A thought from Jeff Bennett

My thought on all these moves and there is a public "history" lesson to back it up. The removal of Bud Chase is a long time in the making, as in 2010. That is when Bud Chase was not going to be reappointed by the selectmen. It was an article in The Gardner News and is on the record by way of selectmen meeting minutes. There was another article in the news that had one selectmen talking about some deal and nothing was going to be done until that particular selectmen was back from a trip to Washington D.C.. In the end, selectmen backing Chase said they would vote to retain the town coordinator if Bud Chase was retained. If Bud went, the town coordinator was also gone. Bud Chase stayed. In 2011, the town coordinator was let go so here we are in 2017 and Bud Chase is run out of town. Nothing will convince me that this is nothing but simple payback. That is my opinion and I do not have nothing "on paper" to prove this other than history, a question from the current chairman of the board of selectmen to me on what I thought about a particular person (can you hear the echo?)This is history repeating itself. Also the financial things happening now were spoken about by the Advisory Committee last year; motor vehicle excise tax, debt exclusion, debt schedule and pay raises that were beyond what the town could afford. Those concerns fell on deaf ears, as people at town meeting voting to not go line item by line item. Now the people have to live with what they wanted. Time to suck it up buttercup. You wanted to keep local dispatch, time to pay for it. You wanted to keep local ambulance service, time to pay for it. Did not want to discuss the spending of upwards of 13 million dollars of your money, time to pay for it. If you want a real laugh, watch Templeton tv channel about highway department doing some things at what looks like Sadie's pit. There are three loaders in the video, 3 ! ! and here I thought Bud Chase told the selectmen, along with Dave Smart, that the two old loaders were worn out and no long any good. Highway needed a new loader, so the selectmen with push from Bud Chase, did not listen to the people and bought a loader out of road maintenance funds. If you are not going to listen to the people, why ask in the first place. Your road in bad shape, don't worry, Templeton highway is spending your road money on toys, that they apparently did not really need. And the merry go round goes round and round.
The above is my opinion.

posted by Jeff Bennett

The Gardner News now is aware of the lie!

---------- Original Message ----------
From:  <jpb01468@comcast.net>
To: cssmith@thegardnernews.com
Date: February 11, 2017 at 10:00 AM
Subject: Fwd: Public record request

Attached, you will find the response of the Town to a directive from the MA secretary of state's office involving public records. It is a lie that the person is dead. How does one not know their assistant is or is not dead?

---------- Original Message ----------
From:  <jpb01468@comcast.net>
To: jpb01468@comcast.net
Date: February 6, 2017 at 7:48 AM
Subject: Fwd: Public record request

from the latest handbook for selectmen.

Contracting Authority :
Towns enter into contracts for a variety of purposes. Contracts are made in the name of the town and under the authority granted to the town by state laws and town bylaws. Under Chapter 40, Section 4, a town “… may make any contract for the exercise of its corporate powers, on such terms and conditions as are authorized by the town meeting … [and] a town may not contract for any purpose, on any terms, or under any conditions inconsistent with the applicable provision of any general or special law.” This section of law does not expressly authorize any town officer or board to sign contracts. In general, authorization to sign contracts must be set forth in town bylaws, charter or by vote of the town meeting. Additionally, a contract is not valid unless all the necessary legal requirements are met, and there is a prior appropriation. Generally, a board or official may be authorized to enter into a contract and may negotiate terms and conditions. A contract cannot exceed three years unless a longer term is authorized by town meeting, town bylaws, or a charter. Under Chapter 30B, many communities have voted to authorize, in general, contracts in excess of three years. A town may also enter into an agreement with one or more other governmental units to jointly perform services or undertake any activity that the town could undertake independently. These are generally referred to as inter-municipal agreements [G.L. c. 40, §4A], and the board of selectmen may authorize such contracts.

There are several different statutory schemes governing public bidding procedures for municipal contracts. The primary laws are the Uniform Procurement Act [G.L. c. 30B], the law relating to public works contracts [G.L. c. 30, §39M], and the law relating to public building construction [G.L. c. 149, §§44A-M]. The Uniform Procurement Act The Uniform Procurement Act governs the general bidding procedures for the procurement of all town supplies and services costing $10,000 or more, unless the particular contract is contained in the list of exemptions, such as solid waste, engineering, insurance contracts, legal services, and certain professional service agreements. (This extensive list is found in Section 1 of Chapter 30B.) For procurements under $10,000, sound business practices are to be followed. The following chart gives a general overview of the procurement process thresholds. As the law is amended from time to time, it is important to be sure that the most current requirements are being followed. (This chart was updated by the Office of the Inspector General, which administers the Uniform Procurement Act, in May 2014.)



