HomeMy WebLinkAbout_04092018-6086Town Government Study Committee
Minutes of the meeting of April 9, 2018. The meeting took place in the Public Safety Facility Training
Room, 4 Fairgrounds Road, Nantucket, MA 02554. Members of the committee present were: Rick
Atherton, John Brescher, Penny Dey, Kristie Flaherty and Linda Williams. Absent: Tucker Holland.
Also Present: Clifford Williams and Curtis Barnes.
1. Chair John Brescher called the meeting to order at 1:33 with a quorum.
2.Agenda: Linda Williams moved approval of the agenda, seconded by Rick Atherton. All voted in
favor.
3.Minutes: No minutes for approval from the last meeting at this time.
4.Public Comment: None.
5.Discussion re: Article 62 from Annual Town Meeting: By a vote of Town Meeting the article was
referred to the TGSC for review. Mr. Williams was present with some input and questions for
the TGSC. The process of the article coming to ATM, in the opinion of Mr. Williams, was not
handled in a smooth manner. He has other examples of what he feels are dysfunction within
the Town. Mr. Williams’ concern is this: where does the average citizen go for recourse when
they do not get any response from the Town? There is currently no process in place for
unbiased arbitration or mediation which could help result in solutions without litigation. Mr.
Williams believes that there are cases where incidents are occurring that are illegal and/or not
in the best interest of the Town which are subsequently ignored by Town officials. He also
asked whether or not a Town Charter change requires only a 2/3 vote. We will find the definitive
answer to his question and inform him. Penny recommended that we have the sponsor of
Article 62 come to a future meeting once the Town officially remands the article to us.
6.At 1:55 PM Lauren Goldberg, counsel from KP Law (Town Counsel’s office), joined the meeting
by phone. Lauren has worked with many different complements of Town Government Study
Committees, some formal and some informal. The manner of appointment usually dictates what
the charge of the committee is. The TGSC should identify what the “problems” are, if any, and
what things we can do better. “It is not about the people”. She recommends that we look to
get feedback and information from the elected officials, Town administration and some
appointed committees (zoning, planning, Conservation Commission, building and BOH) about
what works and what doesn’t work. The second step might be to do a survey, if there are
questions on which we wish more input, to involve a broader constituency of the community.
One option is to do an on-line survey in order to reach as many people as possible. Rick asked if
Lauren knows what other Massachusetts Town(s) might be going through this process now. The
Town of Webster just finished going through the process. North Attleboro, Dedham, Westwood
and Groton are a few others that have recently finished with the process. Lauren mentioned
that changing elected positions to appointed can be an uphill battle, which we recognize. Her
advice: In our discussions do not use people’s names but rather the structure (office) of the
organization that is being discussed.
Rick brought up an example for discussion from our existing charter. He pointed out that there
are things in the charter that may no longer be relevant. For instance, when there are
administrative changes that impact the charter, the charter needs to be updated to reflect those
changes. The charter sets the framework for all of government but a good charter will not
address every possible permutation. According to Lauren, things exist in state law that, if not
addressed in the charter, state law applies. There is nothing that requires a charter to be
updated over time although they typically are by a group that has been tasked with periodic
review. A charter is a living thing that will change over time in order to best accomplish the
goals of the town. Some discussion followed about how to handle reorganization or
consolidation of departments at the Town Manager level. Every change that gets made has
implications, sometimes unintended. Rick raised another question about the Audit Committee
which currently consists of elected officials (Finance and BOS chairs) and there was some
discussion about having the Audit Committee be expanded to include, perhaps, a few more
members, possibly a non-resident taxpayer. Another possibility is to have an outside Audit
Committee that could bring some external expertise to the process. Many municipalities do this
now according to Lauren.
Got some input from Lauren re: Article 62. She has not yet seen anything like this in any other
Massachusetts municipalities. It is important to give thought to what issues an article creates
and any unintended consequences that may result. Something can be good in theory and pose
different challenges in reality. Government needs to be able to govern and if we don’t like it we
can vote people out. There is a reason for the separation of powers between legislative and
executive (whose job it is to carry out the day to day functions of government) branches. We
need to be careful about overly specific charter provisions which can be nearly impossible to
adhere to and can undermine the action entirely. We need to focus on the practical application.
Lauren agreed to take a look at our charter with an eye to making sure that it is consistent with
any recent changes in state law. The committee agreed that this was a good idea.
Lauren: One of the main benefits of operating under a charter form of government is the
coordination of resource management, including personnel. This is something to keep in mind.
There was a brief discussion about those departments that are operating under funding from
enterprise funds. There is not an assumption of independent operation because a department
is structured as an enterprise fund (enterprise funds are an accounting mechanism only). Nor is
there the assumption that the department operates under different rules than the rest of the
town departments. It does not.
7.Other Business: Penny asked if we have the calendar established for the balance of this FY.
John said not yet.
8.The date and time of the next meeting is: Monday, April 30, 2018 at 1:30 PM, same location.
9.A motion was made by Penny D. to adjourn, seconded by Kristie F. All voted in favor.
The meeting was adjourned at 2:42 P.M.