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!
