Sharon Update
--- News from the Source---
|
--- News from the Source---
|
|
|
Welcome to the Sharon Update archives. This is your link to past news articles and editorials.
Tear It Down (11-02-2005) Three to Five: The Right Move (10-23-2005) Much Ado About Nothing (9-25-2005) Voter Apathy Runs Amok (6-3-2005) 12-09-2006BOS-Brickstone PResentation: “Ridiculous” and “Insulting”
The latest installment of what appears to be a joint BOS-Brickstone PR series was perhaps the most embarrassing so far. One attendee summed it up succinctly, calling it “ridiculous” and “insulting” to the intelligence of folks listening. The presentation consisted of two parts. In the first portion, a Brickstone-paid consultant presented what he purported to be a financial analysis of the proposed development. He began his “bullet point”-laden (and virtually math-free) presentation by summarizing his “methodology.” According to the consultant, his methodology was to interview Town department heads and “basically, take their word for it.” In the genuine consulting industry, this is commonly disparaged as “borrowing the client’s watch and then charging him to tell you what time it is.” After approximately 45 minutes of Brickstone presentation, BOS Chair Bill Heitin claimed there would be 15 minutes of citizen Q&A prior to the second part of the presentation, but Heitin then abruptly cut-off discussion when Mountain Street resident Richard Mandell approached the microphone (the reason for which seemed to become clear later in the evening – see below). The final citizen questioner, Judith Bookbinder, spoke eloquently and passionately, challenging residents to look past the unsubstantiated claims of revenue to keep in mind that the sketchily-proposed project represents eighteen 10-12 story apartment buildings with 1,800 units – 1/3 again the Town’s current total. She also warned about the precedent that such dramatic rezoning – some have argued “spot zoning” – would create. In light of the current efforts by large land owners like Frank Gobbi and developer Michael Intoccia (see story on Pine Woods ZBA hearing) on Norwood Street and South Walpole Street, the crowd of several dozen in attendance responded to Mrs. Bookbinder’s cautions with loud and sustained applause. The second part of the presentation, led by a different Brickstone-paid consultant, also began with a discussion of methodology. The consultant claimed to have done exhaustive study of topography, wetlands, tree varieties, etc. but then proceeded to present a literally-laughable animated sequence, alleged to be the perspective of a single home on Coach Lane, claiming that the towers of the Brickstone development would be hidden by two (fortuitously-placed) trees in this individual’s back yard. It can only be assumed that the consultant’s intention was to somehow downplay the visual impact of three clusters of 10-12 story apartment buildings, but the exasperated laughter from the crowd suggested total failure. During the brief Q&A following this presentation, Brickstone was chastised by attendees for the poor quality of the presentations to date, the BOS and Brickstone were criticized for failing to share any real information and failing to follow-up on requests for clarification during previous presentations, and the BOS was once again criticized for poor communication with Sharon townspeople and neighboring towns. Richard Mandell rose again during the second Q&A and read a letter (see the Letters to the Editor section) requesting the disclosure of any and all documents related to meetings and conversations that the Selectmen and others have had with Brickstone to date. Folks who had been at the previous Brickstone presentation appeared troubled by the Selectmen’s apparent difficulty in answering Richard Mandell’s question at that time about secret meetings held with Brickstone. At that meeting, BOS Chair Bill Heitin actually asked Dick Gelerman to answer the simple question that had been directed at the Selectmen and their Executive Secretary, Ben Puritz. Mr. Gelerman’s response -- that he was unaware of such meetings -- bordered on “Nixonian.” Since Mr. Mandell’s request was made pursuant to the State’s Public Records Law, the BOS has 10 days to comply and respond. 12-08-2006Perry Mason Moments at Pine Woods ZBA Hearing
The 11/15/06 ZBA hearing on the Gobbi/Intoccia 40B proposal -- ironically named “Pine Woods,” since the proposal calls for clear-cutting the entire parcel of its pines – held some dramatic moments for the several dozen in attendance. According to ZBA Chairman John Lee, the hearing was intended to focus on “engineering issues,” but the most compelling exchanges of the evening came when abutters’ attorney John Witten – known for his knowledgeable and impassioned opposition to 40B’s – challenged the very validity of the hearing in a “Perry Mason” moment. Citing recent Attorney General investigations into alleged developer fraud and deceit related to 40B, Attorney Witten asked the project proponents – Intoccia Attorney Bob Shelmerdine and Paul Cusson of Delphic Associates LLC of New Bedford – whether they were prepared to stand by the application’s claimed $10M acquisition cost upon which the density of the development is predicated. Greg Meister, Sharon’s Conservation Officer, contrasted that figure, for approximately 25 acres, with the less than $5M amount that Goodwill was willing to accept for the approximately 56-acre “Horizons For Youth” lake-front property. Witten also noted that there was a material discrepancy between the acres upon which the application is based (approximately 26) and the acreage that the applicant has claimed to have site control over (approximately 24 acres). Shelmerdine’s response to this question was that “We believe we have full site control.” Witten noted that an applicant has to have full site control even to make an application under 40B, and so requested the ZBA to suspend the hearings and give the applicant 60 days to cure the situation. Witten claimed that, otherwise, it is “grossly violative of the statute” for the applicant to even be before the ZBA. Witten concluded by saying that the current parcel definition “infringes” upon abutting Audubon and Town-owned land. Towards the end of the hearing, abutter Beth Green asked the ZBA if they had a qualified financial analyst who could review the financial “pro forma” that is used to justify the extraordinary density of 40B applications (at the recent Special Town Meeting, the Finance Committee had advocated unsuccessfully for just such an independent professional) -- ZBA Chairman John Lee indicated that no, they never have. The final exchanges of the evening were contentious and ominous. ZBA member Walter Newman asked a question about the applicant’s apparent intention to clear-cut the entire parcel. Project proponent Cusson, responding to Mr. Newman’s apparent disapproval of this approach, challenged Newman to “write the opinion” that night, implying that it would be a rejection. Mr. Newman indicated that he would be happy to write the opinion. Attorney Witten interjected to remind the ZBA that addressing MassHousing’s conditions is a prerequisite to closing the hearing, noting that Mr. Cusson seemed eager to get to the Housing Appeals Committee (HAC). Cusson fired back “Obviously, that’s where we’re going.” The next hearing for the “Pine Woods” 40B application is January 24th, 2007. Interested citizens are encouraged to attend since ZBA meetings are currently not covered on local cable or in The Advocate. Do you have any thoughts, questions, comments about this article? Let us know at editor@sharonupdate.com. Your letters and opinions are welcomed. 