1. G.L. c. 30B, §2, defines sound business practices as “ensuring the receipt of favorable prices by periodically soliciting price lists or quotes.” 2. G.L. c. 30B, §2, defines a responsible bidder or offerer as “a person who has the capability to perform fully the contract requirements, and the integrity and reliability which assures good faith performance.” 3. G.L. c. 30B, §2, defines a responsive bidder or offerer as “a person who has submitted a bid or proposal which conforms in all respects to the invitation for bids or request for proposals.” 4. G.L. c. 30B, §17(a), states, “All contracts in the amount of [$10,000] or more shall be in writing, and the governmental body shall make no payment for a supply or service rendered prior to the execution of such contract.” 5. G.L. c. 30B, §12(b), states, “Unless authorized by majority vote, a procurement officer shall not award a contract for a term exceeding three years, including any renewal, extension, or option.” If the chief procurement officer determines that selection of the most advantageous offer requires a comparative judgment of other factors as well as price, the town may issue a request for proposals (RFP). This procedure requires the submission by each offerer of separately sealed price and nonprice proposals. The non-price proposals are opened first and evaluated and ranked in accordance with published evaluation criteria. After the evaluation, the price proposals are opened and a contract  may be awarded to the person offering the most advantageous proposal, taking into consideration price and the evaluation criteria.

Public Building Projects If the contract involves the construction, reconstruction, installation, demolition, maintenance or repair of any building by the town, the process to be used depends on the estimated costs. For projects estimated to cost in excess of $25,000, the contract must be awarded in accordance with the filed sub-bid law [G.L. c. 149, §§44A-44M]. This law requires the preparation of written specifications and an invitation for bid, the separate solicitation of filed sub-bids and general bids, advertisement of the contract in accordance with established procedures, and the award of the contract to the lowest responsible and eligible bidder. A building is defined as any building with four walls and a roof, not including sewer or water pumping stations. Design Services for Public Buildings If a contract involves the procurement of design services for a public building project where the estimated cost of construction exceeds $100,000 and the design contract exceeds $10,000, the contract must be awarded in compliance with designer selection procedures established by the town in accordance with state law [G.L. c. 7C, §§44-57]. Construction Materials Not Involving Labor Municipalities may use the bid procedures contained in Section 5 of Chapter 30B for contracts for construction materials if the purchase entails no labor [G.L. c. 30, §39M(d)]. The bid procedures of Chapter 30B, Section 5, differ slightly from those of Chapter 30, Section 39M

The municipal modernization act may have affected some of this as this handbook was prepared in 2014.

posted by Jeff Bennett

What happened in 2010?

Watching a recording of a selectmen's meeting, chairman Caplis stated "Town government has not been proper since 2010." So I thought what happened in 2010? What has John Caplis seen from 2010 to convince him of that statement. I know there a long time member of the board of selectmen who was not reelected in 2010 but that is about all I can think of or find.

As for contract issues, someone should go back and look at the contracts involved in the new elementary school. You will find the first one signed by the Town of Templeton, a second one by the Town of Templeton and Narragansett regional school district. John Columbus should know this as he was a member of the school committee then. There was also a file cabinet in the selectmen's office with copies of all contracts involving the town. What happened after the move of the selectmen's office, I do not know, but the files with the contracts and grants were there.

So much for the transparency and honesty with open government talked about last spring. Actions now in progress remind me of a time prior to 2010 when too many decisions were made in a corner office by a couple of people. Reminds me of the time when, as chairman of the board of selectmen, while attending a meeting of the elementary school building committee, there was a document needing to be signed by either the chief executive officer of the town (chairman of the board of selectmen) or the entire select board. I was asked to sign it at that meeting, at which time I refused, stating that it was a decision for the entire board of selectmen. I was also asked by a town coordinator to sign for a loan from the USDA for 252 Baldwinville road building on a Friday morning. I refused to sign without a meeting of the select board. I think there was a time when alot of town business was done in such a manner. I had hoped things would have changed but it appears things are regressing backwards in time rather than changing for the better. More sunshine is needed in Templeton.


posted by Jeff Bennett

Letter to editor at The Gardner News as submitted:

