Board of Selectmen |
September 28, 2009 |
Regular Meeting |
Selectmen’s Hearing Room, Town Hall |
Present: |
Robert P. MacKendrick, Chairman |
|
Arthur J. Bourque III, Selectman |
|
Al Merritt, Selectman |
Chairman MacKendrick called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
Vocational school merger
Amelia O’Malley, superintendent of the North Shore Regional Vocational School District, provided the Board with an update on the proposed merger of the North Shore Technical High School with Essex Agricultural High School and the Peabody Vocational High School, and on a warrant article the district seeks to place on the October 19 town meeting warrant.
Ms. O’Malley said the discussion of the proposed project, which will include a new facility, started 11 years ago. North Shore Tech was experiencing overcrowding and was turning away up to 200 prospective students from member communities anually . The current facility can accommodate 445 students and the new facility would accommodate 700.
When Essex County was dissolved, Essex Agricultural High School became part of the state. Legislation filed by Sen. Frederick Berry of Peabody that provided for a merger of the three schools. The first design, which would have accommodated 1440 students, was estimated to cost $180 million. The North Shore Regional Vocational School Committee felt this amount was untenable and the design was reworked, with a projected cost of $125 million for the building, or $137 million for the building, fields and other site work. The Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) committed to funding $77.5 million of that amount, with an additional $21.5 million committed by the state in a capital bond bill for the Essex Agricultural High School share of the project.
The sale of the existing North Shore Technical High School building would bring in an estimated $ million, bringing the net cost to the district at $31,168,750. The district is also seeking federal grants and donations to pay for equipment and other items.
Assuming a 30-year bond at five percent interest, Lynnfield’s highest annual cost on the bind, based on an estimated enrollment of 10 Lynnfield students, would be $35,851 in 2015.
The new facility would house all the programs currently offered by the schools and provide additional space for programs in heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), plumbing, dental assistant and biotechnology.
Ms. O’Malley said that warrant articles on the proposed merger had passed unanimously in the towns of Rockport and Danvers.
Selectman Bourque asked what would happen if the merger plan is not approved by the Town. Ms. O’Malley replied that the costs would be shared among the communities that did join, but said the Town is required by law to end students who seek a vocational program to a vocational school. This year, the non-district tuition for the school is approximately $20,000. The Town would also be responsible for providing transportation to the vocational school. If one of more communities chooses not to join, the size of the building project may be adjusted.
Selectman Bourque questioned why the $4 million for the sale of the existing facility should be applied directly to the cost of the new project, as Peabody was not a member of the district and will reap the benefit of the sale in this manner. He said this is unfair to existing members of the district, who shared in the cost of building and maintaining the facility. Ms. O’Malley said that there are two options, and that applying the sale directly to the cost is the preferred option of the MSBA. The legislation, passed in 2004, however, provides for the return of the funds from the sale of the existing facility to the districts’ member communities. Selectman Bourque said that while Peabody has a strong voting bloc on Beacon Hill, smaller, Republican communities have less political clout.
Selectman Bourque said he was pleased new programs would be added at the new school and asked what Lynnfield students who attended other vocational schools due to the lack of preferred programs at North Shore Tech had pursued. Lynnfield Superintendent of Schools Robert Hassett said they had studies telecommunications and environmental science.
Selectman Merritt asked how secure the state bond bill funding was. Ms. O’Malley said that the question is “when,” not “if,” and said the timetable for funding would not affect the total project cost.
School Committee Chair Dorothy Presser said if a municipality does not join the new district, it will no longer be a member of the North Shore Regional Vocational School District.
Town Administrator William Gustus asked if the creation of the merged district would require a new regional agreement among member communities. Ms. O’Malley said there would be a new agreement, and a new School Committee, which would be apportioned after 75 percent of the member communities ratified the agreement. Mr. Gustus asked if assumptions about the breakdown of allocations of costs to each community, such as the formula based on a five-student minimum, could be changed by the new regional agreement. Ms. O’Malley said it was possible, but not likely, that the minimum would be increased significantly.
Mr. Gustus said the waiting list for the current school chiefly consists of students from larger cities, and that these cities would benefit greatly from the building of a new facility. He noted that Lynnfield’s current weighted vote (by student population) in the district is only 1.4 percent, and said that is likely to shrink when additional enrollment from the member cities is accommodated.
Chairman MacKendrick thanked Ms. O’Malley for her presentation and said the proposed warrant article was included in the draft warrant to be voted upon later that evening.
Closing of the warrant and discussion of warrant articles
The Board took of the matter of the closing of the October 19 town meeting warrant. Mr. Gustus said he believes the warrant draft captures the requests of all town boards and departments, and that he is seeking guidance from the Board on which articles should be included or deleted based on feedback received in the past weeks. Chairman MacKendrick suggested going through the draft warrant article by article to see if any Board members wanted to discuss them.