11-09-2006An Open Plea to the Moderator- Paul Pietal - Dear Moderator, As the Fall Town Meeting approaches, let’s try a different approach to make the whole affair a little friendlier. There should be only one reason to entertain a motion to reconsider. If, and only if a citizen has new and valid information that could possibly shed light on an article should we even bother with a motion to reconsider. No more silly motions to reconsider just to “seal the vote”. As moderator, rule that behavior out of order. Town Meeting attendees only put us through the misery of motions to reconsider because they think they have to. You have to power to put their minds at ease. A vote, once counted should be final. If someone has a question on the vote later in the evening, allow the declaration of a Point of Information. If on the very remote chance that earth shattering information is brought to the voters, then you can entertain the motion to reconsider. One fly in the ointment for this approach, is the almost equally annoying “I Move the Question”. I liked your approach of people who were already at the microphones got to have their say. People who have spoken should automatically be banned from going back to the microphone and closing off debate. For that matter, their spouses shouldn’t be allowed to do that either. And as always, keep on encouraging folks to bring new information, not just the same information said in a different way. And just one last point before I close. While watching your hosting of the pre-Town Meeting this past week, I couldn’t help but cringe at the comments of “Let’s hope for just one night”. Speed isn’t the point of Town Meeting. Thoughtful deliberation and participation are the goals. Remember, we the people in the audience are the ones making the decisions for the Town. It is our direction on these precious evenings that are used to guide our elected and appointed boards. See you on Monday. And if it spills into Tuesday and beyond, I’ll be there too. And I won’t be unhappy. ;-) 10-17-2006An Environmental View of the Proposed Soccer Fields- Paul Lauenstein - The attached commentary demonstrates environmental concerns with regards to the proposed third soccer field on Gavins Pond Road. The proposal for the third field will be debated and voted on at the upcoming Fall Town Meeting on November 13th. The link is to an Adobe Acrobat file. If you need the Acrobat reader, go to Adobe.com . Additional Soccer Fields at Gavins Pond 10-04-2006Wilber Lost- David Hearne - As I watched the presentation for redevelopment of the Wilber School by Frontier Development at the Selectmen’s meeting last night, I was torn. I, to paraphrase Selectman Heitin, am shocked that a proposal for development that is worthy of consideration actually materialized. I thought the hard work of the re-use committee would be proven for naught and we’d press on with condemnation and bulldozers. I had hopes of christening the blade of the first dozer with a reclaimed can of abandoned Boston Baked Beans from the dusty shelves of the school’s kitchen store room. But then, that would have been long removed by the Hazmat teams soon to enter the building. On first hearing of the proposal, I thought they’d be too many strings, and we’d end up tearing the thing down as I’ve advocated and hoped for previously. But now we are presented with a proposal from folks that apparently know their business, for assisted elderly housing, lots of ground water permeations, land allotted for a new town Library, $165,000 in annual lease payments, as well as a child free tax base in the neighborhood of twenty million dollars, and affordable units to boot. It appears to be an ideal situation. I like the money. I hate to complain. But I’m still worried. My fear is primarily that of an unknown opportunity lost. Given the Historic restrictions placed on the property at “gotta go” Town Meeting, we will apparently never know what we might have had if we provided developers with a clean slate on the site. How much retail? How much office? How much housing of whatever type? Maybe not much more than we are potentially offered now, but how do we know? I do know one thing we have lost. We have lost the opportunity to truly integrate the site into the dynamic of the Town Center. That is no minor thing. Wilber is the largest single parcel of frontage on Main Street, north or south. And it’s public property. It will be forever set back from the side walk, not inviting us to walk in, or even to walk by. Not providing an anchor to spur other nearby retail development. Not providing assistance in solving the wastewater issues that will forever condemn our Town center to a limited occupancy tax base. We will continue to simply drive past. True, a Library tucked into the corner will mitigate this stagnating effect somewhat. But we are giving up the last large piece of Municipal property in Town and, as they say, it’s a pretty good location. I’m afraid we are settling for the first offer, simply because we’ve been waiting for it for so long. I fear we are repeating some of the same mistakes made when we allowed some of the other projects to move forward in our Town center over the past thirty years. We should strive for vibrancy. We should have faith in the value that we, as a community, offer developers today and in the future, and not simply rush into something because it’s been sitting for twenty five years. I’d hope for more. I do hope for more. I think we deserve more. At least it will be restored. At least there will be some revenue. At least we will be done with it. 07-04-2006Town Meeting Style Democracy—the Best Kind- Alice Cheyer - This column was submitted to the Sharon Advocate before the Monday deadline for publication in the issue of June 30. It was rejected on Thursday, when the paper had already gone to print. The rejection came as a request to cut the words in half (916 to 500) and make it a Letter to the Editor. Cutting the text in half would have meant losing the bulk of my arguments. Rejecting it too late for publication this week ensured that the June 16 column's suggestion for rescinding the $600,000 purchase article would be unopposed by any corrections or contrary views. This is what our town has for a "local" newspaper--a biased publication that has no understanding or interest in balanced journalism.--Alice Cheyer As a resident of the town where Father Bullock was an exemplar for showing courtesy to faiths other than his own, and that possesses an Interfaith Council, I strongly disavow any concurrence with the views of a column published in the Advocate, June 16, which had the gall and disrespect to question the legitimacy of another’s declared spiritual and cultural belief. What next? Will we have to prove that we are entitled to regard Jerusalem, Rome, Bethlehem, Mecca, the Ganga as holy sites? Apologies to Mr. Douglas Harris, Narragansett Tribal Preservation Officer, who took the trouble to journey to Sharon Town Meeting and give a beautiful, eloquent, heartfelt speech about the cultural and religious importance of the King Philip’s Rock area (among other such sites in New England) to the ancestors and descendants of several Native American tribes. The resident who said, “with eight synagogues and seven churches [and other traditions], why shouldn’t Sharon have a place of importance to Native Americans?” spoke very, very appropriately. Further, the columnist misunderstood the texts. The file of archeologists’ letters—publicly presented and available for the asking at Planning Board and ZBA—clearly distinguishes between (1) Dr. Frederick Martin’s hypothesis that certain rocks at the King Philip’s area were aligned by Stone Age people, and (2) the significance of that site, among others, to Native American traditions. (1) “Dr. Martin believes that Native Americans moved and placed the stones into their present alignments prior to 2,000 years ago. . . . [The] archeological contexts require considerable refinement before humans