Vote supports Consensus of the Advisory Committee

January 16, 2017, Templeton Advisory Committee voted to send a letter stating concerns it has with regards to Town debt, especially the approach of adding to town debt by way of a state loan guarantee using Templeton’s share of unrestricted state aid. The vote of the seven member committee was five yes, one no, one member absent. The no vote was Kate Fulton. Is that considered a consensus of the Advisory Committee? According to Webster’s unabridged dictionary of the English language, consensus means; 1) majority opinion (as in a 5 to 1 vote to do something) 2)general agreement (as in concern about town finance and debt), as in “town finances are in a muddle.” The same dictionary, muddle is defined; to mix up in a confused or bungling manner; jumble. Now, we can talk about how Templeton finance got this way until the proverbial cows come home and I believe it began a good while back, as in around 2007, but I would think getting town finances unmuddled first, would be a wise thing to do before going into debt for 47 million dollars, the amount voted for at town meeting back in 2015. The FY 2017 spending plan presented to town meeting by the selectmen, said to be balanced and correct, would suggest that Templeton finances have yet to be unmuddled. Did the Advisory Committee act responsible and in the interest of the town by sending that letter?

By voting no, did Kate Fulton act in the interest of the town or in the interest of a small group? On the subject of how Ms. Farrell acted, the meeting of the MFOB held and attended by Ms. Farrell was a public open meeting, and if she was allowed to speak by whomever was in charge of that meeting, I believe there was no problem with her “testifying”, if that is how she spoke was characterized. If Ms. Farrell stated “we have concerns”, as in the Advisory Committee, I would say she was correct, by way of the 5 to 1 vote. Since it was a public meeting, Kate Fulton could have gone and I would say she would have been allowed to “testify” and give her views as well. I wonder how Kate Fulton would know so much on how a meeting went if she was not present at said meeting. I also feel, if Kate Fulton writes another letter to the editor, she sign it as Kate Fulton, Templeton resident, rather than as secretary, Templeton Advisory Committing. By doing that, she implied, she was writing and speaking on behalf of the Templeton Advisory Committee and as a member of said committee, I am not aware of any vote for her to do so.

As for the general welfare of the town, from a financial stand point, before going into further debt, perhaps the town should have 3 fiscal years in a row with budgets or spending plans that are truly balanced and correct, with a clear understanding of the total amount of debt the town is ultimately responsible for. This would include any debt of any department that acts under or as an enterprise fund, to include any special acts. The record of town meeting votes, show votes for debt of say the Templeton Water department, the articles state that if anything happens, the town of Templeton is responsible for the debt, regardless of how anyone says it is classified as being inside or outside a debt limit. That is why the Templeton Water department had to go to town meeting for a new water tank, a department, not even the Templeton Municipal Light & Water department can borrow on their own, only the town can do that. That fact is on the record of a selectmen’s meeting with an audio/video recording to show that. It is one thing to believe that building a new school and having one building rather than 2 or 3 is a good thing, which I do, just ensure you really can afford it. Trying to back up a 1.4 million dollar loan payment with funds that can and do change from year to year and do not even amount to 1.4 million is in my opinion, irresponsible.  The municipal finance oversight board has so far said no, perhaps I am not alone in that opinion. Let’s hope for Templeton’s sake, state politicians do not get involved in a local issue and force this on the town.

Jeffrey Bennett

77 Partridgeville Road

Templeton, MA 01468

978-360-4634

posted by Jeff Bennett

One would think a para legal would know better!

DO is STUPID7:05 AM

Is it "legal" to separate bills into parts to avoid the procurement laws?

1) Chartier had the work from day one at town hall and hired a NON LICENSED plumber to install the handicap bathrooms, a "plumber" signed the permit but north central mechanical is NOT a plumbing company and can't do work as such, in which they did.

2) those windows they removed and blocked in and replaced with new was ONE job and cannot be considered a couple different jobs.

That is just 2 observations that were pointed out to me by a town hall employee, there are more

To Do is stupid; this and a few other things are going to go to Boston as well as the DOR as the state should know how Templeton selectmen operate before they give them any loans. I have the name of an investigator from the inspector general's office and this is on the way, as well as the claim of an employee death (false) is on the way to the AG as well as secretary of state. Too bad the MA attorney general is a family friend of the echo in Templeton which makes me wonder if Templeton can get a fair shake from her. But perhaps the news, as in TV can have an impact.

posted by Jeff Bennett

Here is a link to the Petition and the Petition itself:

The above is a link to view the letter in which Carter Terenzini states Holly Young is dead. Apparently Holly Young is alive and well so Carter Terenzini lied to the secretary of the commonwealth so I do not trust anything he says or does from here on out.


posted by Jeff Bennett