February 2023 report from State House News Service.

Emergency transportation in a publicly-owned ambulance in Massachusetts costs about twice the national average, according to an upcoming report from the state's Health Policy Commission.

The report, which has not been publicly released yet, shows disparities in how much insurance payers are charged for ambulance services in Massachusetts between publicly- and privately-owned ambulance companies, and between commercial insurers and public insurance such as MassHealth.

Nationwide, commercially insured patients pay an average $761 for an ambulance trip from a municipally owned emergency medical services company, compared to a $1,578 charge in Massachusetts, researcher Diana S. Váscones told the HPC's Market Oversight and Transparency Committee at a meeting on Wednesday.

Of the 1.5 million EMS patient transports in Massachusetts in 2019, commercial insurance payers paid municipal ambulance services roughly double what they paid private ambulances per transport. Most payments for middle-tier services were between $500 and $1,000 for private ambulances and between $750 and $2,500 for municipal transports.

Publicly owned ambulance services are commonly tied to fire departments, although there are some cities that have standalone EMS departments, such as Boston and Fall River. In 2019, there was about a one-to-one chance of being picked up by a private versus public ambulance.

Even as emergency trips have gotten more expensive for everyone over the last six years, payments over $2,000 for municipal ambulances have doubled from 17% in 2017 to 34% in 2020 for similar care.

When asked why emergency trips were so much more expensive in publicly owned vehicles, Váscones said "we don't have the clearest picture of that."

"We do think that it may be related to differences in payer contracting with private versus municipal services. It may be that payers are less likely to contract with municipal services," she said.

She added it is something the commission plans to look into further.

ADVERTISEMENT

 Templeton town bylaw, put forward to town meeting by select board, recommended by advisory committee and voted on by town meeting. Why not just follow the rule?

§ 9-6

Meetings.

The Advisory Committee shall meet jointly with the Select Board whenever there is a request to consider adjusting spending limits on any revolving fund, any end of year financial transfer or any request of transfer from the Town reserve fund.

stated at a meeting of selectmen on June 28, 2023;"this is a waste of time" regarding the bylaw on joint meeting for reserve fund transfer.

If that is the thought, why recommend for the bylaw in the first place? Keep the bylaw, replace some people who violated the bylaw multiple times (documented by public records)

 State Law: Section 2: Locating and marking of town boundary markers; recordation; copy of records to contiguous town

Section 2. The boundary markers of every town shall be located, the marks thereon renewed, and the year located marked upon the face thereof which bears the letter of the town locating its boundary, once every five years, by at least two of the selectmen of the town or by two substitutes designated by them in writing. The marking shall be made with a paint or other suitable marking material.

The proceedings shall be recorded with the town clerk and the board of selectmen of the town in writing signed under penalty of perjury setting forth which boundary marks were located, and those which were not located. A copy of such records shall also be sent, by registered letter, to the town clerk and the board of selectmen of any contiguous town. (Massachusetts General Law chapter 42)

From: jeff bennett <j_bennett506@hotmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 7:51 AM

To: Adam D. Lamontagne <alamontagne@TempletonMA.gov>

Subject: public record

Good day, I am sending this request for public information to the person listed as the Templeton records access officer per MA public records law. I am requesting a copy (electronically preferred) of the required information on file with town clerk, signed letter by involved parties, be it select board members or their substitutes, concerning the finding and marking of the Templeton, MA town boundary markers. To be clear, this is a request for a copy of boundary markers on file with town clerk, rather than the letter on file in the office of selectmen.

Jeffrey Bennett

We have not yet located the documents you are requesting at this time. Should they turn up in the future, we will forward you a copy.

Adam D. Lamontagne, MPA, MCPPO

Town Administrator

Templeton's house is still not in order. One person can read many things, look into many items, spend countless hours looking at town business/government and still not cover or see/find it all. Perhaps no further tv shows and take that time to review things and practices so we as a town become proactive rather than always reactive.

