Open meeting law complaint response from selectmen to Jeff Bennett and Attorney General.
Response of the board: The Board of Selectmen did have a discussion on the use of the rule of necessity at two of their meetings, including April 11, 2016 meeting. The Board did discuss the budget and specific items in the budget. Two members of the board left the table during most of the discussion as they have immediate family members that work for the Town. This is a five member board, however, one of the members has not been attending meetings since August of 2015. The Board of Selectmen did not vote on any budget items that were discussed at the meetings during which time Mr. Bennett claims the Rule of Necessity was invoked. Due to the fact that the Board did not vote, the Board maintains that the rule of necessity was not involved.
The members of the Board of selectmen were not quite clear as to the circumstances under which the rule of necessity could be invoked, however, they are planning to obtain information or training regarding the proper use of the rule of necessity. As the Board feels that the rule of necessity was not invoked, they feel there is not a need for an apology to residents or to publicly admit any error that Mr. Bennett perceives was made.
The Board of Selectmen respectfully requests that you dismiss the complaint of Mr. Bennett and further find that the Board of Selectmen acted in accordance with the Open meeting Law regulations per M.G.L. c.30A, section 20 (a).
Respectfully submitted,
Holly Young, for the Board of Selectmen
April 25, 2016.
posted by Jeff Bennett
Saturday, April 30, 2016
Question: Did the Templeton Town Treasurer submit a Treasurer's report to the selectmen for inclusion in the Annual Town Report? If answer is yes, why was it not included? Who made that call? was it a vote of the select board? If elected, those are my first questions to be asked of the chairman John Columbus.
Jeff Bennett
Jeff Bennett
Friday, April 29, 2016
Many missteps owned by the current board of selectmen.
I believe all select boards have probably made a few errors, down right bad choices or acted in a disrespectful way, or at least one or two members have. that being said, I am referencing the Templeton Board of selectmen serving Now:
2015, the BOS voted to have a special town meeting to do end of the year transfers, the date chosen was July 27, 2015. Problem; Selectmen then check with DOR and are told if you do this on July 27, you be in violation of state law.
November 9, 2015: special town meeting transfer from fire/EMS expense to pay for snow & Ice deficit. Said there was a double appropriation and there was enough money in there to cover it.
March 2016, special town meeting, transfer money back into the fire/ems expense account because it is now short. The financial team has it in control, but do the selectmen?
Chairman John Columbus said it was the law that the building & Grounds director for NRHS be appointed to the school building committee. 963 Code of Mass regulations 2.0 says different. It says it is recommended and suggested but not required. Only one member of the school committee is required by law to be on the committee, MGLc71 section 68.
Chairman John Columbus stated just before a vote concerning the purchase of the excavator, "if you vote against the excavator, you are voting against road projects" Really, that sounds like two different issues, an equipment purchase and use of chapter 90 money.
This board, all members, need to read their own policies and procedures, the open meeting law and take conflict of interest training, they have demonstrated on video that their understanding of it is limited.
Jeff Bennett
I believe all select boards have probably made a few errors, down right bad choices or acted in a disrespectful way, or at least one or two members have. that being said, I am referencing the Templeton Board of selectmen serving Now:
2015, the BOS voted to have a special town meeting to do end of the year transfers, the date chosen was July 27, 2015. Problem; Selectmen then check with DOR and are told if you do this on July 27, you be in violation of state law.
November 9, 2015: special town meeting transfer from fire/EMS expense to pay for snow & Ice deficit. Said there was a double appropriation and there was enough money in there to cover it.
March 2016, special town meeting, transfer money back into the fire/ems expense account because it is now short. The financial team has it in control, but do the selectmen?
Chairman John Columbus said it was the law that the building & Grounds director for NRHS be appointed to the school building committee. 963 Code of Mass regulations 2.0 says different. It says it is recommended and suggested but not required. Only one member of the school committee is required by law to be on the committee, MGLc71 section 68.
Chairman John Columbus stated just before a vote concerning the purchase of the excavator, "if you vote against the excavator, you are voting against road projects" Really, that sounds like two different issues, an equipment purchase and use of chapter 90 money.
This board, all members, need to read their own policies and procedures, the open meeting law and take conflict of interest training, they have demonstrated on video that their understanding of it is limited.
Jeff Bennett
Cadillac tax strategies from MIIA - Templeton's Health Insurance provider
The two-year delay of the tax may provide a sense of relief, but in actuality it is more important than ever to act now to mitigate the damaging impact that the tax will cause. Strategies that municipal leaders may consider include the following:
• Reduce the richness of plans by increasing out-of-pocket payments such as copays and deductibles and/or implementing co-insurance features
• Limit or eliminate FSA, HSA and/or HRA programs that count toward aggregate cost
• Eliminate high-cost plans
• Adopt lower-cost limited network plans
For Massachusetts municipal employers, any significant steps for reducing aggregate cost typically cannot be taken without collective bargaining – with the exception being changes that can be made pursuant to Chapter 32B, sections 21 and 22, of the General Laws. Under these two sections, municipal employers may include – as part of their health plans – co-payments, deductibles, tiered provider network copayments, and other cost-sharing plan design features that are no greater in dollar amount than those features offered in the Group Insurance Commission’s most popular plan.
Because the GIC’s plan design features have changed in the past two years, the procedure established in state law may prove beneficial even for employers that have used it previously. And if the GIC must make further plan design changes to reduce exposure to the excise tax, municipal employers will be able to replicate those changes pursuant to the procedure laid out in sections 21 and 22.
Jeff Bennett
page 10 of the letter from the auditors:
Time limitation The nature of our services makes it difficult, with the passage of time, to gather and present evidence that fully and fairly establishes the facts underlying any Dispute that may arise between us. The parties agree that, notwithstanding any statute or law of limitations that might otherwise apply to a Dispute, including one arising out of this agreement or the services performed under this agreement, for breach of contract or fiduciary duty, tort, fraud, misrepresentation or any other cause of action or remedy, any action or legal proceeding by you against us must be commenced within twenty-four (24) months (“Limitation Period”) after the date when we deliver our final audit report under this agreement to you, regardless of whether we do other services for you relating to the audit report, or you shall be forever barred from commencing a lawsuit or obtaining any legal or equitable relief or recovery. The Limitation Period applies and begins to run even if you have not suffered any damage or loss, or have not become aware of the existence or possible existence of a Dispute. Fees Assuming the audit includes the audit of one (1) major federal grant, our fee for these services will be $28,500 for fiscal year 2013. If an additional grant(s) is required to be audited under the requirements of OMB Circular A-133, we will issue a change order for $5,500 (per grant) to audit the applicable program(s). Our fee above includes all out-of-pocket costs, such as report reproduction, typing, postage, travel, copies, telephone, etc. If unexpected circumstances require significant additional time, we will advise you before undertaking work that would require a substantial increase in the fee estimate. Our invoices for these fees will be rendered each month as work progresses and are payable on presentation. In accordance with our firm policies, work may be suspended if your account becomes 30 days or more overdue and will not be resumed until your account is paid in full. If we elect to terminate our services for nonpayment, our engagement will be deemed to have been completed even if we have not issued our reports. You will be obligated to compensate us for all time expended and to reimburse us for all out-of-pocket expenditures through the date of termination. Unanticipated services Additional work resulting from unanticipated changes in your organization or accounting records If your organization undergoes significant changes in key personnel, accounting systems, and/or internal control, we are required to update our audit documentation and audit plan. The following are examples of situations that will require additional audit work: Revising documentation of your internal control for changes resulting from your implementation of new information systems Deterioration in the quality of the entity’s accounting records during the current-year engagement in comparison to the prior-year engagement Significant new accounting issues
posted by Jeff Bennett
Time limitation The nature of our services makes it difficult, with the passage of time, to gather and present evidence that fully and fairly establishes the facts underlying any Dispute that may arise between us. The parties agree that, notwithstanding any statute or law of limitations that might otherwise apply to a Dispute, including one arising out of this agreement or the services performed under this agreement, for breach of contract or fiduciary duty, tort, fraud, misrepresentation or any other cause of action or remedy, any action or legal proceeding by you against us must be commenced within twenty-four (24) months (“Limitation Period”) after the date when we deliver our final audit report under this agreement to you, regardless of whether we do other services for you relating to the audit report, or you shall be forever barred from commencing a lawsuit or obtaining any legal or equitable relief or recovery. The Limitation Period applies and begins to run even if you have not suffered any damage or loss, or have not become aware of the existence or possible existence of a Dispute. Fees Assuming the audit includes the audit of one (1) major federal grant, our fee for these services will be $28,500 for fiscal year 2013. If an additional grant(s) is required to be audited under the requirements of OMB Circular A-133, we will issue a change order for $5,500 (per grant) to audit the applicable program(s). Our fee above includes all out-of-pocket costs, such as report reproduction, typing, postage, travel, copies, telephone, etc. If unexpected circumstances require significant additional time, we will advise you before undertaking work that would require a substantial increase in the fee estimate. Our invoices for these fees will be rendered each month as work progresses and are payable on presentation. In accordance with our firm policies, work may be suspended if your account becomes 30 days or more overdue and will not be resumed until your account is paid in full. If we elect to terminate our services for nonpayment, our engagement will be deemed to have been completed even if we have not issued our reports. You will be obligated to compensate us for all time expended and to reimburse us for all out-of-pocket expenditures through the date of termination. Unanticipated services Additional work resulting from unanticipated changes in your organization or accounting records If your organization undergoes significant changes in key personnel, accounting systems, and/or internal control, we are required to update our audit documentation and audit plan. The following are examples of situations that will require additional audit work: Revising documentation of your internal control for changes resulting from your implementation of new information systems Deterioration in the quality of the entity’s accounting records during the current-year engagement in comparison to the prior-year engagement Significant new accounting issues
posted by Jeff Bennett
All -
I received a call from Matt Hunt of CliftonLarsonAllen, our auditing firm, regarding a Single Audit for Fiscal 2013. In the spring of 2014, they gave me a quote for conducting audits for Fiscal 2014 and 2015. Later, we added Fiscal 2013 to the list following a recommendation from bond counsel and the DOR. Neither they nor I knew that the Town had expended CDBG monies exceeding $500,000 in FY'13.