can be identified as the causal factors of the patterns of glacial boulders,” states one letter. But with regard to the significance of such sites to Native American traditions, another letter states, (2) “A few [of twelve New England rock shelters with evidence of prehistoric Native American activities] contained either burials or objects that probably had ceremonial or spiritual significance” and “The oral history and ethnohistorical records . . . help to reveal the importance that glacial erratics had for Native Americans during the seventeenth through nineteenth centuries. . . . We see the special regard that Native Americans had for certain large rocks in the natural landscape.” All the letters in the file recommend further archeological investigation to uncover a variety of historical human activities at the site. The appropriation of up to $600,000 to purchase a conservation restriction or portion of the East Hill expressed support for preserving this opportunity. The sequence of development attempts at King Philip’s includes Planning Board denial of 3 houses for lack of compliance with its regulations (steep road slope and water issues) and then an application for 12 houses through 40B, denied by Zoning Board. Because the state Housing Appeals Committee is known to reverse such denials on appeal in most cases, the Town and the landowner negotiated to revert to 3 houses. Asked to re-site one house to preserve East Hill sight lines, the developer explained that the planned units were luxury homes and such buyers could not be constrained in their choice of house siting. It’s a darn shame that all parties are put through the mill like this because our state legislators have brushed aside community planning and adopted the view that all values except economic ones are “just so yesterday.” In the June 16 column, we hear once again disparagement of Open Town Meeting. It has been called inefficient, boring, dominated by special interest groups. To the contrary—as a regular attendant at TM, I’ve found responsible participants, thoughtful debates, interesting and useful speeches, good regulation by the Moderator. The problem of huge masses of people leaving right after voting “their issue” instead of staying to help with the rest of Town business has not been solved, but if we stop disparaging TM and emphasize its civic value, this might improve. And it’s my guess that if the “handful” of people who approved the King Philip’s article had voted in accordance with desires of the June 16 columnist, we would not have heard complaints about “handfuls.” Unfortunately, I’ve learned, leaders in Sharon often try to manipulate the government process to suit their desires instead of bringing the various groups in the Town together. When hundreds of TM voters approved the purchase of Rattlesnake Hill in 2000, the Selectmen’s board of that time promptly revived the Government Study Committee to investigate whether our form of TM government should be changed. That committee subsequently came to favor a council form of government, in which a “handful” of five or six councillors would replace the “handful” or hundreds of citizens voting at TM as the decision-making body. The committee has recommended establishing a charter (without which our form of governance cannot be changed): “Without a charter the Town will continue to have fragmented governance without clear lines of authority.” It’s true that committees often do not exchange information, but there are other ways of remedying this. We do not need a charter to keep Open Town Meeting. A charter commission might recommend keeping OTM, and a charter might help organize government, but the hope evidently is that such a commission would recommend a council form of government. When residents are approached to sign a petition for a charter commission, they should keep this connection in mind. Open Town Meeting is the only forum where each voter can ensure that his/her opinion is taken into account. Representative government, as seen at the state and national levels, has not ensured this. 05-14-2006The Magical Override without a Tax Increase- Paul Pietal - Did you hear the one about the Proposition 2 ½ Override that won’t raise your taxes? I wish there was a punch line, but the joke is on all of us. In their zeal to advocate for the merits of the override, the School Committee pulled out all the stops, none more egregious than the concept that we can vote to raise our taxes and our taxes won’t go up! The magical override is considered to be tax neutral due to potential savings on previous debt exclusions undertaken by the Town to pay for the renovations at the Cottage and East Elementary Schools. The potential savings in debt repayments hinge on attempts by the Board of Selectmen to leverage opportunities presented by the Romney administration. Reimbursements for construction projects could be delivered ahead of schedule and in a lump sum, saving financing costs. The savings, if they come, will not be realized for at least another six months. So if and when the savings occur, they would offset the override, right? Guess again. Overrides are PERMANENT. The school projects were debt exclusions, which mean they have a limited life, typically 20 years. The Town has plenty of other potential debt exclusions in the queue: Horizons for Youth land purchase; Rattlesnake Hill purchase; Wilber School project. We also have one already approved debt exclusion which hasn’t hit the tax rate yet to the tune of $9 million for the Community Center reconstruction. These are the types of tax increases that will offset the potential savings from the school projects. So as we prepare to go to the polls, advocating for the override on the merits of maintaining the current staffing and programs is appropriate. Misleading statements like "the override will not increase your taxes" are not appropriate. Overrides ONLY raise your taxes. That is just the point of overrides. They are PERMANENT increases so as to support the reason for the override in the succeeding years. Please vote for the correct reasons, but don't be misled by the "magical, no tax increase" override argument. For more details, see: School Department Override 04-04-2006Just What is Important?- David Hearne - So the editorial board of the Advocate is “shocked” at the behavior of Selectman Grasfield. Whoop de doo. What they apparently fail to understand is how our Town government works. Should we readers be equally shocked to find this out? On the contrary, we should simply expect it. Let me be clear at the outset. Mr. Grasfield’s apparent choices of late have given me, and others who have supported him over the years, cause for question. I know David well enough to grant him the reluctant benefit of the doubt, and I will continue to do so. But his recent decisions to attend the Finance Committee meetings as they finalize their preparation of the Warrant for Town Meeting should not “shock” anyone who understands how this Town governs itself. On the contrary, his actions should be applauded. And make no mistake, in the Town of Sharon, we its residents, govern ourselves. Although many people, with the apparent inclusion of this paper, think the Board of Selectmen is our governing body, it is not. We govern ourselves through Town Meeting, and we now do so twice annually. So I ask the editors of the Advocate, which is actually more important, a meeting of the BOS where there was, in my opinion, a single agenda item of significance, or the Fincom Meeting with votes scheduled on Articles 4 and 5 of the Warrant? Do the editors realize that these two articles determine the salaries and budgets for our next fiscal year? Do they in fact know that theses are the two articles which historically raise the most questions by the Fincom, and necessitate the most answers from the BOS