The warrant for the next special town meeting is suppose to be posted tomorrow.
It is suppose to have five articles on it with one being the borrowing/grant for the water dept. which may be a little shaky, It seems that basically, it was done by the law firm for the light dept. and apparently it did not go to town counsel or town bond counsel. Why that may be important is that one of the articles is to change or correct a previous town meeting article that is incorrectly worded with regards to borrowing. Seems like a past select board took the word of the district rather than running it by town bond counsel. Whatever the reason, the article has to be changed so the town can borrow the 500 thousand to pay for the design of the new school.
One other article is to pay a bill from the highway dept. from last year within the snow & ice budget. That should deserve a question and explanation at town meeting.
There are some money transfers (again) so it should be a little interesting.
Jeff Bennett
Monday, March 7, 2016
At this evenings selectmen meeting, the chair, John Columbus stated it was a matter of law to appoint the director of building and grounds of NRHS to the school building committee. So I look it up and this is what I find on the website of MSBA:
__________________, MSBA Project Coordinator Massachusetts School Building Authority 40 Broad Street, Fifth Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02109 Dear _____________________: In accordance with 963 CMR 2.00, attached for your review and approval is the membership of the School Building Committee for [insert here] School located in the Town of XXX/City of XXX/XXX Regional School District. The Committee was formed in accordance with the provisions of all applicable statutes, local charters, by-laws and agreements of the Town of XXX/City of XXX/XXX Regional School District. Committee Members include the following:
then look at MA 963CMR 2.00, I find this:
(3) School Building Committee. (a) The Eligible Applicant shall formulate a school building committee for the purpose of generally monitoring the Application process and to advise the Eligible Applicant during the construction of an Approved Project. (b) he school building committee shall be formed in accordance with the provisions of the Eligible Applicant’s local charter and/or by-laws and it is recommended that the city, town, regional school district, or independent agricultural and technical school make a reasonable effort to include one or more of the following individuals: the local chief executive officer of the Eligible Applicant, or, in the case of a town whose local chief executive officer is a multi-party body, said body may elect one of its members to serve on the school building committee; the town administrator, town manager, or city manager, where applicable; at least one member of the school committee, as required by M.G.L. c. 71, § 68; the superintendent of schools; the local official responsible for building maintenance; a representative of the office or body authorized by law to construct school buildings in that city, town or regional school district, or for that independent agricultural and technical school; the school principal from the subject school; a member who has knowledge of the educational mission and function of the facility; a local budget official or member of the local finance committee; members ofthe communitywith architecture, engineering and/or construction experience to provide advice relative to the effect of the Proposed Project on the community and to examine building design and construction in terms of its constructability. 963 CMR: MASSACHUSETTS SCHOOL BUILDING AUTHORITY
does not seem to be a requirement of the law at all, so why say it is. Perhaps the chair has just taken what has been told to him without actually checking it out, of course that requires time and effort. Perhaps the chair is a willing partner in this charade, I do not know. But I do know this, it would be better to not lie to residents, especially while being recorded.