We are required to do a Single Audit for FY'13, and this has added to the cost. I recommend that we pay the additional cost from the $27,000 in surplus funds that is scheduled for transfer into the BoS expenses budget in the FY'16 Financial Transfer article.
Bob
Robert T. Markel
Interim Town Administrator
Town of Templeton
160 Patriots Road
East Templeton, MA 01438
(978)894-2753
Robert T. Markel
Interim Town Administrator
Town of Templeton
160 Patriots Road
East Templeton, MA 01438
(978)894-2753
from the Massachusetts Municipal Association website, this appeared in "The Beacon" that Templeton selectmen receive, I hope they read it.
From The Beacon, November 2015
Buried deep inside the federal Affordable Care Act is an onerous and controversial new tax that is finally beginning to attract public scrutiny and attention: the Cadillac Tax, a massive 40 percent levy on “high-value” health insurance plans.
Because the federal government has developed a rigid one-size-fits-all mandate, and is intent on placing this burden on public employers – cities, towns and states – the law could become one of the costliest unfunded federal mandates in history.
This provision was sold under the false premise that high-cost plans were rare and overly generous or luxurious (thus the term “Cadillac”), but the law actually sets a threshold that is too low and will harm employees and employers in regions of the nation where health costs are naturally higher. New England (and Massachusetts in particular) is one of those regions.
Here’s a brief summary: beginning on Jan. 1, 2018, the ACA will establish a cap on the allowable cost of family and individual health plans that public and private employers can offer to their employees and retirees without triggering a massive tax penalty. The federal government will impose a 40 percent excise tax on employers for the amount that their health insurance plans exceed $27,500 for families and $10,200 for individual coverage. Over time, the tax burden will become heavier and heavier because the threshold will only be adjusted by about 2 percent per year, but health costs are projected to increase at a far higher rate.
As an illustration, if a city or town has a family plan that costs $29,500 a year in 2018 (the total premium including employee and employer contributions), with 200 workers enrolled, the federal government will levy a $160,000 tax bill on the community. The calculation is simple: 200 health plans would be $2,000 over the threshold, for a total overage of $400,000. Forty percent of $400,000 is $160,000.
In five years, that same municipality could be hit with a $380,000 annual tax, using conservative estimates of only a 5 percent annual increase in the cost of health care and prescription drugs. But if health costs rise at a higher rate, say 10 percent, then the federal tax would hit $1 million in the fifth year. Regardless of the scenario, the math is clear: the Cadillac Tax is unaffordable.
Because the Obama administration and many members of Congress were fearful of directly regulating the cost of health care in the U.S. – hospitals, physicians, medical supply companies, and drug manufacturers are exceedingly powerful and influential on Capitol Hill and in virtually every statehouse, and they have blocked every effective idea to regulate what the industry can charge – the ACA’s authors decided that the politically safe way to address skyrocketing costs would be to hand the hot potato to someone else. Their idea was to impose a tax penalty on employers that would be so severe and unaffordable that it would force employers and insurers to clamor for cost controls and reform – even though employers and insurers lack the authority to regulate or force this reform.
In short, the ACA’s sponsors decided to create a crisis instead of addressing the cost control issue in a straightforward manner. This may have been a politically safer strategy for Beltway operatives, but the result will be very harmful to local taxpayers, employees, retirees, and municipal services.
From the MMA’s perspective, this approach is irresponsible and ignores the world in which Massachusetts cities and towns operate. Because the ACA has a “one-size-misfits-all” dollar threshold, the law will have uneven impacts on different regions of the country. Health plans are more expensive in Massachusetts than elsewhere in the nation because the region’s world-class hospitals charge much higher rates, especially in the Greater Boston area. In our state, this means that the cost of even modest health insurance coverage already comes close to or exceeds the threshold for many, many employers, including a number of cities and towns. Thus, the Cadillac Tax will hit Massachusetts employers, including local governments, harder than those in other regions.
Right now, municipal leaders work closely with their employee unions to manage health insurance costs, through collective bargaining and by using the tools provided in the landmark municipal health insurance reform law passed in 2011, which allows cities and towns to adjust their plans to match the copays and deductibles that are set for state employees. But those tools will be insufficient to avoid the Cadillac Tax.
Unless hospitals and drug companies announce that they will be reducing their prices and reforming their costs (this is known as magical thinking), the ACA will force the following options in our communities: a massive shift to high-deductible, low-coverage plans; deep cuts in municipal and school services to pay the new federal tax; widespread layoffs of public workers to balance budgets; large increases in the regressive property tax; or a combination of all of the above.
The MMA has joined with the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the AFL-CIO, and major corporations across the nation in calling for the repeal of the Cadillac Tax. This broad coalition of public and private employers and employees is united in common cause because we know the Cadillac Tax is unfair and would inflict real harm on workers, retirees, taxpayers and businesses across the country.
True cost control is needed, but it will not come through misguided and punishing tariffs on employers and employees. Congress and the president should instead address the issue of cost regulation in a direct and forthright manner. That may be more politically challenging, but it is the only responsible path to take.
posted by Jeff Bennett
From The Beacon, November 2015
Buried deep inside the federal Affordable Care Act is an onerous and controversial new tax that is finally beginning to attract public scrutiny and attention: the Cadillac Tax, a massive 40 percent levy on “high-value” health insurance plans.
Because the federal government has developed a rigid one-size-fits-all mandate, and is intent on placing this burden on public employers – cities, towns and states – the law could become one of the costliest unfunded federal mandates in history.
This provision was sold under the false premise that high-cost plans were rare and overly generous or luxurious (thus the term “Cadillac”), but the law actually sets a threshold that is too low and will harm employees and employers in regions of the nation where health costs are naturally higher. New England (and Massachusetts in particular) is one of those regions.
Here’s a brief summary: beginning on Jan. 1, 2018, the ACA will establish a cap on the allowable cost of family and individual health plans that public and private employers can offer to their employees and retirees without triggering a massive tax penalty. The federal government will impose a 40 percent excise tax on employers for the amount that their health insurance plans exceed $27,500 for families and $10,200 for individual coverage. Over time, the tax burden will become heavier and heavier because the threshold will only be adjusted by about 2 percent per year, but health costs are projected to increase at a far higher rate.