 Oh look, a selectman complaining a business used their rights to file a egal appeal with a state agency (alcoholic beverage control commission) to move a one-day suspension penalty to a different day so a planned paid for already event could take place on said day. First, news flash for government (selectmen) people go into business to make money, not break even or to lose money (they leave that to government) so any day a business is forced to close and thus loses out on taking in money, as in their livelihood is punished, is a penalty and they feel pain. Second, welcome to reality, state and town are not partners like the governor and state legislature likes to say, the state is the dictator and towns are their subjects, welcome to reality.

If selectmen wish to suggest that local business do better so they are safer, etc., perhaps selectmen should take that advice and do better, become a better board and make Templeton a better town. Hey selectmen, start following state law and town bylaws and perhaps you will become a better board.

 Main Street bridge is still open, the roadway is still in use, so why is a debt exclusion needed at this point in time. First, ARPA funds were going to pay for it, then the state was going to pay for it. Yes, it is a town bridge and yes it needs to be replaced, but since it is still in use, it could be placed on TIP list and in about 5-6 years, it would be replaced without a debt exclusion on the backs of town residents, I mean the people on Royalston Road have waited 10 plus years on TIP list. Templeton has 2 roadways that are closed, Stone Bridge and part of N. Main Street/Lord Road. Sometimes called gilligans island and since these roadways are closed and everyone uses the roads, from residents to police, fire, ambulance, school buses, it would seem to this resident that the more pressing items would be the roads that are closed rather than one that is still useable. Important to note, the called for debt exclusion question is a two-part affair. First there is a contingent town meeting question where town meeting is asked to approve borrowing of a certain amount of dollars (I would never vote to approve anything without a known/stated dollar figure and then the question has to go to the election ballot, and both have to pass for it to move forward. Right now, the town has too much debt and remember, the selectmen voted to put less money into town stabilization funds, which can affect the town bond rating which has effect on borrowing costs. Vote no on debt exclusion!

The deadline for obtaining voter approval of override or exclusion questions for contingent appropriations made at an annual town meeting is September 15. More than one election may be held, but the contingent appropriation is null and void if the related question is not approved by September 15.

• The deadline for obtaining voter approval of override or exclusion questions for contingent appropriations made at any other town meeting is 90 days after the close of the town meeting at which the contingent appropriation vote was taken. More than one election may be held, but the contingent appropriation is null and void if the related question is not approved by the end of the 90 day period.

 Sometimes "history" relates to current events. One current event, shows, in my opinion, that the current Templeton town administrator does not quite understand his role concerning policy, specifically select board policy. This history item, in my opinion, shows the lack of understanding local governance, particularly town bylaws, might not be limited to the TA.

following is from email sent to me. It is a bit telling on understanding governance in Templeton.

Mr. May,

I am responding to your request for action pursuant to our town bylaws Chapter 9 Section 6 and Chapter 1 Section 4 and 5. Below is my due diligence within 21 days of the observed and alleged notice of violation; I performed an informal inquiry with published information to determine if the allegations warranted action. I have made determinations and formed an appeal process below along with all of the law and references I have used:

Mr. Robert May, a registered voter of the Town of Templeton, did observe a alleged violation of Templeton Bylaw Chapter 9 Section 6, by which the Advisory Committee (AC) as a whole held a reserve fund transfer action in their regular meeting on 20 September 2023 as "action item 'F'" that violated said bylaw by not holding a joint meeting with the Select Board (SB)as the bylaw calls for. Mr. May's complaint was received 31 October 2023 by the Town Administrator and forwarded for action to the Chair of the SB on 1 November 2023.

AC Chair John Caplis had a chance encounter and conversation with Recreation Commission (RC) Chair Candace Graves at the Gilman Wait fields. The conversation was about a possible reserve request from the RC for the purposes of a sink installation. Caplis said he would add that subject into their next meeting and invited Graves to attend to discuss.

AC Chair Caplis, thru the TA's office, posted a meeting on 28 August with the reserve request scheduled for action as item 'f.'. No reserve request was included in the meeting packet. Between this time and 12 September, Caplis performed the necessary research to determine the path forward for this verbal request.

The SB Chair and AC Chair spoke via phone on the morning of 12 September about several items, one being Item F reserve request and that Caplis intended to still discuss the item, but it was not a reserve request as the Recreation Commission had sufficient funds for an internal transfer.