On an article on transfers within the current fiscal year budget, Mr. Gustus said these would address financial issues that have cropped up since the April town meeting, including the passage of the state budget in June, which reduced local aid from the projected amounts. Other facets address transfers of funds within departments to address projected shortfalls and surpluses.
On the capital budget article, Mr. Gustus said that this article, and article on the funding of an architectural study for an expansion of Lynnfield High School, can be classified as capital costs. He said that since some free cash became available with the close of the Fiscal Year 2009 books in July, he thought it would be appropriate to discuss the capital budget at the fall town meeting, especially because only two ongoing projects – the police radio project and school technology --were addressed by the capital budget passed at the April town meeting, Departments did not have a fair chance to present their capital needs at the April town meeting due to the lack of available funds.
Mr. Gustus acknowledged that the Moderator believes the charter limits passage of budget items to the annual spring town meeting, with the fall town meeting reserved for planning, zoning and bylaw issues. Town Counsel, however, says state law allows financial issues to be brought up at any town meeting.
Mr. Gustus said that the police, fire and public works department have submitted capital funding requests of significance, and have let Town officials know that there are costs associated with deferring action on them. The Governor and state legislature are discussing possible local aid cuts in the current fiscal year that could put the current fiscal year budget out of balance. He said for this reason he is concerned about the Town’s ability to absorb these additional cuts. While the capital requests are significant and worthy of funding, Mr. Gustus said he is not sure that any would rise to the level that their deferral to the next fiscal year would cause a significant problem. He recommended putting off all capital items to next spring. Selectman Bourque and Chairman MacKendrick said they agreed with Mr. Gustus’s recommendation.
Moderator David Miller said he would like to reduce the waiting time for a quorum from the appointing start of Town Meeting from 30 minutes to 15. He said he feels some voters do not arrive on time because they fell they can come late without missing any votes.
On the matter of the charter and the capital budget, Mr. Miller said that that the intent of the charter was to have voters see a complete operating and capital budget in the spring. He said the Town should adhere to the charter and that he is bound to observe its provisions. If the charter provisions are no longer appropriate, eh said, the proper procedure is to revise the charter. The Board of Selectmen is obligated to appoint a committee to review the charterer every five years, he said.
Mr. Miller said that if the expenditures to be put before the fall town meeting are emergencies or unforeseen, he has no objection. He also asked whether the Board considers the school study appropriation a capital or an operating expense.
Selectman Bourque said that when voters passed the charter in 1971, Proposition 2-1/2 was not anticipated. With those spending limitations, a budget passed in April might omit needed items due to an inability to raise enough funds. If the Town overspends its available funds, it creates a nightmare. He said he asked the town administrator to prepare a warrant article asking voters to amend the charter to allow consideration of financial articles at all town meetings.
Mr. Miller said this is a great idea and how the issue should be approached, rather than going behind the back of the voters. Selectman Bourque said he did not consider putting the capital items before voters at fall town meeting going behind their backs, and Mr. Miller said apologized for a “poor choice of words.”
On the motion of Selectman Merritt, seconded by Selectman Bourque, the Board voted to remove the capital budget article from the warrant.
On the article on removal of the police chief from the Civil Service system, Selectman Merritt said the Town is going through a unique period, having had one police chief for the last 30 years, and said he encourages residents to make their voice heard on the issue.
Patrolman Nicholas Secatore, president of the Lynnfield Police Association, said that after the September 14 meeting, he was able to speak with two members of the Board. He said the consultant hired by the Board was asked to evaluate whether the chief position should be removed from Civil Service, He said that the consultant’s firm is in the business of hiring chiefs, and had never evaluated a police department in this manner. The bulk of the report relates to recommendations on policies and procedures, which Chief Dunn, elevated to acting chief under Civil Service rules, has already begun updating. He noted Chief Dunn received nothing hut praise from the consultant.
Patrolman Secatore said he agreed with the consultant’s report that accreditation is an important step for the department, but said it is costly and time-consuming. He said the officers are in support of pursuing it, but that accreditation is a separate issue from Civil Service.
Patrolman Secatore said that one of the purposes of Civil Service is to remove politics and bias from the process. He said the Town can hold assessment centers under the Civil Service process and well as outside of it. The consultant recommended using an assessment center in either case. He said using an outside center could be costly. He said it is not a surprise the consultant recommended use of an assessment center since he is in that business. He said that three sergeants who would be eligible to apply for the chief position meet the criteria, have 25, 19 and 17 years of police experience respectively, and two have master’s degrees and one a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice. He said they were interviewed by the consultants, but they were not told it was an interview for the chief position. There were
no employment applications or reference checks.
Patrolman Secatore said the Association strongly believes that the next police chief should be chosen from within the department, and that the sergeants deserve to compete with each other for the job. He said if the Board is concerned about the operation of the department it can exercise its authority under the “weak chief” law.