As an illustration, if a city or town has a family plan that costs $29,500 a year in 2018 (the total premium including employee and employer contributions), with 200 workers enrolled, the federal government will levy a $160,000 tax bill on the community. The calculation is simple: 200 health plans would be $2,000 over the threshold, for a total overage of $400,000. Forty percent of $400,000 is $160,000.
In five years, that same municipality could be hit with a $380,000 annual tax, using conservative estimates of only a 5 percent annual increase in the cost of health care and prescription drugs. But if health costs rise at a higher rate, say 10 percent, then the federal tax would hit $1 million in the fifth year. Regardless of the scenario, the math is clear: the Cadillac Tax is unaffordable.
Because the Obama administration and many members of Congress were fearful of directly regulating the cost of health care in the U.S. – hospitals, physicians, medical supply companies, and drug manufacturers are exceedingly powerful and influential on Capitol Hill and in virtually every statehouse, and they have blocked every effective idea to regulate what the industry can charge – the ACA’s authors decided that the politically safe way to address skyrocketing costs would be to hand the hot potato to someone else. Their idea was to impose a tax penalty on employers that would be so severe and unaffordable that it would force employers and insurers to clamor for cost controls and reform – even though employers and insurers lack the authority to regulate or force this reform.
In short, the ACA’s sponsors decided to create a crisis instead of addressing the cost control issue in a straightforward manner. This may have been a politically safer strategy for Beltway operatives, but the result will be very harmful to local taxpayers, employees, retirees, and municipal services.
From the MMA’s perspective, this approach is irresponsible and ignores the world in which Massachusetts cities and towns operate. Because the ACA has a “one-size-misfits-all” dollar threshold, the law will have uneven impacts on different regions of the country. Health plans are more expensive in Massachusetts than elsewhere in the nation because the region’s world-class hospitals charge much higher rates, especially in the Greater Boston area. In our state, this means that the cost of even modest health insurance coverage already comes close to or exceeds the threshold for many, many employers, including a number of cities and towns. Thus, the Cadillac Tax will hit Massachusetts employers, including local governments, harder than those in other regions.
Right now, municipal leaders work closely with their employee unions to manage health insurance costs, through collective bargaining and by using the tools provided in the landmark municipal health insurance reform law passed in 2011, which allows cities and towns to adjust their plans to match the copays and deductibles that are set for state employees. But those tools will be insufficient to avoid the Cadillac Tax.
Unless hospitals and drug companies announce that they will be reducing their prices and reforming their costs (this is known as magical thinking), the ACA will force the following options in our communities: a massive shift to high-deductible, low-coverage plans; deep cuts in municipal and school services to pay the new federal tax; widespread layoffs of public workers to balance budgets; large increases in the regressive property tax; or a combination of all of the above.
The MMA has joined with the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the AFL-CIO, and major corporations across the nation in calling for the repeal of the Cadillac Tax. This broad coalition of public and private employers and employees is united in common cause because we know the Cadillac Tax is unfair and would inflict real harm on workers, retirees, taxpayers and businesses across the country.
True cost control is needed, but it will not come through misguided and punishing tariffs on employers and employees. Congress and the president should instead address the issue of cost regulation in a direct and forthright manner. That may be more politically challenging, but it is the only responsible path to take.
posted by Jeff Bennett
BOSTON -- As President Barack Obama descends on the Bay State to join union bosses and Democratic politicians at the annual Labor Day Breakfast, a key element of Obamacare is poised to hurt most Massachusetts families, including those in union households. Obamacare's "Cadillac Tax" on "high-cost" health insurance plans will take effect in 2018, and will force Massachusetts working families to pay thousands of dollars a year in new taxes: over $50,000 over ten years for the average police officer, for example. MassGOP Chairman Kirsten Hughes released the following statement:
"While Obama and the union bosses applaud each other at today's breakfast, working families - especially union households - face a crippling Obamacare tax that will force them to pay thousands of dollars a year in new taxes. With union leaders and a bipartisan coalition agreeing that the tax needs to go, Massachusetts needs leaders to stand up to Obama to avert this disastrous burden on workers across the Commonwealth. But despite the consistent failure of Obamacare in Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren gave the law a grade of “A++” last week. Our Commonwealth deserves better leadership in Washington, D.C."
This is something to watch and think about because here in Templeton the $78,000.00 increase in health care costs that taxpayers have to deal with in the budget. If you look under the group insurance (health insurance) you will see a dollar figure of $1,124,976.00.
Jeff bennett
Thursday, April 28, 2016
TO: Town of
Templeton Department Heads, Committee and Board Chairman
From: Richard
Curtis, EMD / Ethics Liaison
RE: Distribution of Conflict of Interest and
Open Meeting Law Materials
Date: March 21,
2016
It is
mandated by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that each year, the Town of Templeton:
·
Provide every public employee with a copy of
the Summary of the Conflict of Interest Law, and every other year – also
complete the on-line training program. This
year we must do both to comply.
·
Provide every elected or appointed public
employee with a copy of the Open Meeting Law Guide and training materials.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Step 1: Copies of the summary are sent out
to each Department Head electronically, (Attachment
#2), who will then print and issue copies, or send them electronically, to
each of their employees, (full-time, part-time, contract, volunteer, board or
committee members, etc.). Each employee will then fill in, sign and date the
acknowledgment form, (Attachment #5),
verifying that they received a copy. The employee must forward the signed
acknowledgment form to the Town Clerk’s Office. Please ensure that each
employee receives a copy of the summary and acknowledgment form.
Step 2: This year, each employee must also
go to the following web address and complete the Municipal Employee On-Line
Training Program. (www.muniprog.eth.state.ma.us)
Upon completion, each employee must
print out their certificate and forward a copy of that certificate to the
Clerk’s Office.
OPEN MEETING LAW
Copies of the required
Open Meeting Law materials, (the Attorney General’s Regulations 940 CMR
29; the Open Meeting Law Guide and a
copy of the Open Meeting Law – M.G.L. c. 30A, §§ 18-25), are sent out
electronically to each Department Head, (Attachments
#3 and #4), who will then print and issue copies, or send electronically,
to each of their employees who hold elected or appointed positions in the Town
of Templeton. Each employee who receives this material will fill in, sign and
date the certificate of receipt form— (Attachment
#6). The employee must forward the signed certificate of receipt form to
the Town Clerk’s Office to verify that they have received, read and understand
the requirements of the Open Meeting Law. Please ensure that every elected or
appointed employee receives their copy of the Open Meeting Law Guide and
Regulations and the certificate of receipt form.
All
acknowledgement forms and certificates should be received by the Clerk’s Office
no later than May 10, 2016.
Thank
you for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. Should you have any
questions, feel free to contact me at (978)580-6620.
cc: Town Clerk
Town
Administrator
posted by Jeff Bennett
It is time for us to be re certified with the state conflict of interest and open meeting law. Once you have completed the required items listed below bring in copies of documentation as instructed below and in attached document 1.
Let me know if you need these forms printed for you and I will get them.
Gordon
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
Original Message
From: Richard Curtis <emd@templeton1.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2016 11:04 AM
To: gordongmoore; cchartier; fletch91; Steven Castle; seldmorrison templeton1.org; turnkey3; idavis; bankowskioil; mmfarm; jan140; srdmopar; mddickson; joycegmsw; templetoncountrystore; thegibsta; schoolcommittee; carrie.novak; sbmldavis; dardlac; seljrichard templeton1.org; m129; bobmitchell21; John Columbus
Reply To: Richard Curtis
Subject: Conflict of Interest and Open Meeting Laws
It's that time once again for all Templeton Employees / Boards / Committees to
complete the Conflict of Interest Law and Open Meeting Law requirements as
mandated by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Please open Attachment #1 for this year's instructions...
(You are receiving this email, as the Selectmen's Office has given me your email
address as someone who is responsible for a board / committee, or provides a
service
for the Town of Templeton.)
Richard Curtis, EMD
1 Elm Street
Baldwinville, MA 01436
(978) 580-6620
posted by Jeff Bennett
Let me know if you need these forms printed for you and I will get them.
