Clerk

CHARTER REVISION COMMISSION

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

7:00 p.m.

Audrey P. Beck Municipal Building

Council Chambers

Minutes

I.                    Call to Order

Chairman Bacon called the meeting of the Charter Revision Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. 

 

II.                  Roll Call

Members present:  Stephen Bacon, Aline Booth, Lisa Eaton, Henry Krisch, Gene Nesbitt and Sheila Quinn-Clark.

            Members absent:  Nancy Cox, David Dzurec, Shawn Grunwald, Denise Keane and Lucinda Weiss.

III.                Opportunity for Public to Comment

Tim Quinn of Depot Road, Ma nsfield Depot:  In the past the Town had a selectman form of government, but now there are trained professionals in every department of the Town.  They are knowledgeable staff that, in his opinion, seldom overestimates for the budget.  Mr. Quinn asked where the money would come from if town meeting starts raising the budget.  He stated that in this instance you raise the bottom line and it is not possible to ask the taxpayer for more money to cover this bottom line. There is still a low percentage of signatures for petition so there is no great problem to take out but allowance for raising items is risky.  He felt that fairness in ability to raise or lower should not be the gauge on which this consideration is based.  Mr. Quinn acknowledged the efforts of the Commission and thanked them for their time.  

IV.               Approval of Minutes

Booth MOVED to accept the minutes of 5/22/07 as presented.  Nesbitt questioned if he can abstain as did not attend that meeting and has not had an opportunity to review tapes.  Chairman Bacon suggested that they defer approval of minutes at this time.  The members agreed, matter TABLED to next meeting; clerk to continue this item to next meeting agenda.

V.                 Communications

·        6/26/07 Letter of Mary Stanton to Stephen Bacon concerning Town Council recommendations for Commission consideration

Other than email correspondence among Commission regarding summer availability to attend meetings, it was noted that this was the only communication.

VI.               Old Business

Although noting that there was a quorum for the meeting to proceed, Chairman recommended a hold on action and using the meeting for discussion.  A review of the calendar and discussion of everyone’s availability ensued.  To maximize participation, it was determined preferable to meet with the Council on July 23^rd and then follow with a Commission meeting on July 24^th.  An alternative option would be to hold the joint meeting with Council earlier than this date.  It was the consensus of those present and all were in agreement authorizing the Chairman to coordinate meeting schedule with Council.  Further, all in agreement to proceed with discussion of the Council minutes presented at this meeting without action to facilitate progress.

¨      C302A – Quinn-Clark suggested, with concurrence of members, revision to following language: “Following their election, the members of the Council shall meet at 7:30 p.m. on the fourth Monday of November.” 

¨      C304 – Booth noted, and members unanimously agreed, that a reading of the ordinance was necessary in order to consider the Council’s recommendation. 

¨      C307 and C308 – It was the consensus of members that this recommendation was acceptable, making observation that C307 contains the requested language and merely add it to C308. 

¨      C402 – Consensus of members was to accept Council’s recommended revision to this section.

¨      C405 – Quinn-Clark opposed corporate voting; Booth favored the Council recommendation; Eaton concurred favor; Krisch expressed mixed feelings.  The Commission would like to obtain a copy of the state statute referenced in order to review the proposed amendment further.  Under straw vote, if had to take a position then Krisch and Quinn-Clark abstain; Nesbitt, Eaton and Booth in favor. 

¨      C405A – Booth strongly felt that a “raise” in line item could create a lot of havoc.  Budget information is out in the public in advance of town meeting but if vote to raise occurs at town meeting then no way to oppose other than go to referendum, not only affected the bottom line monies but also public awareness.  Nesbitt countered that not attending the town meeting was individual choice and there was no real problem if a vote to raise was approved at the town meeting.  If opposed it then can go to referendum.  Krisch indicated that he hadn’t really considered this previously as option because the discussion has always been between acceptance of status quo or lower.  He had no objection to allow proposed additional expenditure.  Quinn Clark suggested that since the Council expressed puzzlement to why we recommended this, we should flag this item to explain our reasoning at our joint meeting.  Chairman’s recollection as to Council’s rationale for this recommendation was that it would be fair if can lower then can raise.  With respect to “line item”, Chairman recalled that it was the Finance Department’s request for this language and the charge of Council for the Commission to define item.  Nesbitt expressed concern that reference as “item” is vague and does not provide detail.  Booth noted that if citizens want details, then they can obtain copies by request, as it is maintained in staff offices as public information.  Members questioned how this section related to C403C.  The consensus reached was that further clarification was required.

¨      C405B(1) – Booth sensed that this recommendation was connected to allowing a raise of line item.  If allowed to raise the budget at the Town Meeting, then lower the percentage of signatures.  Eaton favored the Council recommendation. Quinn-Clark concurred with Booth.  Krisch stated that the threshold should be low to encourage participation. However he was reluctant to accept this change as it would require such widespread dissatisfaction. The Commission felt the proposal is a reasonable compromise. 

¨      C405B(4) – Nesbitt indicated that this recommendation is more consistent to what the public wants.  Quinn-Clark felt that a high threshold was need as protection.  Booth was not sure if she disagreed with Council.  Krisch contended that a high number should be required for opposition to be taken seriously but would have liked to know the Council’s thought process behind recommendation to consider this further. 

¨      C405D – Booth thought that the Commission’s questions were simple and allowed for less confusion.  Members were unanimous in agreement.

¨      C402, 404 and 405 – Booth said that it is helpful to know when things are going to happen and pointed out Cindy’s extensive work and thoughts on this issue.  She would like to have Cindy’s comment.  Nesbitt noted that one thing is going to affect another so dates are important.  Quinn-Clark suggested issues should be target for further discussion at joint meeting with Council.  Krisch thought it was good to have dates to get things done. Otherwise a lack of a set date could hinder public participation.

¨      502B(4) – The unanimous agreement of members was to accept Council’s recommended revision to this section.

¨      C603 – It was noted by Booth that the title to C304 does not include conflict of interest but a review of the statute would be needed to verify if issue addressed within section.  Krisch inquired about the standard set by the ordinance.  Nesbitt felt that we would need to expand the section to include conflict of interest.  Booth shall obtain copy of ordinance for Commission review.  As ethical standards is a broad term, Quinn-Clark suggested to target issue for further consideration. 

¨      C701 – Eaton questioned the Council’s rationale for deletion of sub-committee; however since recommendation was not substantial and the change did not affect the intent it was the consensus of members to accept the Council recommendation. 

VII.             New Business

None.

VIII.           Future Agenda Items

·        Final Report

·        Format of report

·        Manner of vote – Members would like ability to teleconference so they may be able to participate in discussion and vote although unable to be physically present. 

IX.               Adjournment

Krisch MOVED and Eaton seconded to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 p.m.  All were in favor.  MOTION PASSED unanimously. 

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

Jennifer Thompson

Temporary Clerk