and the Town Administrator? Do the editors care? Or will they simply continue to make ignorant, ill informed assumptions about Mr. Grasfield’s rationale and his attempt to do what he has been trying to do for three years, improve the process by which our Town governs itself? Better communication between the BOS and the Fincom at anytime throughout the year improves our ability to govern. In the final stages of preparation for Town Meeting it is particularly essential. Many Committees and Boards in this Town work along parallel lines, each working hard independently, and sometimes, ignorantly, of the other’s efforts. We have a volunteer government. It’s difficult enough to attend all of your own Board’s meetings, let alone keep apprised of what others are doing. Grasfield puts more time and energy into this than any other member of our volunteer effort. Sometimes this effort conflicts with the meeting schedule of his own Board. Would we prefer he simply let the schedule of a meeting set his priorities rather than his review of specific agendas of competing meetings? He made a decision that sound, informed preparation for Town Meeting was more important than a weekly BOS meeting. Improved inter-board communication is a good thing. Why not support it? And one more thing, I was on the Finance Committee for four years and did not miss many meetings. I can count on one hand less a thumb the number of times a reporter for the Advocate was in attendance. What does that say about what this paper thinks is important? The motions at Town Meeting are controlled by the Finance Committee. It may be our form of government, but it’s their meeting. If it truly wants to serve our community, the Advocate should be paying far more attention to what the Fincom is saying and thinking on a weekly basis. The Advocate does not inform us about what we need to know about our Town government. It doesn’t even try. It’s too busy focusing on the politics and the personalities. It’s time for The Advocate to follow in the footsteps of the departing Mr. Grasfield and do what he did that was right. Focus on the governing. 03-07-2006Full House Beats Two of a Kind- Paul Pietal- The March 7th Selectmen’s meeting marked the return of a full board for the first time in several weeks. Big news? Not really. Chairman Grasfield has been noticeably absent per the reports of the local paper. Fortunately, it is a three member board and Selectmen Roach and Selectmen Heitin have been ably conducting Town business. While there are preparations for the upcoming Town Meeting that would be better served being discussed by a full deliberative board, it would be a stretch to suggest that the business of the Town has suffered. So is it because there has been an absence of real news that the local paper focuses on this issue? One might even say that the coverage has been petty, as e-mails from Chairman Grasfield to his colleagues explaining his absences are published. After all, as the e-mails illustrated, business commitments out of Town explained the majority of the issues. Some might consider that a personal and private matter. Certainly, most wouldn’t consider it big news. It’s time for the Town to begin discussing real issues that affect the citizens. First and foremost, the upcoming Town Meeting might very well center around the need for a Proposition 2 ½ override. The continued specter of 40B developments and as we have seen with the Hunter’s Ridge project, concern over Town approved projects will continue to generate lots of controversy. Re-use of buildings, rebuilding the Community Center, revitalization of the Town Square, alternate wells to complement our water supply, the future of the Horizons for Youth property and let we forget, there’s always Rattlesnake Hill. 03-05-2006Hunter's Ridge Epilogue- Paul Lauenstein- So we lost the battle over strip mining at Hunter's Ridge. The trees are gone, soon to be followed by over 80,000 tons of earth – both losses proscribed by our Conservation Subdivision Design bylaw – another small cut in the seemingly inexorable dismantling of our natural ecosystems that sustain life. In the famous biosphere experiment in Arizona, some smart scientists built a geodesic dome to try to create an artificial ecosystem capable of supporting a handful of humans. The made an epic attempt, but in the end they were forced to evacuate the biosphere. The following quote comes from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2
The almost unimaginable complexity of our planet's natural ecosystems is the basis for all life including ours. We disrupt these ecosystems at our peril. In order to survive we must limit the biomass of humanity and preserve enough contiguous open space to assure sustainability of our ecosystems. Of course, one more suburban development by itself will not bring us down, but there are more responsible ways to develop than the ham-fisted approach taken by the developer at Hunter's Ridge. We can and must employ intelligent development strategies that entail less impact than that. In his book "Collapse" Jared Diamond investigates the causes of ancient societies that abused their environments and collapsed as a consequence. Global warming and stronger hurricanes are providing us with our first ominous preview of future environmental calamities. Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. Unfortunately, we seem to lack the political will at the local, state, national or international level to make progress at a rate fast enough to avert fatal impairment of our planetary ecosystems. Hopefully enough good people will join together soon enough to get the job done before it's too late for future generations. A financial inheritance won't do our heirs much good if we have trashed their environment. Our sophisticated technology for the first time in world history is now fully capable of either destroying or preserving life on earth. It's up to us to collectively choose which it will be. Here in Sharon we are among a tiny elite that has the means to set an example of how to move toward sustainable environmental equilibrium. Will we seize our opportunity to explore alternative, less destructive lifestyles and development strategies, or choose the more comfortable path of least resistance (but far greater long-term peril)? Think globally. Act locally. 02-18-2006Democracy Under Siege in Sharon- Paul Lauenstein- Local officials are undermining democracy in Sharon. A few years ago, Town Meeting voted to approve a new bylaw proposed by the Planning Board called the Conservation Subdivision Design (CSD) bylaw, so-named because it contains unambiguous language that protects trees and the natural contours of the land. Based on the way the Planning Board waived this language in approving the Hunter’s Ridge development off North Main Street, they should have named the CSD bylaw “Clear cut, Strip mine and Dense develop.” First the developer clear cut the trees right up to the property line. Now he proposes to strip mine 60,000 cubic yards of fill, or 2,000 tractor-trailer loads, from the site. The developer got approval from the Planning Board to do these things even though they clearly violate the CSD bylaw approved by Town Meeting. Town Meeting also passed a bylaw that requires the developer to obtain a special permit from the Selectmen before removing fill in excess of 25 cubic yards. The bylaw specifically states, “…tentative or final approval of a subdivision plan by the Planning Board shall not be construed as authorizing the stripping or removal of any material…” However, according to Town Counsel, state law trumps Sharon's bylaw, and requires the Selectmen to issue the earth moving permit because of the prior Planning Board approval. The Massachusetts Attorney General approves every bylaw passed by Sharon Town Meeting before it can go into