According to mytowngovernment.org, which anyone can look at, shows the Templeton agricultural commission met 3 times in 2019, 2 times in 2020, no meetings listed for 2021 and 1 meeting in 2022.

Explain to me again why we have this public body?

Massachusetts open meeting law states - The Open Meeting Law requires public bodies to create and approve minutes in

a timely manner. A “timely manner” is considered to be within the next three public body meetings or 30 days from the date of the meeting, whichever is later, unless the public body can show good cause for further delay. The Attorney General encourages

minutes to be approved at a public body’s next meeting whenever possible. The law requires that existing minutes be made available to the public within ten days of a request, whether they have been approved or remain in draft form. Materials or other

exhibits used by the public body in an open meeting must also be made available to the public within ten days of a request.

I requested meeting minutes from the January 25, 2022 Ag comm. meeting on July 14, 2022, finally got draft minutes August 10, 2022. Who knows when minutes will be approved and posted according to OML. So much for the 10 day rule, hey, that means an OML complaint is valid!

 No final June 2022 monthly expenditure (BvA) report out yet and no end of fiscal year report out yet for Templeton. Well, it is only the middle of August.

 Supposedly 20 plus agencies in Templeton and none to help out or assist homeless, answer is No Loitering and could be police and a charge. But, those same agencies could possibly help some group with insurance so they could have an event that they may not be up to handling; interesting concept.

The answer from a selectman should probably not be "maybe we give them your address so they can camp on your land."

 TOWN OF TEMPLETON WARRANT FOR SPECIAL TOWN MEETING OCTOBER 23, 2001 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS.

Article 14 To see if the Town will vote to appropriate the sum of $1.5 Million for the purpose of paying costs constructing a new operations facility for the Municipal Light and Water Plant on land currently owned by the Municipal Light and Water Plant on Bridge Street in Baldwinville, and that to meet this appropriation, the Town Treasurer, with the approval of the Board of Selectman, is hereby authorized to borrow said amount under and pursuant to Chapter 44, Section 7 (3) of the General Laws, or any other enabling authority, and to issue bonds or notes of the Town therefore, and that although any bonds or notes issued pursuant to this vote shall constitute general obligation debt of the Town, any such bonds or notes shall be paid in the first instance from revenues generated through the operation of the Town’s Municipal Light and Water plant.

On a motion duly noted and seconded the Town voted to appropriate the sum of $1.5 Million for the purpose of paying costs constructing a new operations facility for the Municipal Light and Water Plant on land currently owned by the Municipal Light and Water Plant on Bridge Street in Baldwinville, and that to meet this appropriation, the Town Treasurer, with the approval of the Board of Selectman, is hereby authorized to borrow said amount under and pursuant to Chapter 44, Section 7 (3) of the General Laws, or any other enabling authority, and to issue bonds or notes of the Town therefore, and that although any bonds or notes issued pursuant to this vote shall constitute general obligation debt of the Town, any such bonds or notes shall be paid in the first instance from revenues generated through the operation of the Town’s Municipal Light and Water plant. Passed 2/3 Vote

Templeton Annual Town report of 2003, page 28, under Municipal Light & Water Plant;

"In May of 2002, the municipal light and water plant management advertised for bids to construct the 12,000 sq. ft. office/warehouse complex. On June 5, 2002, the bids were received, and the bid prices ranged from a low of $1,900,000.00 t a high of $2,420,448.00. Bids were reviewed by architect, Paul Lieneck, who recommended that the commissioners accept the low bid submitted by AMS construction company from Ipswich, MA. The commissioners voted to withdraw $400,000.00 from the MMWEC working capital fund to pay the increase above the $1,500,000.00 approved at town meeting. Construction began in August 2002 with an anticipated completion date of March 2003."  Nothing like doing things right and spending more than town meeting appropriation.

This is sent as background information so perhaps less confusion on who owns what. Light & Water dept. building.

 Massachusetts General Law, chapter 39, Section 13. Towns may prescribe by by-law the number of voters necessary to constitute a quorum at town meetings; provided, that a number less than a quorum may from time to time adjourn the same. This section shall not apply to such parts of meetings as are devoted exclusively to the election of town officers.

