Massachusetts General Law, chapter 40:

Section 49: Annual town reports; publication; penalty for noncompliance

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.

A town may by by-law provide for the printing of such fiscal year reports as it deems suitable within ninety days of the close of the fiscal year. A copy of such fiscal year reports shall be transmitted by the town clerk to the state library before the first day of November. A town may also by by-law provide for the printing of all reports of town officers and boards, committees and commissions on a fiscal year basis in place of the calendar year report required by this section.

https://www.templetonma.gov/home/news/closure-of-town-facilities-extended-to-june-1




https://www.templetonma.gov/board-of-health/news/face-coverings-now-required

https://www.templetonma.gov/sites/templetonma/files/uploads/declaration_of_postponement.pdf


About Templeton Annual Town Meeting postponement; note date document signed, time stamped and date posted to town web site.

The U.S. Supreme Court also dealt with the right to travel in the case of Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999). In that case, Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, held that the United States Constitution protected three separate aspects of the right to travel among the states:

(1) the right to enter one state and leave another (an inherent right with historical support from the Articles of Confederation),

(2) the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than a hostile stranger (protected by the "Privileges and Immunities" clause in Article IV, § 2), and

(3) (for those who become permanent residents of a state) the right to be treated equally to native-born citizens (this is protected by the 14th Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause; citing the majority opinion in the Slaughter-House Cases, Justice Stevens said, "the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . . . has always been common ground that this Clause protects the third component of the right to travel.").

WEST BOYLSTON — The tee sheet was full from 7:30 a.m. until 5:30 p.m. on Friday as 150 golfers played on the first day of golf at Wachusett Country Club since Gov. Charlie Baker allowed golf courses to open on Thursday for the first time in six weeks due to the coronavirus.

"People are so happy today," Wachusett owner Cara Cullen said. "I think they felt like there's some hope. We haven't had a lot of hope for the last six weeks." Not everyone was happy, however. Among the strict guidelines golf courses had to follow in order to open was the banning of golf carts to promote social distancing. Golfers physically unable to walk 18 holes were upset they wouldn't be able to play. "I have been yelled at," Cullen said. "I have been screamed at. I have been threatened to be sued." Cullen said one golfer got in his car and left after screaming at her for discriminating against people with disabilities. She offered him phone numbers at the state house to register his complaints.

Cullen said after receiving complaints that the club was violating the Americans With Disabilities Act, she spoke with the Massachusetts Office on Disability on Friday. Cullen said she was told that the office had received thousands of complaints, that it should have been included on the 17-member Governor's Reopening Advisory Board that set the guidelines to reopen courses and that it planned to contact the governor's office. The T&G's call to the MOD for comment was not immediately returned.

Cullen hopes single riding carts will be allowed soon. She said a lot of her customers are older, Vietnam veterans, retired firefighters with COPD, people with heart and lung issues, people with knee replacements. But they can still golf if they can ride a cart. "I feel bad for them," Cullen said. "The people who can walk, they're so happy today to be golfing and the people who can't feel completely discriminated against by us and the state." Bob Smith, 72, of Worcester has been a member at Wachusett for 40 years, and he runs two leagues at the course. He recently underwent hip replacement surgery, so he can't walk while golfing, but he showed up on Friday to say hello to friends. He was upset he couldn't ride in a cart by himself.

Below link should allow you to watch advisory committee meeting; about 55 minutes into the meeting, listen to town administrator speak of scout hall.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZoAFiWccHI&t=1074s

TO: SelectBoard

FROM: Carter Terenzini, Town Administrator

RE: Scout Hall

DATE: February 5, 2020

CC: Advisory Committee; Accountant; file
______________________________________________________________________________

I write to follow-up on recent questions relative to Scout Hall raised by various bodies.

Let me first address the matter of expenditures to date. There have been two appropriations of $50k each to this project from CPA funds. Those were made at the Annual Town Meeting of 2016 and the Fall Town Meeting of 2019. To date, $38,859.26 has been expended. You will find the itemized breakdown and invoices attached.

Let me now move on to the matter of the request for the second round of funding. Over a period of time, this office somehow become more deeply involved in trying to assist with project bidding and implementation. Our DPW Director, which includes Buildings & Grounds, was assigned to be the lead person on this. As the project approached having roughly $10k on hand, it became apparent to him that there were insufficient funds to complete the project. He recommended we not proceed further until we could identify the remaining elements needed for a finished project and obtain funding to carry those out.

In a meeting with the Committee Chair, Ms. Julie Richard, Bob and I did verify such a list and Bob went on to compile the needed estimates. With that in hand, with the Fall Town Meeting approaching, with a project that had already been in progress far longer than anticipated, and with a Committee that seemed challenged to obtain a quorum and convene, I personally encouraged Ms. Richard to seek the needed funding from the CPC. In conjunction with that application I advised her there would also be a need to appear before the Capital Planning Committee. She did as asked and presented to both bodies the estimates compiled for her.

At this point I want to apologize to Ms. Richard for not have been more aggressive in defending her by explaining I asked her to do these things. If you have any questions about why I asked Mr. Szocik or Ms. Richard to do as they did feel free to ask and I will respond as best I can.

Where this project goes from here I leave to the Board.