TOWN OF TEMPLETON WARRANT FOR SPECIAL TOWN MEETING OCTOBER 23, 2001 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS.

Article 14 To see if the Town will vote to appropriate the sum of $1.5 Million for the purpose of paying costs constructing a new operations facility for the Municipal Light and Water Plant on land currently owned by the Municipal Light and Water Plant on Bridge Street in Baldwinville, and that to meet this appropriation, the Town Treasurer, with the approval of the Board of Selectman, is hereby authorized to borrow said amount under and pursuant to Chapter 44, Section 7 (3) of the General Laws, or any other enabling authority, and to issue bonds or notes of the Town therefore, and that although any bonds or notes issued pursuant to this vote shall constitute general obligation debt of the Town, any such bonds or notes shall be paid in the first instance from revenues generated through the operation of the Town’s Municipal Light and Water plant.

On a motion duly noted and seconded the Town voted to appropriate the sum of $1.5 Million for the purpose of paying costs constructing a new operations facility for the Municipal Light and Water Plant on land currently owned by the Municipal Light and Water Plant on Bridge Street in Baldwinville, and that to meet this appropriation, the Town Treasurer, with the approval of the Board of Selectman, is hereby authorized to borrow said amount under and pursuant to Chapter 44, Section 7 (3) of the General Laws, or any other enabling authority, and to issue bonds or notes of the Town therefore, and that although any bonds or notes issued pursuant to this vote shall constitute general obligation debt of the Town, any such bonds or notes shall be paid in the first instance from revenues generated through the operation of the Town’s Municipal Light and Water plant. Passed 2/3 Vote

Templeton Annual Town report of 2003, page 28, under Municipal Light & Water Plant;

"In May of 2002, the municipal light and water plant management advertised for bids to construct the 12,000 sq. ft. office/warehouse complex. On June 5, 2002, the bids were received, and the bid prices ranged from a low of $1,900,000.00 t a high of $2,420,448.00. Bids were reviewed by architect, Paul Lieneck, who recommended that the commissioners accept the low bid submitted by AMS construction company from Ipswich, MA. The commissioners voted to withdraw $400,000.00 from the MMWEC working capital fund to pay the increase above the $1,500,000.00 approved at town meeting. Construction began in August 2002 with an anticipated completion date of March 2003."  Nothing like doing things right and spending more than town meeting appropriation.

This is sent as background information so perhaps less confusion on who owns what. Light & Water dept. building.

 Massachusetts General Law, chapter 39, Section 13. Towns may prescribe by by-law the number of voters necessary to constitute a quorum at town meetings; provided, that a number less than a quorum may from time to time adjourn the same. This section shall not apply to such parts of meetings as are devoted exclusively to the election of town officers.

 Town meeting times, official guide book of Templeton Town Meeting, per town bylaws (vote of the people) page 17, chapter 2, speaks to quorums at town meeting. Voters or town meeting members, (if there is a representative town meeting structure) are one of four elements of a town meeting. The other three are a moderator, a clerk and a properly executed warrant with return of service. While town meeting may elect a temporary moderator and / or a temporary clerk if either is absent from the meeting, there is no substitute for the qualified voters. In Massachusetts, the by-laws of an open town meeting, usually  and the acts establishing representative meetings always, specify a minimum number of voters or members who must be present before the meeting can transact any business. In Rhode Island, the number is fixed by statute at seven in towns not over 3,000 in population and 15 in the rest. That number is called a quorum. Page 18 of town meeting times, Towns frequently change the number of voters necessary to constitute a quorum, and some towns have abolished quorum requirements completely. Advantages to abolishing a quorum, unable to conduct town meeting or being forced to adjourn (recess) for lack of a quorum, (you take time off from work to go to town meeting but not enough people so meeting is postponed and you missed work for nothing) another reason is so meetings can begin on time. Voters in towns with a quorum requirement often assume that, although the meeting is to start at 6:00 P.M., no quorum will be there until later so there is no reason to be on time. One concern with a zero quorum is that a small number of voters may convene and conduct business without a broad consensus. This is understandable, but it should be noted that anecdotal evidence offered at meetings of the Massachusetts Moderators association has more than once brought to light cases where attendance actually increased when quorum requirements were eliminated. However, no detailed study has been conducted. (if you want a quorum in Templeton, perhaps do some research on this subject and bring findings to town meeting) Note: page 19 of Town Meeting Times, Even where a quorum is not specified by statute or by-law, meetings have sometimes adjourned voluntarily "upon account of the thinness of the meeting."  You can read this in Town Meeting times if you have or can borrow a copy. I have asked the moderators association if Town Meeting Times could be put on town website electronically, answer was no, if it is "baked" into your by-laws, some parts can but since town meeting times is copyright, and is main fundraising source for moderators' association, they will not let it go electronically. I hope this brief item on quorums for town meetings clears up some confusion, if any, on the subject. Bottom line is if anyone feels Templeton Town Meeting should have a quorum, do a citizen petition and get it in front of town meeting for a vote. My question would be if one feels a quorum is needed because so few people now attend town meeting, would one also think it is fair for 50 or 100 people should make this very important call? Is this a catch 22 situation?