The AC properly scheduled and held their meeting on September 20th at town hall. During the meeting, it was clear that the discussion was as the AC Chair indicated that the request itself was 'cancelled' by voting on the agenda action item as a unanimous 'no' vote.

In my review of the facts, there was no intent of the AC to have a vote or action in violation of Templeton Bylaw Ch9Sec6. The AC continued the agenda item vote in order to deny the verbal request of the RC Chair and was understood by the rest of the AC (M. Euvrard @37:47). It was also clear to me that the AC Chair understood more than what the rest of the AC did and referenced 'an alternative plan' that would mitigate any necessity for a true reserve request. The meeting minutes did not accurately capture what the motion was, which was to deny the request, not the sink. The minutes should be amended to reflect that fact.

If I believed that the AC was voting on disapproving an official request that procedure calls for a joint meeting, then Mr. May's assessment of a violation of Ch9Sec6 would trigger a general and/or noncriminal violation and pursuant penalty under Ch1Sec4 "General Penalty".

My duties as an 'enforcing person' as notified by a person of cognizance (a resident, B. May) would be to investigate the cognizance of the violation and then act to inform the SB that a violation had been filed and founded and what our duties would be with respect to our bylaw and MGL Ch40Sec21D. I have found no substantiating evidence to support a claim of violation of bylaw Ch9Sec6.

If you disagree with my informal inquiry and findings, I would say that your appeal process for this decision would be for me to place this on a SB meeting agenda, by your request, to allow for discussion and possible action. You have somewhat confused the process by including many town and state-level entities in your correspondence with the TA on his assessments, so I am unsure if any other actions are happing simultaneously. Please consider your decision to appeal carefully or reach out to me for any further clarification.

Thank you,

-Mike Currie

Chair, Select Board

Town of Templeton

Material used to investigate:

Templeton Advisory Committee Meeting of Sept. 20, 2023

Fact: advisory committee agenda for September 20, 2023 shows an item reserved request - f. Action RE: Reserve Request Parks and Rec commission. Since this was listed as an action item I believe the average person would take that as a thing the committee would take up, discuss and vote on. The committee did vote on it, a unanimous no vote recorded in official minutes of the meeting.

 What does the town bylaw state (voted on and put in place by town meeting) 

§ 9-6 Meetings.

The Advisory Committee shall meet jointly with the Select Board whenever there is a request to consider adjusting spending limits on any revolving fund, any end of year financial transfer or any request of transfer from the Town reserve fund. There you have it folks, bylaw simply states if there is a reserve fund transfer request, there shall be a joint meeting of advisory and select board to discuss the issue, no excuses from the chairman of the select board! Anyone can read the minutes of the 9/20/2023 advisory committee by going to mytowngovernment.org, click Templeton, then advisory then look for past meetings and find the minutes and agenda for said meeting. If the Tempeton TA does not like this and thinks I am posting information to divide the town, perhaps he should point out town bylaws to select board and try and unite them into following said town bylaws, put into place by town meeting, you know, the people ho vote on TA salary within the select board budget, among other things. If posting this type of information is not beneficial to town residents, then perhaps the TA can explain what would be beneficial to the town!

 Templeton town administrator might have a problem with being questioned on his actions. After pointing something out, I received this in email.

Jeff,

It is in the Select Board read file. I have to say, I believe the Town of Templeton would be better served if you refrained from attempting to cause division and put all of that time into something productive and positive for the Town.

Adam D. Lamontagne, MPA, MCPPO

Town Administrator

Below is link to agreement for Templeton Town Administrator.

https://www.templetonma.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif3911/f/uploads/final_lamontagne_emp_agreement_fully_negotiated_30oct23_-_signed.pdf 

 

from Templeton Town website - financial  management policy.

Policy: The Town shall have an independent outside audit performed by a certified audit firm each year. The Town shall endeavor to have the audit completed prior to January 1 of each year. The Board shall provide for such an audit by an accountant or a firm of accountants, who have no personal interests, direct or indirect, in the fiscal affairs of the Town government or of any of its officers or employees. The Board shall require a public presentation of the audit and management letter once it is finalized.

It is February 2, 2024, where is the audit????

Endeavor - try hard to do or achieve something, evidently, TA and selectmen do not try too hard.