zoning. There was concern that we hadn’t looked enough at other options. There was concern that this might be converted to a charter school and cost the town money. Charlie Foskett talked about the depreciation of the schools, and how we should convert one town asset (Parmenter and Crosby) into another asset (rebuilt Thompson).

We had a 10 minute break.

Several speakers were in favor of the plan; they argued that it was smart use of town assets and the best available option for the town. There was a speaker opposed to Mr. Worden’s amendment because it is anti-affordable housing. Gwen Hooper gave the history of the Arlington Children’s Center. I thought the history was fascinating – it was fact-filled, but also gave a great feeling for the texture of the times and places. It was a beautiful oral history. Town Meeting sometimes provides unexpected, delightful gems – Mrs. Hooper’s speech was such a delight. Annie LaCourt argued against the amendment because it reduced flexibility. She asked Town Meeting to permit the negotiations to go forward. Mr. Ruderman thinks we’re holding Thompson hostage. Mr. Ruderman was the second speaker that suggested this, and I just can’t figure it out. If I understand the argument, the selectmen are trying to force something through by linking it to something popular, like Thompson rebuild. The thing I don’t understand is, in that scenario, why are we doing it? What do we have to gain? What is our ulterior motive? I just can’t imagine what it would be. I spoke. I said that the value of the property is both monetary and non-monetary in the way the tenants give back to the town. I said to vote for the motion so that we had the opportunity to maximize the value of the asset. There were further speakers in favor and against. Leo Doherty moved the question. There were a series of questions about the order of the votes. The Moderator chose to vote on the substitute motion first. He chose to vote on the amendment to the substitute motion after the substitute had been made. That was just backward. We should amend the proposed substitute first, and then, having perfected it, we would then substitute for the main motion. The moderator was asking to substitute first and then perfect. He got testy when people argued with him. The substitution failed by voice vote. The amendment was therefore irrelevant. And you have to ask yourself – would the substitution been made if it had been amended? We’ll never know. The main motion then failed by voice vote.

Article 39. Crosby school.

Clarissa Rowe asked that this be considered differently than Parmenter. In this case, there is interest in purchasing by the current tenant.

We adjourned.

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.