Is this an approach that could be used or needed in Templeton?

© The Stoneham Independent

STONEHAM, MA - Citizens last Monday night instituted a new timetable for convening Town Meeting assemblies in order to allow the Board of Selectmen extra time to fully vet articles proposed for the legislative meetings.  During the recent Annual Town Meeting in Town Hall’s auditorium, Article 18, which set new deadlines for opening and closing warrants for all types of Town Meeting assemblies, easily garnered the votes needed to become permanently codified in Stoneham’s bylaws.

The measure was pitched by Selectman Thomas Boussy last Feburary, when he convinced his colleagues to begin reviewing in greater depth any proposed articles that unelected municipal officials sought to place on the Annual Town Meeting warrant without collecting the requisite 10 signatures.   

In order to facilitate that review, the Board of Selectmen will now close the warrant on the first Monday in March, rather than at the end of February.  By doing so, the town officials will have additional time to debate whether to sponsor any petitions from department heads and other local officials.   

In arguing for the changes last winter, Boussy contended in the past, measures with significant financial implications had been quietly slipped into the Annual Town Meeting warrant without input from either the Board of Selectmen or Finance & Advisory Board. 

In a new vetting process that began this year, all warrant articles coming from unelected officials, particularly those that involve spending more than $10,000, had to be submitted in Town Hall by Jan. 21. 

During the pre-approval process, the selectmen didn’t render an opinion on the merits of an article — that debate occurred after the warrant closed —but rather decided whether the board should sponsor each proposal.  

Submissions arriving after that Jan. 21 date were presumed ineligible for sponsorship, though citizens could still circulate a petition of their own and collect 10 signatures of support from registered voters.

“The Board of Selectmen voted that in order for us to sponsor an article it had to be submitted to us by Jan. 21.  If for some reason we decide not to sponsor it, we wanted to allow for more time for anyone to gather the proper signatures [by closing the warrant in March now],” Boussy explained last week.   

By contrast, the deadlines for opening and closing a warrant were narrowed for Special Town Meeting assemblies — with the exception of the regular October Special Town Meeting —by eliminating a requirement that the warrant remain open for at least seven days. 

There is no longer any minimum time frame for the warrant to be open — it could hypothetically be closed the day after a Special Town Meeting is called — but the agenda must be finalized at least two weeks prior to the assembly being held. 

According to proponents of the change, though citizens regularly conduct pivotal town business during October’s Special Town Meeting, when when local officials generally ask voters to decide on how to spend certified free cash and to authorize roadway improvements and other capital repairs, the public pays less scrutiny to other assemblies.

To discourage unelected officials and citizens from sneaking in a major financial proposal for consideration during irregular special town meetings, Article 18 sought to allow for the swift closing of warrants. 

According to Boussy, such scenarios also created an atmosphere where voters are asked to take action on an article without having the benefit of being aware of Stoneham’s larger fiscal picture — the specifics of which are discussed at length during the bi-annual gatherings in May and October.

posted by Jeff Bennett