 Town meeting times, official guide book of Templeton Town Meeting, per town bylaws (vote of the people) page 17, chapter 2, speaks to quorums at town meeting. Voters or town meeting members, (if there is a representative town meeting structure) are one of four elements of a town meeting. The other three are a moderator, a clerk and a properly executed warrant with return of service. While town meeting may elect a temporary moderator and / or a temporary clerk if either is absent from the meeting, there is no substitute for the qualified voters. In Massachusetts, the by-laws of an open town meeting, usually  and the acts establishing representative meetings always, specify a minimum number of voters or members who must be present before the meeting can transact any business. In Rhode Island, the number is fixed by statute at seven in towns not over 3,000 in population and 15 in the rest. That number is called a quorum. Page 18 of town meeting times, Towns frequently change the number of voters necessary to constitute a quorum, and some towns have abolished quorum requirements completely. Advantages to abolishing a quorum, unable to conduct town meeting or being forced to adjourn (recess) for lack of a quorum, (you take time off from work to go to town meeting but not enough people so meeting is postponed and you missed work for nothing) another reason is so meetings can begin on time. Voters in towns with a quorum requirement often assume that, although the meeting is to start at 6:00 P.M., no quorum will be there until later so there is no reason to be on time. One concern with a zero quorum is that a small number of voters may convene and conduct business without a broad consensus. This is understandable, but it should be noted that anecdotal evidence offered at meetings of the Massachusetts Moderators association has more than once brought to light cases where attendance actually increased when quorum requirements were eliminated. However, no detailed study has been conducted. (if you want a quorum in Templeton, perhaps do some research on this subject and bring findings to town meeting) Note: page 19 of Town Meeting Times, Even where a quorum is not specified by statute or by-law, meetings have sometimes adjourned voluntarily "upon account of the thinness of the meeting."  You can read this in Town Meeting times if you have or can borrow a copy. I have asked the moderators association if Town Meeting Times could be put on town website electronically, answer was no, if it is "baked" into your by-laws, some parts can but since town meeting times is copyright, and is main fundraising source for moderators' association, they will not let it go electronically. I hope this brief item on quorums for town meetings clears up some confusion, if any, on the subject. Bottom line is if anyone feels Templeton Town Meeting should have a quorum, do a citizen petition and get it in front of town meeting for a vote. My question would be if one feels a quorum is needed because so few people now attend town meeting, would one also think it is fair for 50 or 100 people should make this very important call? Is this a catch 22 situation?

 Municipalities can raise tax revenue beyond annual statutory limits imposed by

Proposition 2½ M.G.L Ch. 59 Sec. 21C through a referendum to approve an override or an exclusion, or they can reduce the amount taxed through an underride. With one exception, legal authority to place a question on the ballot rests solely with the board of selectmen, city council or town council. Only an underride can also be placed before the voters through a local initiative petition process. Otherwise, overrides and underrides require a majority vote, while exclusions require a two-thirds vote of the local appropriating authority and, to take effect, all must receive a majority of votes in a city or town election. Under the Proposition 2½ statute, local appropriating authority is defined, in a town, as the board of selectmen.

from MA general law, chapter 59, section 21C:

''Shall the (city/town) of ___ be allowed to assess an additional $___ in real estate and personal property taxes for the purposes of (state the purpose(s) for which the monies from this assessment will be used) for the fiscal year beginning July first, nineteen hundred and ___?

So, the override is coming, the override is coming, okay, but for it to happen, it has to be approved by the voters. Selectmen do not just get to say we need an override and BAM, it goes into effect.

Lastly, amendments in 2003 to Ch. 40, Sec 5b allow a municipality to establish special purpose stabilization funds and to build balances in them through a type of override, which also has characteristics of a debt exclusion. Through initial approval, by two thirds vote, of town meeting (and the selectmen), a city council or a town council, a referendum can be placed before the voters asking whether to raise tax revenue, by majority vote, above Proposition 2½ limits for the purpose of the stabilization fund. In succeeding years, solely through an annual vote of the selectmen, city council or town council, the override can be continued, lowered or deferred entirely and resumed, or not, in a later year. Like an override, the additional tax can continue year-after-year without town-wide or city-wide referendum votes beyond the year of inception and, each year, the amount available to be raised increases by 2½ percent. However, like an exclusion under Proposition 2½, the levy limit increase need not be permanent. It can be discontinued in any year.

This approach would be one way to fund the infrastructure stabilization fund just created by town meeting vote. Not the only way, but one way.