HOLYOKE — Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker’s administration wrongfully fired the head of a home for aging veterans where nearly 80 people sickened with the coronavirus have died, a judge has ruled.

The Hampden Superior Court judge’s ruling on Monday invalidates the firing of former Holyoke Soldiers’ Home Superintendent Bennett Walsh, MassLive.com reported.

Walsh was fired in June after investigators released a report pointing to “utterly baffling” decisions made by the superintendent and his leadership team that helped the disease run rampant at the home. The independent investigators said that Walsh was not qualified to run a long-term care facility.

Walsh’s lawyer argued that only the home’s board of trustees can hire and fire the superintendent. Walsh has defended his actions and accused the Baker administration of denying the home emergency aid as staff worked to protect the residents from the virus.

A spokesperson for the Executive Office of Health and Human Services said the administration is reviewing the court’s decision.

 Town(s): Templeton, MA;

Board: Templeton Elementary School Building Committee

Time: Thursday September 24, 2020 4 PM EDT

Location:  Via ZOOM

Agenda:

1. Approve invoices for payment

2. Review of status of previously

   approved additional work:

      Caulking of Curbing

      Yard drain grates

      Balancing HVAC system

      State Fire Marshall Violations

 

3. Review of Punchlist items:

      Cafeteria Door Hold-Open

      Commissioning

      Delaminating wood panels at main

      stair and Media Center

5. Review of Miscellaneous items:

      Filters

      Future BMS training

      Hot Water Heater inspection

 BOSTON — In a press release Thursday, the state Ethics Commission’s Enforcement Division announced that Templeton Planning Board members Kirk Moschetti, Frank Moschetti and John Buckley have admitted to violating the conflict of interest law by participating in Planning Board decisions related to proposals to re-zone areas where they and their families owned property.

Planning Board Chair Kirk Moschetti has paid a $5,000 civil penalty, and Frank Moschetti and Buckley have each paid a $2,000 civil penalty.

In addition, the Ethics Commission’s Enforcement Division has issued an order to show cause alleging Templeton Planning Board member Charles Carroll violated the conflict of interest law in connection with the same set of facts.

After the commission found reasonable cause to believe the four Planning Board members violated the conflict-of-interest law, Kirk Moschetti, Frank Moschetti and Buckley agreed to resolve the matter by signing disposition agreements, in which they admitted to the violations, agreed to pay the civil penalties, and waived their right to contest the commission’s findings.

Carroll did not sign a disposition agreement. The commission will schedule a public hearing on the allegations against Carroll within 90 days.

At a July 2017 meeting, the Planning Board discussed proposing two warrant articles to Town Meeting to re-zone certain areas of the town to increase Templeton’s commercial property tax base. At the time, Planning Board members or their families owned property that would be affected by the zoning proposals.

According to the commission, Planning Board Chair Kirk Moschetti owned residential property in the area and was interested in purchasing an automobile storage business with a pre-existing nonconforming commercial-use status in a residential zone. His father, Frank Moschetti, owned residential property and a septic business with a pre-existing nonconforming commercial-use status in a residential zone. Buckley and his wife each owned residential property and jointly owned a campground with a pre-existing nonconforming commercial-use status in a residential zone.

In the order to show cause, the commission’s Enforcement Division alleges that Carroll’s father owned and rented out a residential property in one of the areas to be rezoned under the proposals.

The Planning Board held a public hearing on the zoning proposals, which were then added to the agenda for the November 2017 Town Meeting, where they did not pass.

In November 2018, the Planning Board met to discuss submitting the unsuccessful zoning proposals to the spring 2019 Town Meeting. During the meeting, Kirk Moschetti stated in response to questions from members of the public that, “Ethics was not up for discussion.” After many Templeton residents expressed opposition, the Planning Board decided to recommend only one of the two zoning proposals to Town Meeting.

In December 2018, the Planning Board held a public hearing on the rezoning proposal including Kirk Moschetti’s business property. Moschetti participated in discussions and a vote related to proposing a zoning change of parcels including his own.

The zoning proposal was placed on the agenda for the Spring 2019 Town Meeting, where Moschetti answered residents’ questions about the proposal. The rezoning article passed.

The conflict of interest law prohibits municipal employees from officially participating in matters in which they or their immediate family have a financial interest. The commission stated that Kirk Moschetti, Frank Moschetti and Buckley violated this legal prohibition by acting as members of the Planning Board they discussed and voted on proposals to re-zone areas of the town that included property they owned. The proposed zoning changes would allow greater opportunities to develop the property with fewer restrictions, increasing its value. Their financial interests in the proposed zoning changes were not shared by a substantial segment of Templeton’s population.

In the order to show cause, the commission’s Enforcement Division alleges that Carroll also violated this legal prohibition by participating as a Planning Board member in discussions and votes regarding the proposed zoning change that would have affected his father’s property.

The commission encourages public employees to contact the commission’s Legal Division at 617-371-9500 for free advice if they have any questions regarding how the conflict of interest law may apply to them.