Gordon
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
Original Message
From: Richard Curtis <emd@templeton1.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2016 11:04 AM
To: gordongmoore; cchartier; fletch91; Steven Castle; seldmorrison templeton1.org; turnkey3; idavis; bankowskioil; mmfarm; jan140; srdmopar; mddickson; joycegmsw; templetoncountrystore; thegibsta; schoolcommittee; carrie.novak; sbmldavis; dardlac; seljrichard templeton1.org; m129; bobmitchell21; John Columbus
Reply To: Richard Curtis
Subject: Conflict of Interest and Open Meeting Laws
It's that time once again for all Templeton Employees / Boards / Committees to
complete the Conflict of Interest Law and Open Meeting Law requirements as
mandated by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Please open Attachment #1 for this year's instructions...
(You are receiving this email, as the Selectmen's Office has given me your email
address as someone who is responsible for a board / committee, or provides a
service
for the Town of Templeton.)
Richard Curtis, EMD
1 Elm Street
Baldwinville, MA 01436
(978) 580-6620
posted by Jeff Bennett
MGL chapter 40, section 49
The selectmen, before the annual town meeting, shall at the expense of the town make available the annual town report for the use of the inhabitants containing the report of the selectmen for the calendar or fiscal year preceding said meeting, the report of the school committee, statements in tabulated form prepared under section sixty of chapter forty-one unless otherwise printed as provided in said section, the annual report of the town accountant for the preceding fiscal year as provided in section sixty-one of chapter forty-one, the annual report of the town treasurer as provided in section thirty-five of chapter forty-one, and except as otherwise provided by vote or by-law of the town, of such other officers and boards as consider it expedient to make a report, the jury list as required by chapter two hundred and thirty-four, and such other matters as the law, or the town by vote or by-law, requires or as the selectmen consider expedient. If the selectmen neglect or refuse to make the annual report, they shall severally forfeit fifty dollars.
Jeff Bennett
The selectmen, before the annual town meeting, shall at the expense of the town make available the annual town report for the use of the inhabitants containing the report of the selectmen for the calendar or fiscal year preceding said meeting, the report of the school committee, statements in tabulated form prepared under section sixty of chapter forty-one unless otherwise printed as provided in said section, the annual report of the town accountant for the preceding fiscal year as provided in section sixty-one of chapter forty-one, the annual report of the town treasurer as provided in section thirty-five of chapter forty-one, and except as otherwise provided by vote or by-law of the town, of such other officers and boards as consider it expedient to make a report, the jury list as required by chapter two hundred and thirty-four, and such other matters as the law, or the town by vote or by-law, requires or as the selectmen consider expedient. If the selectmen neglect or refuse to make the annual report, they shall severally forfeit fifty dollars.
Jeff Bennett
from general Town by-laws:
Article VIII – Records and Reports
Section 1. All officers, boards, and committees of the town, shall cause records of their doings and accounts to be kept in suitable books. Said books shall be kept in their respective places in the town offices, and shall not be removed therefrom. Said books shall, unless otherwise provided by law, be open to public inspection at any reasonable time, but shall remain during such inspection under supervision of the officer, board, or committee having custody thereof.
Section 2. All officers, boards, standing committees, and special committees of the town having charge of the expenditure of town money shall annually report thereon in writing in such manner as to give the citizens a fair and full understanding of the objects and methods of such expenditures, referring, however, to the report of the Town Accountant for statements in detail of receipts and payments, and may make therein such recommendations as they deem proper. Such reports shall be submitted to the Selectmen for inclusion in the Annual Town Report on or before the thirty-first (31) day of January of each year.
Section 3. It shall be the duty of the Selectmen to publish the Annual Report, to be made available in the Office of the Town Clerk on the Monday preceding the first Monday in May. Amended 8-31-78, Amended 5-16-13
Section 4. The Annual Town Report shall contain, in addition to the reports of officers, boards, and committees as hereinbefore provided, a detailed report of all moneys received into and paid out of the town treasury in the financial year next preceding, showing separately payments made from the proceeds of loans as capital outlays for permanent improvements; the report of the collector of taxes, of receipts, payments and abatements; statements of all funds belonging to the town or held for the benefit of its inhabitants; a statement of the liabilities of the town on bonds, notes, certificates of indebtedness, or otherwise, and of indebtedness authorized but not incurred, and the purpose thereof: a statement of transfers made to or from any appropriation: abstracts of the records of the meetings of the town held since publication of the last annual report; a complete list of town officers and appointees for the municipal year: and such other matters as the said report is required by law to contain, or as may be inserted by the Selectmen under the discretion granted them by law.
Look for the report of the Treasurer in the 2015 Annual Town Report.
Jeff Bennett
Article VIII – Records and Reports
Section 1. All officers, boards, and committees of the town, shall cause records of their doings and accounts to be kept in suitable books. Said books shall be kept in their respective places in the town offices, and shall not be removed therefrom. Said books shall, unless otherwise provided by law, be open to public inspection at any reasonable time, but shall remain during such inspection under supervision of the officer, board, or committee having custody thereof.
Section 2. All officers, boards, standing committees, and special committees of the town having charge of the expenditure of town money shall annually report thereon in writing in such manner as to give the citizens a fair and full understanding of the objects and methods of such expenditures, referring, however, to the report of the Town Accountant for statements in detail of receipts and payments, and may make therein such recommendations as they deem proper. Such reports shall be submitted to the Selectmen for inclusion in the Annual Town Report on or before the thirty-first (31) day of January of each year.
Section 3. It shall be the duty of the Selectmen to publish the Annual Report, to be made available in the Office of the Town Clerk on the Monday preceding the first Monday in May. Amended 8-31-78, Amended 5-16-13
Section 4. The Annual Town Report shall contain, in addition to the reports of officers, boards, and committees as hereinbefore provided, a detailed report of all moneys received into and paid out of the town treasury in the financial year next preceding, showing separately payments made from the proceeds of loans as capital outlays for permanent improvements; the report of the collector of taxes, of receipts, payments and abatements; statements of all funds belonging to the town or held for the benefit of its inhabitants; a statement of the liabilities of the town on bonds, notes, certificates of indebtedness, or otherwise, and of indebtedness authorized but not incurred, and the purpose thereof: a statement of transfers made to or from any appropriation: abstracts of the records of the meetings of the town held since publication of the last annual report; a complete list of town officers and appointees for the municipal year: and such other matters as the said report is required by law to contain, or as may be inserted by the Selectmen under the discretion granted them by law.
Look for the report of the Treasurer in the 2015 Annual Town Report.
Jeff Bennett
Monday, April 25, 2016
The following link is the latest budget document to come from the Town Administrator to the Advisory Board. You should be able to view after clicking on the link.
Jeff Bennett
2017 OPERATING BUDGET
Jeff Bennett
2017 OPERATING BUDGETFriday, April 22, 2016
Templeton Board of Selectmen Town Hall,
160 Patriots Road, East Templeton
Monday, April 25, 2016, 6:30 p.m.
Agenda 6:30 P.M. Call to Order Pledge
Town Administrator Report
Minutes~ 4.11.16
Discuss Insurance Advisory Committee
Appointments
Peaceful Pines License
Dr. Hemman~Update on Templeton Center School Closing & Moving
Vote on Selectmen’s Office Job Descriptions
Vote on Personnel Policy
Bud Chase~Update on Road Projects
Action on Annual Town Meeting Warrant
Action on Possible Show Cause Hearing~Liquor License Policy
160 Patriots Road, East Templeton
Monday, April 25, 2016, 6:30 p.m.
Agenda 6:30 P.M. Call to Order Pledge
Town Administrator Report
Minutes~ 4.11.16
Discuss Insurance Advisory Committee
Appointments
Peaceful Pines License
Dr. Hemman~Update on Templeton Center School Closing & Moving
Vote on Selectmen’s Office Job Descriptions
Vote on Personnel Policy
Bud Chase~Update on Road Projects
Action on Annual Town Meeting Warrant
Action on Possible Show Cause Hearing~Liquor License Policy
Who are they appointing and to what committee or position?