Jeff Bennett
__________________, MSBA Project Coordinator Massachusetts School Building Authority 40 Broad Street, Fifth Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02109 Dear _____________________: In accordance with 963 CMR 2.00, attached for your review and approval is the membership of the School Building Committee for [insert here] School located in the Town of XXX/City of XXX/XXX Regional School District. The Committee was formed in accordance with the provisions of all applicable statutes, local charters, by-laws and agreements of the Town of XXX/City of XXX/XXX Regional School District. Committee Members include the following:
then look at MA 963CMR 2.00, I find this:
(3) School Building Committee. (a) The Eligible Applicant shall formulate a school building committee for the purpose of generally monitoring the Application process and to advise the Eligible Applicant during the construction of an Approved Project. (b) he school building committee shall be formed in accordance with the provisions of the Eligible Applicant’s local charter and/or by-laws and it is recommended that the city, town, regional school district, or independent agricultural and technical school make a reasonable effort to include one or more of the following individuals: the local chief executive officer of the Eligible Applicant, or, in the case of a town whose local chief executive officer is a multi-party body, said body may elect one of its members to serve on the school building committee; the town administrator, town manager, or city manager, where applicable; at least one member of the school committee, as required by M.G.L. c. 71, § 68; the superintendent of schools; the local official responsible for building maintenance; a representative of the office or body authorized by law to construct school buildings in that city, town or regional school district, or for that independent agricultural and technical school; the school principal from the subject school; a member who has knowledge of the educational mission and function of the facility; a local budget official or member of the local finance committee; members ofthe communitywith architecture, engineering and/or construction experience to provide advice relative to the effect of the Proposed Project on the community and to examine building design and construction in terms of its constructability. 963 CMR: MASSACHUSETTS SCHOOL BUILDING AUTHORITY
does not seem to be a requirement of the law at all, so why say it is. Perhaps the chair has just taken what has been told to him without actually checking it out, of course that requires time and effort. Perhaps the chair is a willing partner in this charade, I do not know. But I do know this, it would be better to not lie to residents, especially while being recorded.
Jeff Bennett
Sunday, March 6, 2016
Massachusetts General Law
Chapter 44
Section 64.
Any town or city having unpaid bills of previous fiscal years which may be legally unenforceable due to the insufficiency of an appropriation in the fiscal year in which such bills were incurred may, in the case of a town, at an annual meeting by a four fifths vote, or at a special meeting by a nine tenths vote, of the voters present and voting at a meeting duly called, and, in the case of a city which accepts this section, by a two thirds vote of the city council, appropriate money to pay such bills; but no bill or payroll shall be approved for payment or paid from an appropriation voted under authority of this section unless and until certificates have been signed and filed with the selectmen or the city auditor, as the case may be, as hereinafter provided, stating under the penalties of perjury that the goods, materials or services for which bills have been submitted were ordered by an official or employee of the town or city and that such goods and materials were delivered and actually received by the town or city or that such services were rendered to or for the town or city, as the case may be.
Every such certificate that goods, materials or services were so ordered shall be signed and filed by the official or employee of the town or city who ordered the same or, if he has ceased to be an official or employee of the town or city, by any official or employee of the town or city; every such certificate of delivery to the town or city of goods or materials shall be signed and filed by the vendor thereof or, if such vendor is a corporation, shall be signed and filed by the treasurer thereof; every such certificate that goods or materials were received by the town or city shall be signed and filed by an official or employee of the town or city; and every such certificate of services rendered to or for a town or city shall be signed and filed by the person who rendered such services.
This section shall not prohibit or prevent appropriations by a majority vote for bills or obligations of previous fiscal years due to any other town or to a district, a city, a county or the commonwealth, or for legally incurred debt and interest the payment of which is provided for by any general or special law.
This section shall apply to districts.
I wonder if this was done last time?
Jeff Bennett
The following is from the Open Meeting Law guide of March 2015 put forth by the office of Attorney General of Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
The Attorney General interprets the exemption for “quasi-judicial boards or commissions” to apply only to certain state “quasi-judicial” bodies and a very limited number of public bodies at other levels of government whose proceedings are specifically defined as “agencies” for purposes of G.L. c. 30A.
We have received several inquiries about the exception for Town Meeting and whether it applies to meetings outside of a Town Meeting session by Town Meeting members or Town Meeting committees or to deliberation by members of a public body – such as a board of selectmen – during a session of Town Meeting. The Attorney General interprets this exemption to mean that the Open Meeting Law does not reach any aspect of Town Meeting. Therefore, the Attorney General will not investigate complaints alleging violations in these situations. Note, however, that this is a matter of interpretation and future Attorneys General may choose to apply the law in such situations.
Hopefully, whoever shall act as moderator at Templeton Town meeting will have this clear in their head before the meeting begins.
Jeff Bennett
The Attorney General interprets the exemption for “quasi-judicial boards or commissions” to apply only to certain state “quasi-judicial” bodies and a very limited number of public bodies at other levels of government whose proceedings are specifically defined as “agencies” for purposes of G.L. c. 30A.