Massachusetts Department of Revenue Division of Local Services
Geoffrey E. Snyder, Commissioner
Sean R. Cronin, Senior Deputy Commissioner of Local Services

9/9/2020

NOTIFICATION OF FREE CASH APPROVAL - Town of Templeton

Based upon the un-audited balance sheet submitted, I hereby certify that the amount of available funds or "free cash" as of July 1, 2020 for the Town of Templeton is:

General Fund			$1,327,538.00
Enterprise Fund	Sewer		$408,790.00
Enterprise Fund	Cable TV		$172,779.00

This certification is in accordance with the provisions of G. L. Chapter 59, §23, as amended.

Certification letters will be emailed to the mayor/manager, board of selectmen, prudential committee, finance director and treasurer immediately upon approval, provided an email address is reported in DLS' Local Officials Directory. Please forward to other officials as you deem appropriate.

Sincerely,

Mary Jane Handy
Director of Accounts
Massachusetts Department of Revenue

Why a public hearing for engine brake use?

Because you (town meeting) passed this:

On a motion duly made and seconded the town voted to amend the General By-laws by inserting a new Article LVIII, Engine Braking, as follows: No operator of a diesel truck shall use engine braking (also known as exhaust braking or Jake braking) while operating a vehicle on a public way, where such use is prohibited by the issuance of a Traffic Order by the Board of Selectmen after the holding of a noticed public hearing, in the Town of Templeton except in an emergency. Whoever violates this bylaw shall be punished by a fine of One Hundred Dollars ($100) for the first offense and Three Hundred Dollars ($300) for the second and subsequent offenses. The owner of the vehicle may be cited in lieu of the operator.

Passed by hand count of 50 yes and 47 no on May 15, 2019.

 Town governance; there is a thing called the weekly warrant and it involves invoices, bills, etc., that need to be signed off on by selectmen before they can be passed on to the town treasurer so they can be paid, with taxpayer money. This week, there is one such item, in a stand alone warrant; it states school district and it is for an item of the new elementary school, specifically the repair of the caulking on the sidewalk between concrete and granite curb. It is a little more than $25,000.00 and it is to redo work previously done. So, was the previous work done correctly? Is it a water / drainage issue (poor design), is the issue improper preparation, lack of inspection and oversight? The question remains, should you have to pay for the work twice? You paid tens of thousands of dollars for an Owners Project Manager (required for public projects one million dollars or more) with a clerk of the works, that is suppose to look out for you and your property (the school building project). Some thing was not done right and someone was apparently not watching, so, as a selectmen, responsible for signing those weekly warrants, I have no intention of signing off on this item. Yes, three other selectmen can sign it and it will move on down the line and be paid. I just think it should not be paid by you, it should be the responsibility of the OPM and the company that originally did the work. As a point of interest, both parties are now working on a new project; they are both on the same job site. The construction cost total for the new school is a bit over 32 million dollars with a little over 800 thousand dollars in change orders.

Note: The total warrant item for new school is $25,730.00, my bad, old man moment, but still BS, warrant reads - ATC reprogramming at $5,980.00 and cut out and recaulk sidewalk to curb at $19,750.00, and I still refuse to sign off on this; you should not have to pay twice for bad work.

Community Preservation Trust:

The Department of Revenue is now projecting a 17.7% first round trust fund distribution in November of 2020.

It is important to note, however, that the agency's projection is based solely on revenue that was collected in the CPA Trust Fund as of July 31st, 2020 - it does not take into consideration the additional revenue that will come in between August and November of this year. This effectively means that if the state match distribution occurred today, all communities would receive a base match of 17.7%.

What Could the Final November 15th Match Look Like?

Available reports show that monthly CPA collections from the state's Registries of Deeds have not been significantly impacted by the pandemic. Because of the new CPA revenue legislation that went into effect in January, collections each month have averaged out to be approximately 2.5x higher compared to last year. Assuming the collections hold strong for the rest of the year, the Coalition feels it is likely that the base match for November could fall into the range of 25-30% of what communities raise at the local level.

That being said, CPA communities are advised to use DOR's official projection before making any updates to their FY21 budgets.

FY2021 Community Preservation State Match - Update on State Match

As of July 31, 2020 collections from the Registry of Deeds indicates that the Community Preservation State Trust Fund balance would allow for a 17.7% base state match for FY2021. Now that communities are beginning to submit local surcharge reports (CP-1 form) we will update the state match estimate in September based on those reports and state collections as of the end of August.

We will provide updated guidance on the state match percentage as additional data becomes available.

What is CPA? The Community Preservation Act (CPA) is a smart growth tool that helps communities preserve open space and historic sites, create affordable housing, and develop outdoor recreational facilities. CPA also helps strengthen the state and local economies by expanding housing opportunities and construction jobs for the Commonwealth's workforce, and by supporting the tourism industry through preservation of the Commonwealth’s historic and natural resources.