In past meetings, job descriptions have included assistant town administrator with a pay increase. The important thing to do is not look for and hire a full time administrator but grow government size and create a larger administration then maybe hire a full time administrator. Makes sense to me, get an assistant then get their boss rather than the other way around.
Jeff Bennett
The Town Administrator has stated at a few open meetings that the Town Health insurance costs are unsustainable. A different plan was looked at that would cost the Town less but employees did not want it so the current board of selectmen stayed with the more expensive plan. The Town Administrator has not yet shared that with the public to the best of my knowledge. So the cost versus savings remain out of view for now. If I am elected, that will change, as I think residents should have that information, as they pay the bills.
Jeff Bennett
Jeff Bennett
The auditors were in the building this past Wednesday, that is what the Advisory Board was told Wednesday night at their meeting. We were also told that there is a strong possibility of a deficit in the FY2013 books. The board was also told that in FY17, there is/was $509,759.00 of "new money" and of that amount, some $400,000.00 plus has been used up by four items; Health insurance, retirement costs, Monty Tech school district and Narragansett school district. Increase in state aid went to chapter 70 (education).
Jeff Bennett
Jeff Bennett
On April 19, 2016 at 11:00 AM, there was a meeting on the insurance advisory committee and it was scheduled on the meeting calendar on the Town's web site and now it is gone. Yet if you look all the way back to January 1, 2016, all of the meeting schedules are there. Even the cancelled meeting of the insurance committee meeting that was posted after the legal posting time is still on the meeting schedule. Is someone trying to erase history? Just another odd item coming from that office these days. Perhaps someone hit the wrong button by mistake.
Jeff Bennett
Jeff Bennett
Thursday, April 21, 2016
BOARD ETHICS:
1. A member of the Board of Selectmen, in relation to his or her community should:
A. Realize that his or her basic function is to make policy, with administration delegated to the Town Administrator.
B. Realize that he or she is one of a team and should abide by all board decisions once they are made.
C. Be well informed concerning the duties of a board member on both local and state levels.
D. Remember that he or she represents the entire community at all times.
E. Accept the office of Selectmen as a means of unselfish service, not benefit personally
or politically from his or her board or outside activities.
F. In all appointments, avoid political patronage by judging all candidates on merit,
experience and qualifications only.
G. Abide by the ethics established by the state and not use the position to obtain inside
information on matters which may benefit someone personally.
2. A member of the Board of Selectmen, in their relations with administrative officers of the Town
should:
A. Endeavor to establish sound, clearly defined policies that will direct and support the
administration for the benefit of the people of the community.
B. Recognize and support the administrative chain of command and refuse to act on complaints as
an individual outside the administration.
C. Give the Town Administrator full responsibility for discharging his or her disposition and
solution.
3. A member of the Board of Selectmen, in his or her relations with fellow board members, should:
A. Recognize that action at official legal meetings is binding and that he or she alone cannot
bind the board outside of such meetings
. B. Uphold the intent of executive session and respect the privileged communications that exists
in executive session.
C. Make decisions only after all facts on an issue have been presented and discussed.
D. Treat with respect the rights of all members of the board despite differences of opinion.
from the selectmen policies and procedures
Jeff Bennett
1. A member of the Board of Selectmen, in relation to his or her community should:
A. Realize that his or her basic function is to make policy, with administration delegated to the Town Administrator.
B. Realize that he or she is one of a team and should abide by all board decisions once they are made.
C. Be well informed concerning the duties of a board member on both local and state levels.
D. Remember that he or she represents the entire community at all times.
E. Accept the office of Selectmen as a means of unselfish service, not benefit personally
or politically from his or her board or outside activities.
F. In all appointments, avoid political patronage by judging all candidates on merit,
experience and qualifications only.
G. Abide by the ethics established by the state and not use the position to obtain inside
information on matters which may benefit someone personally.
2. A member of the Board of Selectmen, in their relations with administrative officers of the Town
should:
A. Endeavor to establish sound, clearly defined policies that will direct and support the
administration for the benefit of the people of the community.
B. Recognize and support the administrative chain of command and refuse to act on complaints as
an individual outside the administration.
C. Give the Town Administrator full responsibility for discharging his or her disposition and
solution.
3. A member of the Board of Selectmen, in his or her relations with fellow board members, should:
A. Recognize that action at official legal meetings is binding and that he or she alone cannot
bind the board outside of such meetings
. B. Uphold the intent of executive session and respect the privileged communications that exists
in executive session.
C. Make decisions only after all facts on an issue have been presented and discussed.
D. Treat with respect the rights of all members of the board despite differences of opinion.
from the selectmen policies and procedures
Jeff Bennett
this is from the Policies and Procedures document that is on the town web site in the selectmen section:
TOWN MEETINGS:
1. Annual Town Meeting: There shall be an Annual Town Meeting in May each year for the consideration of all Town business which is to be posted properly prior to the meeting. The Annual Town Meeting Warrant is the Selectmen’s by statute. The Selectmen may insert articles in the warrant; within the time frame the warrant is open, on their own initiative or by written petition signed by the proper number of registered voters for the Annual Town Meeting.
2. Special Town Meeting: The Selectmen will call a Special Town Meeting when deferment of the particular matter (s) proposed for inclusion on the Warrant for the Annual Town Meeting will not serve the interest of the Town. The Selectmen must call a Special Town Meeting if they receive a written request, signed by at least 200 hundred registered voters of Templeton. It is the practice of the Town of Templeton to address major issues at the Annual Town Meeting versus a Special Town Meeting.
3. Notwithstanding the above, in the interest of economy of operations and imposition on the taxpayers and voters, the Selectmen shall strive to limit the calling of Special Town Meetings to the minimum necessary as is otherwise in the Town’s best interest. In determining whether to call a Special Town Meeting, the Selectmen may consult with other Town Committees, Boards, Commissions, staff and other Officials as is appropriate. It is advisable to contact the Town Moderator and Town Council for consultation prior to each Town Meeting.
Jeff Bennett
TOWN MEETINGS:
1. Annual Town Meeting: There shall be an Annual Town Meeting in May each year for the consideration of all Town business which is to be posted properly prior to the meeting. The Annual Town Meeting Warrant is the Selectmen’s by statute. The Selectmen may insert articles in the warrant; within the time frame the warrant is open, on their own initiative or by written petition signed by the proper number of registered voters for the Annual Town Meeting.
2. Special Town Meeting: The Selectmen will call a Special Town Meeting when deferment of the particular matter (s) proposed for inclusion on the Warrant for the Annual Town Meeting will not serve the interest of the Town. The Selectmen must call a Special Town Meeting if they receive a written request, signed by at least 200 hundred registered voters of Templeton. It is the practice of the Town of Templeton to address major issues at the Annual Town Meeting versus a Special Town Meeting.
3. Notwithstanding the above, in the interest of economy of operations and imposition on the taxpayers and voters, the Selectmen shall strive to limit the calling of Special Town Meetings to the minimum necessary as is otherwise in the Town’s best interest. In determining whether to call a Special Town Meeting, the Selectmen may consult with other Town Committees, Boards, Commissions, staff and other Officials as is appropriate. It is advisable to contact the Town Moderator and Town Council for consultation prior to each Town Meeting.
Jeff Bennett
Wednesday, April 20, 2016
At tonight's meeting of the Advisory Board, Wednesday, April 20, 2016, the Town Administrator was asked about the large jump in dispatch costs. Part of his answer was that for many years the E 911 grant was used to supplement salaries while the salary appropriation was used for other purposes and that was not correct. The Town Administrator stated that was against the rules and it had to be stopped. He stated that the current chief of police said the Town needed to ween itself off of this money. So perhaps a certain selectmen was not so wrong after all and it was not a bad idea to be looking at the dispatch budget, costs and the E 911 grant. Apparently it does costs more than $37,000.00 to run dispatch.
Jeff Bennett
Jeff Bennett
Good Afternoon,
I was notified that Jeff Bennet sat as a voting member of the IAC this morning. I do not have him listed as a member of this board, and have confirmed that he has not been sworn-in with the Town Clerk.
Should the Advisory Board wish to have Mr. Bennet serve on the IAC, they will have to make a vote and notify me of such so that I can get it on the Board of Selectmen’s agenda for appointment. Once appointed he can see the Town Clerk to be sworn-in and begin serving as a voting member.