We have received several inquiries about the exception for Town Meeting and whether it applies to meetings outside of a Town Meeting session by Town Meeting members or Town Meeting committees or to deliberation by members of a public body – such as a board of selectmen – during a session of Town Meeting. The Attorney General interprets this exemption to mean that the Open Meeting Law does not reach any aspect of Town Meeting. Therefore, the Attorney General will not investigate complaints alleging violations in these situations. Note, however, that this is a matter of interpretation and future Attorneys General may choose to apply the law in such situations.
Hopefully, whoever shall act as moderator at Templeton Town meeting will have this clear in their head before the meeting begins.
Jeff Bennett
Is there a better or different way to use taxpayer money?
Under the title "new initiatives" concerning the next budget for Town meeting is one item for $13,837.00 for a seasonal worker for the Cemetery/Parks dept. This is a worker for the summer who will probably be laid off in the fall or at the end of the grass mowing season. Question is this; how do these seasonal workers affect the cost of the town's unemployment insurance costs, if at all?
Could this work be done by contacting the Worcester County sheriffs office and use inmates to do this work. Example; Templeton Cemetery/Parks dept. could use two or four inmates to mow grass within the Town and we will need these people until the end of the season on such n such a date. No additional cost to Templeton taxpayers, other than the cost already paid to house these inmates in jail.
Inmates have been used before to do work for Cemetery dept. and inmates were used to do work preparing the building in the eastern part of Templeton in preparing it to become Town hall, so why would this arrangement not work again. Why do department heads not ask to go this route first, before asking for more employees? My opinion is, that if things like that were done in the first place, taxpayers may be more willing to listen and provide, when you go to them for an override or debt exclusion. Just a thought.
Jeff Bennett
Under the title "new initiatives" concerning the next budget for Town meeting is one item for $13,837.00 for a seasonal worker for the Cemetery/Parks dept. This is a worker for the summer who will probably be laid off in the fall or at the end of the grass mowing season. Question is this; how do these seasonal workers affect the cost of the town's unemployment insurance costs, if at all?
Could this work be done by contacting the Worcester County sheriffs office and use inmates to do this work. Example; Templeton Cemetery/Parks dept. could use two or four inmates to mow grass within the Town and we will need these people until the end of the season on such n such a date. No additional cost to Templeton taxpayers, other than the cost already paid to house these inmates in jail.
Inmates have been used before to do work for Cemetery dept. and inmates were used to do work preparing the building in the eastern part of Templeton in preparing it to become Town hall, so why would this arrangement not work again. Why do department heads not ask to go this route first, before asking for more employees? My opinion is, that if things like that were done in the first place, taxpayers may be more willing to listen and provide, when you go to them for an override or debt exclusion. Just a thought.
Jeff Bennett
If an elected member of a town or city board has a conflict of interest with respect to a matter before the board
that involves his own financial interest or that of a partner, an immediate family member, a business organization
with which the board member has certain affiliations, or a person or organization with whom the board member
is negotiating or has any arrangement concerning future employment, that member will be disqualified from
participating as a board member in that matter. In some cases, especially when more than one member
is disqualified, a board cannot act because it does not have a quorum or some other number of members
required to take a valid affirmative vote. (If the number for a quorum is not set by law, a quorum is generally
a majority of the board members.) In these circumstances, the board may be able to use the rule of necessity
to permit the participation of the disqualified member(s) in order to allow the board to act. Individual elected
officials, such as the mayor of a municipality or a constitutional officer, also may be able to use the rule of
necessity in order to carry out legally-required actions that would otherwise be barred by the conflict of interest
law.
that involves his own financial interest or that of a partner, an immediate family member, a business organization
with which the board member has certain affiliations, or a person or organization with whom the board member
is negotiating or has any arrangement concerning future employment, that member will be disqualified from
participating as a board member in that matter. In some cases, especially when more than one member
is disqualified, a board cannot act because it does not have a quorum or some other number of members
required to take a valid affirmative vote. (If the number for a quorum is not set by law, a quorum is generally
a majority of the board members.) In these circumstances, the board may be able to use the rule of necessity
to permit the participation of the disqualified member(s) in order to allow the board to act. Individual elected
officials, such as the mayor of a municipality or a constitutional officer, also may be able to use the rule of
necessity in order to carry out legally-required actions that would otherwise be barred by the conflict of interest
law.
