HomeMy WebLinkAboutTGSCminutes20060810Town Government Study Committee
Minutes, August 10, 2006
2 Fairgrounds Road
Call to Order. Chairman Reinhard called the thirtythird meeting of the Town Government
Study Committee to order at 4:05 pm. Present were members Reinhard, Gardner, Lohmann,
Sevrens, Topham, and Willauer, and guest Sherman.
Minutes. The minutes from July 31 were approved as submitted. Sherman noted that though
Mr. Groux was quoted correctly in the minutes, saying that the title of Town Manager is not
specifically mentioned in state law, there is a reference to Town Manager in the state
Constitution. Sherman believes this may be a category where the Charter cannot be
amended except by legislative act or a Charter Commission. Reinhard will follow up with a
query to the Attorney General.
Presentation to the Nonvoting Taxpayers Association. [NVTA] Reinhard will make a
presentation to the NVTA tomorrow, updating them on our activities and asking them for
their comments and input.
2006 Annual Report. Reinhard submitted a copy of the TGSC's report he has drafted for
submission to the Town Annual Report. It was approved by all the members.
Review of Meeting with Consultant. Groux raised the issue of timing for implementing
any proposed Charter changes: a proposal would have to be submitted to Town Meeting
[ATM] in April 2007, be approved by a 2/3 vote, then be put on a subsequent ballot vote
and approved by a majority. Reinhard had thought this could be accomplished by June 2007,
but that would not allow sufficient time to advertise the ballot question; it would likely not
be voted on until the following year. Sherman wondered if the Attorney General might
permit the proposals to be published early enough, and an election scheduled so that the vote
could follow soon after ATM. Gardner noted this would only work if the wording were not
changed at ATM. Reinhard will review this question as well with the Attorney General.
Gardner noted there were differences in the views of Groux and DeRensis regarding such
issues as the powers of the TM. Sherman suggested asking Groux his views on the relative
merits of appointing versus electing. Sevrens commented that DeRensis could provide
information on the legality of proposals. Reinhard noted it is the job of the TGSC to decide
what is best among various proposals and bring forward their recommendations.
Lohmann cited DeRensis' suggestion that the powers the Charter gives the County had
unused potential and suggested the committee explore this idea more with Mr. Groux.
Recommendations. Reinhard asked what questions were still not covered. Lohmann
distributed a revised draft list of recommendations [see attached]. Regarding the number of
signatures required to put an article on the annual town warrant, the TGSC had voted
to increase the number from 10 to 50. Willauer wanted to also decrease the number of
signatures needed for Special Town Meeting; Sevrens disagreed. Sherman observed that any
change would require state legislative approval. Groux is to be consulted on how best to
effect a change.
Regarding requiring a threeperson majority of the Board of Selectmen [BOS] to decide
policy, Willauer was concerned that the BOS decisionmaking could be hamstrung if
members were absent or recused themselves. Lohmann, Sevrens and Topham felt that it was
problematic for only two of five members to make major or controversial decisions. There
was some feeling that requiring a threeperson majority would reduce flexibility the Charter
granted the BOS to act and would address an only occasional problem. Topham felt BOS
members had an obligation to explain recusals, they should be only for substantive reasons;
a question for legal advice. Sherman observed that with a threeperson board, two
constitutes a majority, and with a strengthened TM only one person is making decisions.
Willauer noted that for signing bills, or removing a TM, three selectmen are necessary, and
the BOS had adopted a policy of requiring three on making appointments, and this seemed
to work. Several people felt that assuring a sufficient number of selectmen to act could be
done by adjusting the agenda or postponing action. There was support for requiring a three
person majority, if possible in the Charter, if not, by policy recommendation to the BOS.
Ask consultant for how best to accomplish this.
There followed a discussion of how to deal with nonattendance on boards and committees.
There is a mechanism in place for removing appointed members of committees who do not
attend, although it is somewhat cumbersome, and requires good recordkeeping and follow
up. There is a provision for recall of elected officials, but it is also cumbersome and long;
the easier remedy is the ballot box after a threeyear term. Some towns have yearly
elections. Publicizing a record of nonattendance was felt to be important. Candidates
should indicate a commitment not to be gone for half a year. The new BOS policies
requiring mission statements, minutes and attendance records for boards and committees
will help. Some committees may be "sunsetted" if their function ends. Committee chairs and
the TM's office should keep track.
Regarding appointment powers for the TM to boards and committees, the TGSC
proposed rationale and list, were generally approved by DeRensis and Groux, although each
committee was not reviewed individually. Sherman noted the following changes: the Non
voting Taxpayers Advisory Committee is, by a 2003 bylaw, to be appointed by the TM.
The Capital Programs Committee should be appointed by the BOS. [CPC stands for
Community Preservation Committee, and is also appointed by the BOS]. We will ask Groux
to comment on the individual boards. Our final report will give the rationale for all
proposals.
Groux had suggested that another way to strengthen the power of the TM would be the
power to approve bills and award contracts. Currently under the Charter the TM has the
power to negotiate contracts, subject to the approval of the BOS. The relative roles of the
TM and the BOS are clearer under the Charter and the TM has assumed more authority.
Authority to approve contracts and sign weekly bills would stress accountability and
thorough review by the TM.
Reinhard summed up that the TGSC is in agreement on all the items marked "AC" [Amend
Charter] on the 8/10 revised recommendation list.
Future Plans. For the next meeting Reinhard would like to complete the review of the
issues on the list to arrive at a "definitive" list of recommendations to forward to Groux,
although always subject to more information and input. Meanwhile, members would like
Groux to respond to the issues discussed today and last week's meeting. Reinhard hopes that
after consensus on refining the issues, we will have a package of recommendations ready for
an official vote in October.
Adjournment. At 5:45 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Pamela Lohmann