Until these steps are completed he cannot serve as a voting member, and doing such could result in an open meeting law violation.
Thank You for your time,
Alisha O'Malley
Alisha O'Malley, Human Resources
Town of Templeton Board of Selectmen
P.O. Box 620, 160 Patriots Road
East Templeton, MA 01438
Phone 978-894-2756
This email was forwarded to me by the chairman of the Advisory Board, it apparently was sent to all members of the advisory board except to Jeff Bennett. This is what I found when I checked the open meeting law guide:
Bodies appointed by a public official solely for the purpose of advising the official on
a decision that individual could make alone are not public bodies subject to the Open
Meeting Law. For example, a school superintendent appoints a five-member advisory
body to assist her in nominating candidates for school principal, a task the
1 Although the Legislature itself is not a public body subject to the Open Meeting Law, certain
legislative commissions must follow the Law’s requirements.
Open Meeting Law Guide Page 4 Version 3.18.15
superintendent could perform herself. That advisory body would not be subject to the
Open Meeting Law. The Town Administrator and selectmen made the call to keep the health insurance as it is after some meetings last year so presumably, that could have been done this year and this committee by its name is only an advisory committee doing what the Town Administrator could do so does the open meeting law come into play?
Bennett
However, with some exceptions, the town’s fiscal situation has since fallen more in line with
neighboring communities. The number of building permits issued and their estimated value, as presented in
Appendix A, Chart II, has declined and, after a spike in development, new growth, which is anticipated tax
revenue associated with new construction, has returned to a more historic level. Consistent with the
experience of most Massachusetts towns, Appendix A, Chart III shows a decline in home sales and an
increase in foreclosures. Reflective of the regional economy, the unemployment rate as of June 2009 rose to
10.8 percent of the town’s working population, ranking it the 8th highest among all Massachusetts towns.
See Appendix A, Chart I and Table I.
Although Templeton has been moderately successful in its initiatives to stabilize the annual budget,
the town is taxing to its levy limit and using all of its free cash to support recurring operating expenses that
continue to escalate. While town meeting appropriated a “balanced budget” of $13,823,558 for FY2010
funded through a combination of property taxes ($7.27m), state aid ($1.53m), local receipts ($1.52m) and
miscellaneous revenue ($3.5m), a significant portion was funded with free cash. As depicted in Appendix
A, Table III, free cash is a healthy 6.4 percent of the budget or $882,486. Over the preceding two years
however, the town has appropriated 100 percent of certified free cash or $1.55 million in total to supplement
the budget.
The above material is from the DOR financial review of 2009.
Jeff Bennett
The above material is from the DOR financial review of 2009.
Jeff Bennett
Tuesday, April 19, 2016
Someone is apparently a fortune teller in the office of the Board of Selectmen. They have put on the Town website that there are three openings on the Advisory Board, which is a 7 member board with 6 sitting members. It is the responsibility of the Town Moderator to appoint people at the conclusion of the Town Meeting. How do people in the selectmen's office know what the moderator will do? How does anyone in the selectmen's office know that current members wish to continue serving? Since there is only one individual running for moderator, does this mean there is a deal in place or a deal in the works? I am not really into conspiracy theories but it seems a bit strange for that posting. Perhaps the selectmen do not like some current members who ask to many questions. I think I will ask the selectmen at their next meeting and see what the response is.
Jeff Bennett
Jeff Bennett
Things just keep adding up to more misinformation.
A few days ago I received an email concerning the Town and its responsibility to have required employees, elected and appointed board and commission members do some reading, training and signing of forms. One has to do with open meeting law and the other is conflict of interest. There is a conflict of interest online training course with questions and a certificate at the end which all of these need to be done, signed, printed etc., and turned in at the Town Clerk's office. One of the items covered under the conflict of interest is the rule of necessity. I believe the Board of Selectmen recently not only violated the Open Meeting law but also violated the conflict of interest law as well. Just another thing to file.
Jeff Bennett
A few days ago I received an email concerning the Town and its responsibility to have required employees, elected and appointed board and commission members do some reading, training and signing of forms. One has to do with open meeting law and the other is conflict of interest. There is a conflict of interest online training course with questions and a certificate at the end which all of these need to be done, signed, printed etc., and turned in at the Town Clerk's office. One of the items covered under the conflict of interest is the rule of necessity. I believe the Board of Selectmen recently not only violated the Open Meeting law but also violated the conflict of interest law as well. Just another thing to file.
Jeff Bennett
Monday, April 18, 2016
Recently, on April 11, 2016, the board of selectmen invoked the rule of necessity. Reason given, two members of the BOS had a conflict of interest because the budget was being discussed. This is a five member board and there was one member not present at the meeting. Four members were present, three members are needed to have a quorum so a meeting can take place. With only two members sitting at the table, chairman of the board John Columbus stated the rule of necessity allowed them to continue. Here is what it says; Advisory 05-05: Rule of Necessity, from state ethics commission:
Example: A five-member elected board has a meeting involving a matter in which the board is legally required to act and four members are present (one member is sick at home). Two of the four present members have conflicts. A quorum is three. The one member who is sick at home does not have a conflict. The rule of necessity may not be used because, even though a quorum of the board which is able to act is not present at that particular meeting, there is a quorum of the board which is able to act. The absence of one member does not permit the use of the rule of necessity.
Example: A five-member elected board has a meeting involving a matter in which the board is legally required to act and four members are present (one member is sick at home). Two of the four present members have conflicts. A quorum is three. The one member who is sick at home does not have a conflict. The rule of necessity may not be used because, even though a quorum of the board which is able to act is not present at that particular meeting, there is a quorum of the board which is able to act. The absence of one member does not permit the use of the rule of necessity.
My thought is someone needs to read that book that someone said Templeton needs to be run by. I am not sure what book was being referred to, either a book of law or a comic book. You can decide on that one.
Friday, April 15, 2016
email from Town Administrator to members of the Advisory Board - read the last couple lines with interest.
All -
1) I used the figure of $80,000 for new growth after conversations with the Deputy Assessor and the Building Inspector. Our economy continues to grow, and my estimate is based upon building permits this year. Assessors always give conservative estimates for new growth. The budget as presented has slack in case our revenue does not hold up. There is nearly $100,000 in the budget that can cover any shortfall in new growth or revenue. Also, it looks like the Legislature will provide somewhat more in Local Aid than what we projected in the FY'17 budget.
2)The Electric Department will decide their contribution in May, according to John Driscoll. The Town did propose a project - help with renovation of Scout Hall - but it was rejected. We are still trying to work with Light and Water on a stable, formula based annual contribution. This week, I was asked to submit a letter with a formal request for funding.
3) The $175,000 from the sale of the property at Baldwinville Road must be used to reduce the debt - DOR mandate. We are using $143,000 to reduce debt service in FY'17. This will not result in a squeeze next year because the non-excluded debt service will decrease in FY'18 by more than $143,000 due to retiring debt.
4) I believe that Kelli explained some of the reasons for the mismatch between BvA and FY'16 revised.
5) I will bring answers to your most recent questions to our meeting on Wednesday. Most of the issues you cite with Police and Dispatch budgets are related to the long term use of the E-911 grant to subsidize the Dispatch operating budget. We are attempting to move away from this practice before we are reprimanded by the state.
Why would the Town be reprimanded by the state if the E-911 grant money was used correctly and legally? Suddenly, I question even more the statement made by a prior chief of police to the selectmen and really the entire Town that dispatch only costs taxpayers $37,000.00. This is just another reason to be very wary of all these financial transfers that have taken place, not by past selectmen, treasurers, accountants, coordinators, but by the ones who are presently in office.
Jeff Bennett
Something needs to be cleared up!
Monday. April 11, 2016, there was a public meeting of the Templeton Board of Selectmen. There was a discussion of $47,000.00 of unallocated funds in the FY17 budgets and then the selectmen began to use that money to potentially fund things from the "new initiatives" from department heads. Now on Thursday, April 14, 2016, page 3 of the Gardner News, article titled 'Gansett sees more students to Monty Tech, 2nd column, 3rd paragraph, "Markel added that all departments are fully funded with $47,000.00 unallocated available revenue." So unless this article was written prior to Monday nights meeting of the selectmen, that information is incorrect and is misleading Templeton residents/taxpayers into thinking there are more funds left over than are actually available and that is a bit disturbing. Perhaps contact the author of the story, tvocino@thegardnernews.com and ask her, then contact a selectmen and compare stories.