The rule of necessity is not a law written and passed by the Legislature. Rather, the rule of necessity was
developed by judges who applied it in their court decisions. The rule of necessity may only be used as a last
resort. The rule should be used only upon prior written advice from town or city counsel because improper
use of the rule could result in a violation of the conflict of interest law.
developed by judges who applied it in their court decisions. The rule of necessity may only be used as a last
resort. The rule should be used only upon prior written advice from town or city counsel because improper
use of the rule could result in a violation of the conflict of interest law.
Near the end of the last selectmen meeting in Templeton, there was a period of time when there were only two
members of the board sitting at the "table" Last time I looked, it is required to have a majority or a quorum to
have a meeting of a public body. I think John Columbus needs to read up on this. A question raised concerning
only 2 members at the table and how the meeting could continue or take place and the words from Mr. Columbus
was the rule of necessity. Which, as anyone can see, does not mean a meeting is able to go on without a
quorum, but rather a member (s) may take part, even with a potential conflict, because of the need or necessity
of those members being present so the board or committee may conduct their business, and in essence, the
business of the taxpayers/residents, whom they represent (or suppose to). Perhaps a small mistake, but one
that deserves clarification and attention by the select board so these small things do not continue to add up to
big cases. More and more, it looks as though Templeton was making real progress on change, only to be back
going in circles and being right back where we started. Making more transfers as if there is not enough money
to cover all expenses and costs of running the town or funds not being applied where needed.
More ignoring the rules, etc., etc.
members of the board sitting at the "table" Last time I looked, it is required to have a majority or a quorum to
have a meeting of a public body. I think John Columbus needs to read up on this. A question raised concerning
only 2 members at the table and how the meeting could continue or take place and the words from Mr. Columbus
was the rule of necessity. Which, as anyone can see, does not mean a meeting is able to go on without a
quorum, but rather a member (s) may take part, even with a potential conflict, because of the need or necessity
of those members being present so the board or committee may conduct their business, and in essence, the
business of the taxpayers/residents, whom they represent (or suppose to). Perhaps a small mistake, but one
that deserves clarification and attention by the select board so these small things do not continue to add up to
big cases. More and more, it looks as though Templeton was making real progress on change, only to be back
going in circles and being right back where we started. Making more transfers as if there is not enough money
to cover all expenses and costs of running the town or funds not being applied where needed.
More ignoring the rules, etc., etc.
Jeff Bennett
MS4 permits expected in coming weeks
- March 2, 2016
Following the September 2014 release of the draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general permit for MS4s in Massachusetts, the MMA expressed concerns about the cost that the new requirements would place on municipalities.
The federal Clean Water Act requires that the MS4 permit be re-evaluated every five years to ensure that it continues to protect the environment. The previous permit was issued in 2003.
The EPA says the new permits will help communities meet water quality standards and deal with the impacts of climate change. Draft permit requirements include illicit discharge detection and elimination, new requirements for signage and outfall testing and management of stormwater runoff.
The MMA has been participating in an NPDES Delegation Advisory Committee, formed by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, to explore the possibility of the DEP taking delegated authority over NPDES programs. Authorization would allow the DEP to be the stormwater permit-issuing authority, rather than the EPA.
The advisory committee has met three times so far and has discussed staffing needs, cost, funding and implementation.
Forty-seven states have obtained authorization from the EPA to administer the NPDES program. The DEP has reached out to other delegated states in New England to get more information about the advantages and disadvantages of delegation and the process moving forward.
The MMA’s Policy Committee on Energy and the Environment has not yet taken a position on the issue of NPDES delegation.
from the website of Massachusetts Municipal Association
Jeff Bennett
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)