effect. Nevertheless, in the case of the Hunter’s Ridge development, two bylaws designed to protect the community from inappropriate clear-cutting and strip mining appear to be impotent. Meanwhile the developer will get three paydays as a result of waiving the bylaws: one for the lumber, one for the gravel (worth roughly a million dollars) and one for constructing 51 housing units, only two of which will be affordable. Waiving the bylaws sets a precedent that exposes every parcel of developable land in Sharon to clear cutting and strip mining. Why should those who selflessly contribute to the democratic process by enduring endless hours of Town Meeting continue to do so if the bylaws they enact are ignored? Now is the time for our elected Selectmen to stand up and defend Sharon's bylaws by denying permission to strip mine in Sharon at all costs. The democratic ideals we hold dear are on the line. 01-30-2006Interpreting the Open Meeting Law- Paul Pietal - The Norfolk County District Attorney recently provided a decision on an inquiry from Board of Selectman Chairman David Grasfield. The inquiry concerned a string of e-mails and phone calls between the Town Administrator and the individual members of the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Grasfield’s concerns were that the types of calls and e-mails used to conduct the business of the Board of Selectmen are in violation of the Open Meeting Law and was looking for guidance from the District Attorney’s office. The main events in question occurred in June of 2005 and are outlined in the News section. The Attorney General of Massachusetts provides an overview of the Open Meeting Law on the State’s web site. Included in this summary is the following regarding serial communications: "Telephone meetings" -- discussion by telephone among members of a governmental body on an issue of public business within the jurisdiction of the body -- are a violation of the Law. This is true even where individual telephone conversations occur in serial fashion. It would appear pretty clear that the types of communications between Mr. Puritz and two Selectmen on June 24th met the criteria of serial conversations. It seems puzzling that the Assistant District Attorney in the case didn’t cite this violation but rather thought a technical violation occurred only when Mr. Puritz explained his position when Mr. Grasfield questioned how the “Town had decided” on a union issue without having the Selectman met as a Board. It also raises an eyebrow when the Assistant DA notes that the recorded minutes of the Executive Session of June 21st don’t support the Town Counsel’s analysis of the complaint, yet accepts the representation by Town Counsel as fact. It isn’t widely known, but a previous Open Meeting violation in 2001 was lodged against the Board of Selectmen, only after 5 months of denial of the facts by the Board. That type of past behavior wouldn’t seem to lead to the acceptance of recollected conversation over recorded minutes. All of this might seem picayune to many, but the manner in which our elected officials conduct business is part of the duties entrusted in them. Cutting corners may be expedient, and in many cases, inconsequential. However, the Open Meeting Law is designed to protect all of us and ensure business is conducted properly, for both the small and the large issues. It is time to bring the District Attorney’s representatives back in to discuss the Open Meeting Law. All members of Town boards should be required to attend the session or view a videotape of the proceedings. It is for the good of the Town. 06-14-2006Legal Seagull
There is much that one could write concerning long-time Town Counsel Dick Gelerman, but let's begin with his recent performance leading up to May Town Meeting, and the Wilber School article, in particular (Gelerman's involvement in the previous "sale" that brought the Town $0, and the ensuing developer pay-off to the tune of $500K may be addressed later).... As Town Meeting regulars may have noticed ... first, Gelerman provided Selectman Bill Heitin with an opinion supposedly authorizing the Board of Selectmen to tear the Wilber down over the Historic District Commission's objections; then the long-awaited "public hazard" letter from the DPW failed to materialize (in its place came rumblings and mumblings about unintended legal hazards that might ensue); then Gelerman drafted and supposedly reviewed both the original article language and the revised language permitting demolition; only to "discover" at the proverbial 11th Hour that Town Meeting couldn't, in fact, borrow money to demolish a building (which should be common sense, even to non-attorneys, since bonds are traditionally backed by assets, not rubble). For this, the Board of Selectmen and Town Administrator Ben Puritz are supporting a 20% increase in the hourly fee Gelerman charges the Town. The Town deserves much better for six figures a year. 05-06-2006Soapbox Tactics
The override discussion at Town Meeting brought the typical arguments from both sides of the issues. Even the old “it’s only the cost of a cup of coffee a day” was resurrected by Jeffrey Sternklar, with a new twist of “a couple of Starbucks double shots per week”. It is a demeaning argument for many, especially for those on fixed incomes. He’s entitled to his opinions and his commentary as is everyone else who wants to speak. But wait….apparently the other half of the Sternklar tag team, Mrs. Sternklar, would rather not hear much more from anyone else. She had the audacity to move the question, cutting off any more debate. Perhaps we need to identify ourselves a little more clearly to the Moderator. Or better yet. Demonstrate a little common courtesy! 05-06-2006The Nights of Town Meeting
What more does a small town need for entertainment? From the opening night’s back handed swipe at the Library Board of Trustees by a member of the Finance Committee, to the mass exodus of parents after the vote on the budget for the school override, to Tuesday’s embarrassing behavior by the conservative majority of the Fincom, compelling standing vote count after standing vote count, simply because their agenda was being challenged. A good time was had by all in attendance, as they participated in an antiquated, inefficient, sometimes demeaning process of self governing. Town Council! Town Council! Town Council!
04-04-2006The Pettiness Continues
The Sharon Advocate continues to editorialize on Selectman Grasfield's attendance. That is amazing enough, but who is the mole inside of Town Hall? How do Grasfield's e-mails appear word for word in the Advocate? Has the Advocate tapped into Town Hall to secretly harvest e-mails? More likely is that an employee and/or elected official thinks that providing this type of information to the press is somehow productive. Well guess what? It's time to grow up and get back to work! 06-24-2006Fall Town Meeting Schedule
The Selectmen have announced the schedule of events leading up to the Fall Town Meeting.
05-16-2006Town Election Recap