Jeff Bennett
Monday. April 11, 2016, there was a public meeting of the Templeton Board of Selectmen. There was a discussion of $47,000.00 of unallocated funds in the FY17 budgets and then the selectmen began to use that money to potentially fund things from the "new initiatives" from department heads. Now on Thursday, April 14, 2016, page 3 of the Gardner News, article titled 'Gansett sees more students to Monty Tech, 2nd column, 3rd paragraph, "Markel added that all departments are fully funded with $47,000.00 unallocated available revenue." So unless this article was written prior to Monday nights meeting of the selectmen, that information is incorrect and is misleading Templeton residents/taxpayers into thinking there are more funds left over than are actually available and that is a bit disturbing. Perhaps contact the author of the story, tvocino@thegardnernews.com and ask her, then contact a selectmen and compare stories.
Jeff Bennett
Thursday, April 14, 2016
32.06: Fees for Copies of Public Records
(1) Except where fees for copies of public records are prescribed by statute, a governmental entity shall charge no more than the following fees for copies of public records: (a) the actual cost of any storage device or material provided to a person in response to a request for public records may be included as part of the fee; (b) the charge for black and white paper copies or printouts of records shall not exceed 5 cents per page, for both single and double-sided black and white copies; (c) for requests for non-computerized public records a prorated fee based on the hourly rate of the lowest paid employee capable of performing the task may be assessed for search time and segregation time expenses, as defined by 950 CMR 32.03. In addition, a per page copying fee under 950 CMR 32.06(1)(b) may be assessed; (d) for a search of computerized records the actual cost incurred from the use of the computer time may be assessed; (e) for copies of public records not susceptible to ordinary means of reproduction, the actual cost incurred in providing a copy may be assessed. (2) Estimates. A custodian shall provide a written, good faith estimate of the applicable copying, search time and segregation time fees to be incurred prior to complying with a public records request where the total costs are estimated to exceed ten dollars. (3) Postage. A custodian may assess the actual cost of postage. (4) Inspection of Public Records. A custodian may not assess a fee for the mere inspection of public records, unless compliance with such request for inspection involves "search time" in which case a fee under 950 CMR 32.06(1)(c) may be assessed. (5) Waiver of Fees. Every custodian, unless otherwise required by law, is encouraged to waive fees where disclosure would benefit the public interest. (6) Street Census Computer Tapes and Mailing Labels - Reproduction Fees for City and Town Committee Chairman. Where "street list" data collected under M.G.L. c. 51, §§ 6 and 7, is compiled on computer tapes: (a) City or town registrars of voters shall provide, or cause their agents to provide, copies of said computer tapes to the chairman of each city or town committee for a fee of no more than $ 0.01 per name, provided that a minimum fee of no more than $ 90.00 may be assessed. No fee assessed under 950 CMR 32.06(6)(a) shall exceed $ 750.00. (b) City or town registrars of voters shall provide, or cause their agents to provide, sets of mailing labels made from said computer tapes to the chairman of each city or town.
The above is from the MMA website and is an emergency regulation, as of February 29, 2016.
posted by Jeff Bennett
(1) Except where fees for copies of public records are prescribed by statute, a governmental entity shall charge no more than the following fees for copies of public records: (a) the actual cost of any storage device or material provided to a person in response to a request for public records may be included as part of the fee; (b) the charge for black and white paper copies or printouts of records shall not exceed 5 cents per page, for both single and double-sided black and white copies; (c) for requests for non-computerized public records a prorated fee based on the hourly rate of the lowest paid employee capable of performing the task may be assessed for search time and segregation time expenses, as defined by 950 CMR 32.03. In addition, a per page copying fee under 950 CMR 32.06(1)(b) may be assessed; (d) for a search of computerized records the actual cost incurred from the use of the computer time may be assessed; (e) for copies of public records not susceptible to ordinary means of reproduction, the actual cost incurred in providing a copy may be assessed. (2) Estimates. A custodian shall provide a written, good faith estimate of the applicable copying, search time and segregation time fees to be incurred prior to complying with a public records request where the total costs are estimated to exceed ten dollars. (3) Postage. A custodian may assess the actual cost of postage. (4) Inspection of Public Records. A custodian may not assess a fee for the mere inspection of public records, unless compliance with such request for inspection involves "search time" in which case a fee under 950 CMR 32.06(1)(c) may be assessed. (5) Waiver of Fees. Every custodian, unless otherwise required by law, is encouraged to waive fees where disclosure would benefit the public interest. (6) Street Census Computer Tapes and Mailing Labels - Reproduction Fees for City and Town Committee Chairman. Where "street list" data collected under M.G.L. c. 51, §§ 6 and 7, is compiled on computer tapes: (a) City or town registrars of voters shall provide, or cause their agents to provide, copies of said computer tapes to the chairman of each city or town committee for a fee of no more than $ 0.01 per name, provided that a minimum fee of no more than $ 90.00 may be assessed. No fee assessed under 950 CMR 32.06(6)(a) shall exceed $ 750.00. (b) City or town registrars of voters shall provide, or cause their agents to provide, sets of mailing labels made from said computer tapes to the chairman of each city or town.
The above is from the MMA website and is an emergency regulation, as of February 29, 2016.
posted by Jeff Bennett
Contained in an email to the Advisory Board today from the Town Administrator;
2)The Electric Department will decide their contribution in May, according to John Driscoll. The Town did propose a project - help with renovation of Scout Hall - but it was rejected. We are still trying to work with Light and Water on a stable, formula based annual contribution. This week, I was asked to submit a letter with a formal request for funding.
It was stated at a prior selectmen meeting that the Light commissioners did not wish to "give money to the Town to be wasted but they would be willing to pay for a town project, apparently they wish to dictate to the Town, which is strange coming from a town department.
Jeff Bennett
2)The Electric Department will decide their contribution in May, according to John Driscoll. The Town did propose a project - help with renovation of Scout Hall - but it was rejected. We are still trying to work with Light and Water on a stable, formula based annual contribution. This week, I was asked to submit a letter with a formal request for funding.
It was stated at a prior selectmen meeting that the Light commissioners did not wish to "give money to the Town to be wasted but they would be willing to pay for a town project, apparently they wish to dictate to the Town, which is strange coming from a town department.
Jeff Bennett
Okay, lots of complaining or questions asking on this or that, but how about a plan or at least a hint of a direction to go in;
I believe it is time for the Town to take a look at all of the fees charged to residents or anyone who wishes to do somethings in Templeton. If you remember, or not, there was a few years back, an article in the Gardner News and it was a subject brought up at a couple of public meetings, the fact that in Templeton, the fee schedule for that once upon a time mall in Templeton (exit 19 project) was to come in at an astounding 10 thousand dollars. It was pointed out that in other Towns/cities, those same fees totaled from 25 to around 100 dollars. Those were no secrets, they were and are posted or on record at various departments, such as building and planning board. I think the large fee schedule came about in Templeton back when all the family farms were being sold to developers for houses and the genius plan was to make the developers pay for everything. Of course when it gets to be to expensive here, they go else where. There was also a letter in the Gardner News written by the then Templeton building inspector concerning the limited amount of build-able land in Templeton and how that should be viewed in Town. So I think it is time to look at all fees and ask why? Why do we tell residents/taxpayers that you must pay property taxes to cover the salaries of those individuals whose job it is to do these inspections and then you must pay a fee for that individual to do their job. Now some may say Jeff, that would cut into the Town's revenue source or those funds are used to pay for forms or for this or that. Well, I believe that the cost of those forms, etc. can and should be covered in each departments budget. One job of local government is to provide services at a reasonable cost. The last meeting of the selectmen had the chairman talking about spending money we do not even have, that is the Town (selectmen) could use some of the coming free cash to cover this or that, you know, just a few thousand dollars. well if you have a budget with 100 thousand dollars of slack in it, my thought is you already have a few thousand dollars to pay for this or that. You should not be thinking of spending money you do not even have nor have any guarantee it is coming. First priority is to build a rainy day fund. You know, so when state funding dries up, you have funds to pay the playground bill. Heck, this board of selectmen are going to spend money from the stabilization fund this year. They said as much at their last meeting. It is time for some fiscal restraint, especially when you are spending someone elses money on wants and not needs. Like an assistant town administrator.