 Municipalities can raise tax revenue beyond annual statutory limits imposed by

Proposition 2½ M.G.L Ch. 59 Sec. 21C through a referendum to approve an override or an exclusion, or they can reduce the amount taxed through an underride. With one exception, legal authority to place a question on the ballot rests solely with the board of selectmen, city council or town council. Only an underride can also be placed before the voters through a local initiative petition process. Otherwise, overrides and underrides require a majority vote, while exclusions require a two-thirds vote of the local appropriating authority and, to take effect, all must receive a majority of votes in a city or town election. Under the Proposition 2½ statute, local appropriating authority is defined, in a town, as the board of selectmen.

from MA general law, chapter 59, section 21C:

''Shall the (city/town) of ___ be allowed to assess an additional $___ in real estate and personal property taxes for the purposes of (state the purpose(s) for which the monies from this assessment will be used) for the fiscal year beginning July first, nineteen hundred and ___?

So, the override is coming, the override is coming, okay, but for it to happen, it has to be approved by the voters. Selectmen do not just get to say we need an override and BAM, it goes into effect.

Lastly, amendments in 2003 to Ch. 40, Sec 5b allow a municipality to establish special purpose stabilization funds and to build balances in them through a type of override, which also has characteristics of a debt exclusion. Through initial approval, by two thirds vote, of town meeting (and the selectmen), a city council or a town council, a referendum can be placed before the voters asking whether to raise tax revenue, by majority vote, above Proposition 2½ limits for the purpose of the stabilization fund. In succeeding years, solely through an annual vote of the selectmen, city council or town council, the override can be continued, lowered or deferred entirely and resumed, or not, in a later year. Like an override, the additional tax can continue year-after-year without town-wide or city-wide referendum votes beyond the year of inception and, each year, the amount available to be raised increases by 2½ percent. However, like an exclusion under Proposition 2½, the levy limit increase need not be permanent. It can be discontinued in any year.

This approach would be one way to fund the infrastructure stabilization fund just created by town meeting vote. Not the only way, but one way.

 Excess levy capacity, Templeton now has it and on purpose. Each year, under prop 2 1/2, the town's levy can increase by 2 1/2% and many towns, including Templeton usually spend at or very close to levy limit. For fiscal year 2023, Templeton budget left almost 200 thousand dollars on the table, so to speak. What this means is Templeton has, in a way, set aside 200 thousand dollars that will be available next year, that could be added to the automatic 2 1/2% increase in the levy in case something comes up, money wise. That 200 thousand is a financial cushion and if the town could continue to have excess levy capacity over the years, those funds could be used rather than an override to have more funds available for any unforeseen need for increased funding for any number of things. Anyone can google or search online for what is excess levy capacity.  This was a smart move by the board of selectmen. You are welcome.

from statehouse news service.

State Agrees To $56 Mil Holyoke Home Settlement
The Baker administration has agreed to a $56 million deal to settle a class-action lawsuit related to the COVID-19 outbreak that took the lives of at least 76 veterans at the Holyoke Soldiers' Home in 2020, and will soon ask the Legislature to appropriate the money for the settlement. The terms of the settlement, which must still be approved by the federal district court for Massachusetts, would cover veterans who lived at the state-run Holyoke home at any point between March 1, 2020 and June 23, 2020 and who became ill or died from COVID during that period. Estates of deceased veterans would receive at least $400,000 and veterans who contracted COVID but did not die would receive at least $10,000, the governor's office said. "The COVID-19 outbreak at the Holyoke Soldiers' Home was a terrible tragedy. While we know nothing can bring back those who were lost, we hope that this settlement brings a sense of closure to the loved ones of the veterans," Baker said in a statement.

 Massachusetts has an item called the Open Meeting Law, which is covered under MA general law chapter 30A, §§ 18-25, and accompanying regulations, 940 Code of Mass. Regs. 29.00, provide the public with a right of access to the meetings of a large number of public bodies at the state and local level. It is important to have these laws / regulations, which results in a way for residents to ty and hold their elected and appointed representatives accountable. When residents use these laws and regulations, it is not a burden, unfair or costly means, it is part of our system of governance that we have in place. When I hear an elected or appointed official comment or complain about an open meeting law complaint being a burden to taxpayers or a reference to increased legal cost to taxpayers, as if a resident or person should not use the process put in place by other elected officials. All elected or appointed persons should remember that the people supply the money elected people spend, so in the end, when a person files an open meeting law complaint, they are also approving the spending of their money to bring forward and have discussion on said complaint.