Our next Selectman Richard Powell with family and friends on Election Day Powell Captures Selectman's Race The election season is over. After a well fought race for the open Selectman's seat, Richard Powell emerged victorious with a convincing victory over challengers Ira Miller and Peter Bickoff. Powell captured 1686 votes, to 717 for Miller and 430 for Bickoff. Powell takes the seat of departing Selectman David Grasfield and begins a three year term. Sloan Beats Maniscalco for Planning Board Seat In the election's other contested race, Amanda Sloan defeated incumbent Gina Maniscalco by a vote of 1460 to 940 to become the next member of the Planning Board. The five year term greets Sloan with significant challenges as she joins the five member board. The ever present specter of 40B developments is just one of the hot items that continually engage the Planning Board. The Override Fails by the Slimmest of Margins In a closely watched election ballot initiative to override Proposition 2 1/2, the $934,000 override failed by only 6 votes. The final count was 1512 votes against the override and 1506 votes for the override. It is expected that the vote will be challenged and a recount called for. The last override vote four years ago won by a margin on 11 votes. It too was challenged by a recount. The end result of the recount was a swing of 2 votes, increasing the margin to 13 votes. Based on the automated nature of ballot counting, conventional wisdom would lead one to believe a recount will be unlikely to reverse the outcome of the override vote. Stay tuned. 05-08-2006Annual Town Meeting - Night 3 Recap
The third and final night of Town Meeting convened at 7 PM on May 8th. The first article considered was for the purchase of land to preserve purported Native American grounds off of Mansfield Street. The discussion was informative, emotional and challenging, leading the attendees to believe that a fourth night of Town Meeting wasn't out of the question. Article 19 - Purchase of King Philips Property This proposal asked the Town to purchase portions of property off of Mansfield Street, for not more than $600,000. As with many articles in this year's Town Meeting, this one didn't seem ready for prime time. The Finance Committee felt the lack of information didn't warrant a positive motion, and they move to indefinitely postpone the article. Proponent Kurt Buermann outlined his reasons for bringing the article forward, including preservation of stone structures that lined up perfectly with the winter and summer solstice. Mr. Buermann explained that this may have Native American significance, possibly dating back thousands of years. The most compelling and moving information of the evening was provided by Doug Harris, a member of the Narragansett tribe. Mr. Harris explained the need to preserve vestiges of Native American history, including what may have been ceremonial grounds. He urged the Town Meeting attendees to "support what is ancient". Board of Selectman chairman David Grasfield eloquently spoke on the duties of preserving the heritage of the property for future generations. He also indicated the cost for a borrowing over 20 years would amount to an extra $5 per household for each of the 20 years. The real estate agent for the property, David Wluka rose to indicate that the value of the property far exceeds the $600K amount, possibly by a factor of three. He also outlined the onerous process already required to get approvals from the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ultimately, the motion for indefinite postponement by the Finance Committee was defeated and a positive motion was offered by Mr. Buermann. Two separate motions to amend the motion were proposed. The first by Planning Board member Eli Hauser attempted to limit the Town's contribution to $100K. The second moved by School Committee member Sam Liao attempted to remove funding altogether so that it would be possible to use Community Preservation Act funds. Both amendments failed. The initial Buermann motion for funding $600K to allow the Board of Selectmen to negotiate for the property passed by a vote of 68 to 31, enough for the required two-thirds majority. The next steps are somewhat unclear. It isn't definite that the property owners would have an interest in selling portions of the property or perhaps allowing easements on the property. It is certainly an issue that we'll hear more about. Picking Up Speed After spending over 2 1/2 hours considering and voting on Article 19, the remaining articles flew by at light speed over the course of the next hour. Article 24 for Veteran's exemptions was unanimously approved. Also gaining unanimous approval were Article 25 for interest rate reduction on senior's deferred property taxes, Article 26 for operating funds for the Community Preservation Committee and Article 27 for refinement of the Community Preservation Act's language on exemptions. Articles 28 and 29 extended leases in Post Office Square by unanimous votes. The total consensus was broken on Article 30 regarding changes to the Planning Board's Sign By-law. However, only one dissenting voice was heard. Article 31 resumed the good feeling of the attendees with another unanimous vote, approving funding for the Assessor's property re-inspection. Article 32 Has Some Bite Dissension returned for Article 32, which attempted to increase fees for dog licenses. The Finance Committee sponsored this article, but only because other proponents backed off. Their reasoning was to charge fees that were appropriate for the services provided. Selectman Bill Heitin indicated the Board of Selectmen were against this initiative because they hadn't yet had a hearing on the issue. Ultimately a voice vote of 52-41 passed the motion, which now will await the Selectmen's hearing. Article 33 proposed more dog fee increases, this time for kennel fees paid when unleashed dogs are picked up by the Animal Control Officer. Interestingly, the Board of Selectmen have yet to hold a hearing on this issue either, yet remained silent. The initiative passed unanimously to the puzzlement of the Moderator Paul Bouton. Closing Out the Evening The modifications proposed to the stormwater by-law in Article 34 passed unanimously. The increase of allowable trash containers passed on a voice vote, with one concerned gadfly voting nay on concerns that the proposal might increase the waste collection fees. The remaining articles all passed unanimously, allowing the Historical Commission use of property behind their current building for a carriage house, approving the revolving funds and allowing modifications to Board of Health regulations. Final Kudos Finance Committee Vice Chair closed out the third night of Town Meeting recognizing one employee and three board members for their service to the Town as they fade off into the sunset. Dave Clifton, Recreation Director is retiring this year. Board of Selectman Chairman David Grasfield will retire from public service, at least temporarily, as will School Committee member Jane Furr and Finance Committee member Michael Feldman. All were thanked for their service. 05-03-2006Candidates Night
The Annual Candidates Night sponsored by the League of Women Voters took place on Thursday evening, April 27 in the High School Library. The two contested races, one for Planning Board and one for the Board of Selectmen generated the most interest and questions. The night led off with questions for the two candidates for School Committee: incumbent Mitch Blaustein and newcomer Glen Allen. This race is for two seats so the outcome is already in the books. Blaustein has been a long term member of the School Committee. Although his children are no longer in the school system, he indicated he did not want to abandon the program in a tough fiscal climate. Newcomer Allen has a doctorate in physics. He has two young children in the school system, values education and stated that "good schools make good communities". Also appearing were Richie Gordon, who is unopposed for his re-election to the Board of Assessors. Likewise, there is no opponent for Arnold Kublin as he seeks another 5 year term on the Housing Authority. The Planning Board candidates, Amanda Sloan and Gina Maniscalco, the current chair of the committee, both showed a command of the issues facing the town. Sloan established herself as an environmentalist an pledged to bring a "conservationist" perspective to issues facing the Planning Board and work for "Smart Growth". Maniscalco voiced her pride in leadership of the current board and the valiant efforts to fend off the varied 40B proposals.