Jeff Bennett
I believe it is time for the Town to take a look at all of the fees charged to residents or anyone who wishes to do somethings in Templeton. If you remember, or not, there was a few years back, an article in the Gardner News and it was a subject brought up at a couple of public meetings, the fact that in Templeton, the fee schedule for that once upon a time mall in Templeton (exit 19 project) was to come in at an astounding 10 thousand dollars. It was pointed out that in other Towns/cities, those same fees totaled from 25 to around 100 dollars. Those were no secrets, they were and are posted or on record at various departments, such as building and planning board. I think the large fee schedule came about in Templeton back when all the family farms were being sold to developers for houses and the genius plan was to make the developers pay for everything. Of course when it gets to be to expensive here, they go else where. There was also a letter in the Gardner News written by the then Templeton building inspector concerning the limited amount of build-able land in Templeton and how that should be viewed in Town. So I think it is time to look at all fees and ask why? Why do we tell residents/taxpayers that you must pay property taxes to cover the salaries of those individuals whose job it is to do these inspections and then you must pay a fee for that individual to do their job. Now some may say Jeff, that would cut into the Town's revenue source or those funds are used to pay for forms or for this or that. Well, I believe that the cost of those forms, etc. can and should be covered in each departments budget. One job of local government is to provide services at a reasonable cost. The last meeting of the selectmen had the chairman talking about spending money we do not even have, that is the Town (selectmen) could use some of the coming free cash to cover this or that, you know, just a few thousand dollars. well if you have a budget with 100 thousand dollars of slack in it, my thought is you already have a few thousand dollars to pay for this or that. You should not be thinking of spending money you do not even have nor have any guarantee it is coming. First priority is to build a rainy day fund. You know, so when state funding dries up, you have funds to pay the playground bill. Heck, this board of selectmen are going to spend money from the stabilization fund this year. They said as much at their last meeting. It is time for some fiscal restraint, especially when you are spending someone elses money on wants and not needs. Like an assistant town administrator.
Jeff Bennett
Latest email to Advisory Board:
All -
I am sending the most recent update of the budget. A department head was looking at the budget today via the link, and I realized that she was not seeing the latest version. The link may not be working for you either, so I am attaching a copy of the most recent update for your meeting tomorrow night. This update contains the new assessment from Monty Tech and our health insurance premium for next year.
The budget has been updated for the changes at our recent STM. The wage and salary accounts are correct, although I will need to explain some accounts at our next meeting next week.
I have added a line item called "reserve for contingencies." This will cover the estimated amounts we may be required to pay out for accrued benefits for retiring employees. Also, I have an indication that the Light and Water Department will again cover the cost of street lights and municipal electricity.
Frankly, there is about $100,000 slack in this budget, in case something happens and we have a need.
Bob
Robert T. Markel
Interim Town Administrator
Town of Templeton
160 Patriots Road
East Templeton, MA 01438
(978)894-2753
I am taking "slack" to mean there is an extra $100K in the budget, so there is money to pay for say air tanks for the Fire department. Frankly, I would think the money for those items should be in the Ambulance receipts account.
Jeff Bennett
Robert T. Markel
Interim Town Administrator
Town of Templeton
160 Patriots Road
East Templeton, MA 01438
(978)894-2753
I am taking "slack" to mean there is an extra $100K in the budget, so there is money to pay for say air tanks for the Fire department. Frankly, I would think the money for those items should be in the Ambulance receipts account.
Jeff Bennett
Wednesday, April 13, 2016
The Town will look to be paying itself and the funds are suppose to go into a revolving account.
Variance - $275.00
Special Permit - $275.00
Comprehensive Permit - $500.00
These fees were adopted by the ZBA on August 26, 2015
You can view this on website for Town of Templeton, MA under zoning board of appeals, instructions for filing an appeal.
I went back to the Town meeting calendar and did not find any meeting notice posted for August 26, 2015, but I will check the newspaper from back then to see if an appeal was held on that date and try to find the minutes for said meeting.
Jeff Bennett
Variance - $275.00
Special Permit - $275.00
Comprehensive Permit - $500.00
These fees were adopted by the ZBA on August 26, 2015
You can view this on website for Town of Templeton, MA under zoning board of appeals, instructions for filing an appeal.
I went back to the Town meeting calendar and did not find any meeting notice posted for August 26, 2015, but I will check the newspaper from back then to see if an appeal was held on that date and try to find the minutes for said meeting.
Jeff Bennett
So what is up with this new technology? Perhaps what Templeton needs is backup and procedure rather than a larger Town administrative bureaucracy. The following is email from the Town Administrator and you decide if you think there should be some procedure or backup before admin growth. There is this new thing called the cloud, okay, not so new, but I tend to purposely be a bit behind with it because I do not like being dependent on it, which is why I still keep paper copies and still use the mail (snail) system. The latest budget document has been in the cloud for a while now, so why not the warrant draft which then could be accessed by any computer. No more excuses.
I will be sending copies of the preliminary warrant and the updated budget later today. My computer has been down for two days; hoping it will be fixed this morning.
Bob
Robert T. Markel
Interim Town Administrator
Town of Templeton
160 Patriots Road
East Templeton, MA 01438
(978)894-2753
That is the facts and now you can decide.
posted by Jeff Bennett
PS: The Advisory Board did receive the warrant, or part of it, today, via email at 10:36 A.M. Town by-law states the selectmen will hand over the budget and all articles for annual Town meeting to the Advisory Board by April 10th. Since April 10th fell on a Sunday, I cut em slack and would have been fine with Monday, April 11th. Add it to the list.
Robert T. Markel
Interim Town Administrator
Town of Templeton
160 Patriots Road
East Templeton, MA 01438
(978)894-2753
That is the facts and now you can decide.
posted by Jeff Bennett
PS: The Advisory Board did receive the warrant, or part of it, today, via email at 10:36 A.M. Town by-law states the selectmen will hand over the budget and all articles for annual Town meeting to the Advisory Board by April 10th. Since April 10th fell on a Sunday, I cut em slack and would have been fine with Monday, April 11th. Add it to the list.
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
Sounds like a good deal, this new community compact, but like a grocery store, if they can give me so called great deals if i have their store card, why can't I just get the great deal without the card? So why do we have to sign this compact to get state grants? Why do we to sign this compact to get a quick response from state initiatives? Why do we have to sign this compact to get technical assistance/ Is that not what the residents of the Commonwealth pay taxes and fees for? Sounds like another political gimmick to suck cities and towns into more red tape. Sounds like if you do not have their card, you do not get equal protection, you do not get equal representation, you go to the end of the line and get put on hold. More politics of the same, make em play more games and jump through more hoops so we can give them something for their tax dollars. It would be nice in the elected state legislatures would just do right by the residents but that is probably not going to happen anytime soon. So here is what the state will tell you if you sign the communit compact:
Commonwealth Commitments
As a sign of its commitment to an improved partnership with cities and towns, the Baker-Polito Administration:
- Intends to be a reliable partner on local aid.
- Pledges to work with our partners in the Legislature toward earlier local aid formula funding levels.
- Will work to make available technical assistance opportunities for cities and towns as they work toward best practices.
- Will not propose any new unfunded state mandates, and we will look at existing mandates with a goal toward making it easier to manage municipal governments.
- Will give special attention, in its review of state regulations, to those that affect the ability of municipalities to govern themselves.
- Pledges to work closely with municipal leaders to expand opportunities to add municipal voices to those state boards and commissions that impact local governments.
- Will introduce incentives for municipalities that sign Compacts in existing and proposed state grant opportunities, including proposals for technical assistance grants available only to compact communities.
- Will identify ways to expedite state reviews that can often slow down economic development opportunities or hinder other municipal interests.
Jeff Bennett
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)