Selectmen candidates Richard Powell, Ira Miller and Peter Bickoff The candidates for the Board of Selectmen closed out the evening. The one open seat is to replace David Grasfield, who decided not to run for re-election. When asked what their primary goal would be in their first year, the candidates gave varied answers. Peter Bickoff reiterated his campaign theme of "finding the bleeding points" of the Town and addressing them. Ira Miller stressed an issue he has been making the cornerstone of his campaign which is the control of the rising health care costs incurred by the Town. Richard Powell indicated that he would like to address the escalating health care costs, improve the communication on the Board and work on strategy planning. 05-02-2006Annual Town Meeting - Night 2 Recap
The second night of Town Meeting started off on a fast track to finish the remaining articles before the witching hour of 11 PM. Alas, debate and discussion got in the way and the meeting stalled on Article 23 for the creation of the Sharon Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Town Meeting will resume on Monday, May 8th in the High School auditorium. The remaining 15 articles will most likely fit into that evening and Town Meeting will conclude after 3 nights. Completion of Article 5 The remaining budget line items to review and approve didn't take long, but required a little explanation before commencing. Due to a warrant preparation error, the $60,000 extra voted on the first night of Town Meeting within Article 1 of the Special Town Meeting, was not reflected in the warrant recap sheet. Apparently, even though it wasn't already approved, procedurally it should have been included in the warrant, giving Town Meeting the opportunity to reduce line item amounts if they so desired. Once the Finance Committee Chair Chuck Goodman explained the approach of moving funds from the Reserve Fund and Insurance line items to the affected budgets, the passage of the line items for Article 5 passed unanimously. The Fast Track After the budget deliberations of Article 5, the next few items presented no controversy whatsoever. Votes on the Sharon Friends School Fund, Norfolk County Retirement, the Annual Audit and Unemployment were all unanimous. Capital Outlay The inquisitive audience returned during the discussion of the capital articles but in the end, Town Meeting was in a spending mood. The borrowings for roads and sidewalks was approved, although at a lesser amount because of some late breaking news regarding the Avalon Bay development. Apparently, there may be $400,000 in road improvements funded by the developer, essentially allowing the Town to shift the request for that money from the roads to the Community Center. The requests for demolishing the Sacred Heart Building was indefinitely postponed due to a ruling from Town Counsel that we can't borrow for demolition in the first place. DPW equipment was approved on a voice vote, as was the School Department request. The Fire, Library and Police department requests were all approved unanimously. AM Radio Station The Finance Committee recommended only funding replacement cots for the Civil Defense Department. The Director of Civil Defense, Mike Polimer made a compelling case for funding the purchase of equipment to allow the Town to establish its own AM radio station, which would be used in case of disasters. The radio station would provide the citizens of Sharon with information when all other avenues might be disrupted. Passage of $30,000 to fund the cots and the radio station was accomplished on a voice vote. Horizons For Youth and King Philips Rock The initiative for purchasing the Horizons for Youth property was only a placeholder in case action needed to be taken. Alas, indefinite postponement was unanimous, as there is nothing to do at this time with the property. The article on the property of King Philip's Rock was moved by the moderator to Monday evening, when it will be the first article considered. This will allow the proponent Kurt Buermann to bring experts on the significance of the property to Town Meeting to educate the voters. The Community Center Additional Funding The request to add $1.4 million to the previously approved appropriation to restore the Community Center was approved by Town Meeting, but not before some good presentations and some healthy debate. The need for the additional funds arose as the bids for the project came in significantly higher than expected, due mostly in part by the rising cost of materials. Most of that cost increase was laid at the feet of the rising cost of energy and its trickle down effect on other goods. The good news is that the additional funds will not have to be raised by another Proposition 2 1/2 debt exclusion. Shifting of requests in the Capital Outlay program, along with the pre-approval of $400K borrowing from next year's capital program combined to cover the cost of the additional funds. The monies shifted were road construction funds due to the aforementioned Avalon Bay contribution, and the monies not needed for Sacred Heart Demolition and Wilber demolition. There was legitimate concerns raised by resident Laura Nelson regarding the use of the Avalon Bay contribution before it was really official. The concerns were not enough to sway the crowd and the borrowing of $1.4 million was approved on a voice vote. Funds Not Needed Standing Building Committee Chairman Gordon Gladstone happily reported that even though the Community Center bids came in higher than expected, the bids for the Middle School roof and the Middle School HVAC improvements came in under the estimates. This allowed the Town Meeting to happily postpone the two requests indefinitely. Sharon Affordable Housing Trust Fund The final business for night 2 was to consider changing the Town's by-laws to create a trust fund for which affordable housing initiatives could be funded. The discussion on this article was long and drawn out. It wasn't clear whether the Planning Board had taken an official position on this, although the trust fund is advocated by their own Housing Plan. Questions from the audience focused on the broad reach of the by-law and the concerns with the language of the by-law. In the end, the Finance Committee was overruled and the motion to create the Trust Fund was passed on a standing vote of 68 to 39. 05-01-2006Annual Town Meeting - Night 1 Recap
Well, we didn't get very far, barely making it past the BIG ONE. The hour was already late when the School Department override budget passed on a voice vote. Town Meeting only considered two more budget items after that, passing both the Debt/Principal and Debt/Interest line items. The festivities continue on Tuesday evening, May 2nd, beginning at 7 PM in the High School Auditorium. Special Town Meeting within the Annual Town Meeting The night started with two articles in the Special Town Meeting. The first was an appropriation request to fund an additional $60,000 in this year's budget to cover employment contracts that had recently been negotiated. It passed unanimously. The second article took considerable time, as the request for an additional $290,000 for the abatement of hazardous materials at the Wilber School meandered back and forth. There was an amendment presented by Robert Young, although it seemed like it was coaxed out of him by the Moderator Paul Bouton. Mr. Young attempted to abate and stabilize the building but the amendment failed. The request for $290,000 did pass on a voice vote. Annual Town Meeting The Annual Town Meeting kicked off with the nomination of new Finance Committee members. There was at least one nay in the crowd for Jon Hitter and Chuck Goodman, but they both passed muster, as did Ira Miller, Laura Nelson and Ted Phillips. The crowd was unanimously for Accepting Reports in Article 2 and dissolving the Government Studies Committee in Article 3. A voice vote in the affirmative passed Article 4 for the personnel matters. This was a little different than the last couple of years when department head salaries raised a bit of a ruckus. It was a School crowd, however and they only came for one thing, and it wasn't Article 4. Article 5 The budget process began with deciding which line items to act upon singly or in a group. Once decided, the items not held for individual discussion passed unanimously with "Option A", which was the non-override budget. Also passing unanimously were the budgets of the Selectmen, the Reserve Fund and the Board of Assessors. And then came the Library. Due to some budgeting snafus, the number printed in the Warrant didn't match what the Priorities Committee had thought appropriate. However, the Warrant was printed before the Priorities Committee's final deliberations. It was a perfect example of a budget process gone awry with late breaking news, changing articles and general confusion. The end result is that the extra money will probably come from the Reserve Fund, but that will have to wait for another day as a motion pushed the vote until later in the Town Meeting. Other budgets to pass were the Town Clerk (unanimously), Fire and Ambulance (unanimously) and the Water Department (unanimously). School Override Vote The main event began with a presentation by the School Committee Chair Andy Nebenzahl, followed by another presentation by Superintendent Claire Jackson. Numbers, facts and information were provided to what arguably could be called a pro-School crowd. Minor opposition was mounted but it was readily apparent where the vote was going to head. Only a voice vote was needed and the crowd headed for the doors. Of course, Town Meeting wasn't over, but it was only more evidence that it was a pro-School crowd. The next step for the override will be at the Town Election on May 16th. Typically, this is the more significant hurdle to overcome, as secret ballots tend to swing against the sentiments of the Town Meeting discussions. Final Business Two more line items were taken up before the meeting adjourned for the evening. The passage of the budgets for Debt/Principal and Debt/Interest were both unanimous. At that time, the Finance Committee started to move the budget for the Department of Public Works. However, some discussion on stage led the an agreement to adjourn for the evening, and the crowd was only too happy to agree. Day 2 will bring more budget items, including the many capital borrowing items. How did the SharonUpdate predictions fare on night 1 of Town Meeting? All was going well until the School override vote took center stage. Up until that point, SharonUpdate was perfect in its prognostications. However, never underestimate the power of the School advocacy groups. It is a pretty unbeatable foe at Town Meeting, causing the first blemish for SharonUpdate. 05-01-2006Annual Town Meeting - May 2006
The articles for the Annual Town Meeting, including the Special Town Meeting are included below. SharonUpdate has also provided a brief summary for each along with the insider's predictions. Enjoy!
Special Town Meeting Within the Annual Town Meeting ARTICLE 1 - Funding additional amounts for collective bargaining agreements -PASSED ARTICLE 2 - Additional funds for the demolition/abatement of the Wilber School - PASSED
Annual Town Meeting ARTICLE 1 - Election of Finance Committee Members - PASSED ARTICLE 2 - Acceptance of reports - PASSED ARTICLE 3 - Dissolution of the Government Studies Committee - PASSED ARTICLE 4 - Personnel By-laws - PASSED ARTICLE 5 - The Budget - IN PROCESS ARTICLE 6 - Sharon Friends School Fund ARTICLE 7 - Norfolk County Retirement ARTICLE 10 - Capital Requests for Roads and Sidewalks ARTICLE 11 - Demolition of the Sacred Heart Building ARTICLE 12 - DPW Capital Requests ARTICLE 13 - School Department Capital Requests ARTICLE 14 - Fire Department Capital Requests ARTICLE 15 - Police Department Capital Requests ARTICLE 16 - Civil Defense Capital Requests ARTICLE 17 - Library Capital Requests ARTICLE 18 - Horizons For Youth Property ARTICLE 19 - King Philip Rock Property ARTICLE 20 - Additional Community Center Funding ARTICLE 21 - Additional Middle School Roof Funding ARTICLE 22 - Additional Middle School HVAC System Funding ARTICLE 23 - Affordable Housing Trust Fund ARTICLE 24 - Veterans Exemptions ARTICLE 25 - Seniors Exemptions ARTICLE 26 - Operating Funds for the Community Preservation Committee ARTICLE 27 - Community Preservation Act Clarification ARTICLE 28 - Lease Extensions for Post Office Square ARTICLE 29 - Another Lease Extension for Post Office Square ARTICLE 30 - Sign By-Law Change ARTICLE 31 - Property Re-inspection Funding ARTICLE 32 - Dog License Fee Increases ARTICLE 33 - Increase in Fees for Unleashed Dogs ARTICLE 34 - Amendment to the Storm Water Discharge By-law ARTICLE 35 - Increase in Size of Waste Containers ARTICLE 36 - Lease of Town Property to the Historical Commission ARTICLE 38 - Board of Health Fines
More To Come! Stay Tuned.
ARTICLE 1 - Funding additional amounts for collective bargaining agreements Submitted by the Board of Selectmen SharonUpdate Summary: The Board of Selectmen have been negotiating with several unions in Town during the course of the year. Since this agreement affects the budget for the current fiscal year, it is placed in a "Special" Town Meeting before the Annual Town Meeting. It has been discussed during the Priorities Committee process. The estimate to fund these agreements is $60,000. SharonUpdate Prediction: C There was some discussion this past fall when a similar initiative was brought forward by the Board of Selectmen in the quest for "parity" amongst the Town employee with respect to compensation. In the end, that initiative passed and this one will as well
ARTICLE 2 - Additional funds for the demolition/abatement of the Wilber School Submitted by the Board of Selectmen SharonUpdate Summary: In the continuing saga of the Wilber School building and property, this is a late formulating article submitted in response to recommendations to demolish the building. There is contention from the Historical District Commission in that we first need to make sure the building is truly ready for the wrecking ball. The total projected cost of the work is $1.56 million, which includes abatement of the hazardous materials and its demolition. Late Breaking News: At the Finance Committee meeting on Friday evening, April 28th, it was brought forward that demolition cannot proceed at this time. Therefore the amount requested will only be for abatement. This initiative will be recommended at a lower amount than $1.56 million by the Finance Committee. The requested number will be approximately $500,000 less than originally thought. SharonUpdate Prediction: C There seems to be growing sentiment in Town that the Wilber School has outlived its useful life and plans to renovate/reuse the facility, though noble, are at this point in time past their prime. There should be good lively discussion on this major issue, but ultimately it will pass with the voters at Town Meeting. There may be questions to clear up the confusion on what the Town perceives to be the direction on this initiative. There is still talk of sending out a Request for Proposals to develop the site. The RFP has already been prepared so sending it out is felt to be one last attempt to find an interested developer. Annual Town Meeting
ARTICLE 1 - Election of Finance Committee Members Submitted by the Board of Selectmen SharonUpdate Summary: The Finance Committee currently has 11 members. The Town by-laws allow for up to 12 members. The Town Meeting will be presented with the names of candidates as brought forward by the Finance Committee Nomination Committee, a group appointed by the Town Moderator. Approval is typically automatic, although Town Meeting periodically will hear select nay votes rise from the crowd! SharonUpdate Prediction: C Except for the occasional nay vote for select returning members, all the candidates will pass with approval of Town Meeting voters. ARTICLE 2 - Acceptance of reports Submitted by the Board of Selectmen SharonUpdate Summary: Ah, the mysterious "act upon reports". This always passes unanimously, since we're not doing anything but accepting reports. I wonder which ones we received last year? SharonUpdate Prediction: C Rumor has it that we'll be accepting the report of the Government Studies Committee this year on the future direction for the Town's government. Stay tuned. ARTICLE 3 - Dissolution of the Government Studies Committee Submitted by the Board of Selectmen SharonUpdate Summary: The Government Studies Committee has been very active in the past few years, discussing key items like whether Town Meeting has outlived its useful life and whether it is time for a different approach to local government. They have also advocated for the development and acceptance of a Town Charter. Minor procedural modification for Town Meeting have also been proposed and accepted by the Town. At this time, the Committee believes it has accomplished its mission and recommend its own dissolution. SharonUpdate Prediction: C Well maybe we will be accepting their report in Article 2. And if we don't can they dissolve? It would be hard to imagine that a committee recommending it dissolve itself would be turned down. A unanimous vote is expected in the affirmative. SharonUpdate Summary: Article 4 contains an abundance of information. The first section lists the amendments to the Personnel By-laws as proposed by the Personnel Board. There are five amendments, none of which should be controversial. The second section lists the proposed salaries for the department heads in the Town. The following table summarizes the year to year increases over the last three years along with the percentage increase for FY07 over FY06. Note: The Town Engineer position is currently unfilled and has been for several years. The increase is intended to reflect the potential salary if the position were to be filled.
|