Selectman Merritt said that the sergeants did a wonderful job for the Town, and the police and fire departments are held in the highest esteem.
Selectman Bourque said that he shares Selectman Merritt’s opinion and appreciated the recent changes in the department. He said that his concern about Civil Service is about the protection it will provide to the chief in cases when the chief is not acting in the Town’s best interests. He said that he has felt that the department has not been run in the past as it should, and that the consultant had enumerated 60 areas in which the department did not meet general standards for police departments. He said little corrective action had been taken by the past chief unless he had been issued a direct order by the Board. He said the Town had been exposed to civil liability due to the failure of the chief to take disciplinary action. He said the Board had been advised by town counsel that discipline was a matter of
management discretion and under the chief’s control. Under Civil Service, the Board could not change chiefs unless there had been gross negligence. He said police chiefs today command six-figure salaries and are expected to be professional managers. Civil Service provisions put in place decades ago are no antiquated.
Patrolman Secatore said that the Board learned it had more authority under the “weak chief” law than it had previously thought. Selectman Bourque said that exercise of that authority would put the Board in the position of managing the department’s day-to-day operations, which it does not want to do. He said that the Boards on which he had served had only urged the chief to take appropriate disciplinary actions after officers had made repeated errors. He said the Board merely wished to avoid a potential multi-million suit.
Selectman Merritt said that he hopes that as the Town copes with this issue, the discussion remains civil, and people remember that Lynnfield is a great town with a great police force.
Chairman MacKendrick said he has the highest regard for Chief Dunn and praised him for his recent actions. He said he thought the department’s sergeants are all very good and well qualified, and that he was a little taken aback by the consultant’s report. He asked whether an employment contract for a Civil Service chief could override provisions of the Civil Service law. Patrolman Secatore said it could not, but it can set forth guidelines that would result in discipline, not termination. Under Civil Service, the standard for termination is just cause.
On the article on the school building study, Mr. Gustus said that he would recommend removing this article for the reasons he outlined when discussing the capital budget article. He also said that the Town should seek an appropriation for the entire amount of the Lynnfield High School addition project in the spring. He also said that it is unclear what that complete cost would be, and that all architectural plans could total $250,000 to $275,000. Since debt exclusion will be needed for entire project, requiring approval at town meeting and a town election, it would be prudent to be sure the Town will support the entire project before spending $250,000 on architectural work. The appropriation sought under this article has been reduced to $95,000, he said.
Mr. Gustus said that school and Town officials have been discussing with MSBA officials the plan for a permanent modular addition. He said it is unclear whether the MSBA will make a commitment to this project and what the reimbursement rate would be. He said there has been some concern voiced that the MSBA would see a failure to act on this article as a lack of commitment to the project from the Town. The architect said a delay until April would set the project back three months, with a planned completion date of January 2011 delayed to April 2011. He said Lynnfield officials have a meeting on Wednesday with the MSBA and may be told early action is required. If that is the case, he said, a special town meeting could be scheduled for January, and the special election for senator could include a voter approval of that
measure.
Selectman Merritt credited the School Building Committee for adjusting to changes at the state level. He said that the school population “bubble” will continue through at least 2018 and that the additional space is needed at the High School. He said he supported removing the article for the reasons cited by Mr. Gustus. Selectman Bourque said that he would prefer leaving the article in the warrant, as he fears it would be difficult to achieve a quorum for a special town meeting in January. He said that the article could move forward if the moderator allows the article.
Mr. Miller said that the said that he is trying to avoid discussing the merits of the article and feels obligated to follow the provisions of the charter. He said since the school study is not an annual, recurring expense, he views it differently than he does the capital budget. He said he would allow it if the Board declare sit an unforeseen or emergency expense. Selectman Bourque said that it could be construed as unforeseen due to the MSBA insisting on early action.
Resident Patricia Campbell of Patrice Lane said the expense is not unforeseen as it has been discussed for two years. She said she does not believe Town officials have had the time to study the issue prior to the October meeting. Mrs. Campbell said that once voters approve the architectural study, approval of the entire amount would be seen as a “done deal.” Selectman Merritt said that a two-thirds vote for the entire appropriation and a ballot vote could not be viewed that way. He noted that the last school building project passed town meeting by seven votes and by 53 percent to 47 percent at the ballot.
Mrs. Campbell said that she wants to know the costs of additional teachers, electricity, landscaping and other items related to the expansion.
The Board agreed to leave the article in the warrant. Chairman MacKendrick said the Board could recommend approval or indefinite postponement based on any new information it receives before town meeting.
On the article changing the due date for dog licensing fees, Mr. Gustus said the town clerk had asked for the change in date to bring it into line with the calendar year. He said it also conflicts with other activities taking place in the office at the time it is currently held. Asked by Selectman Bourque how the Town would handle those who paid in July, Mr. Gustus said the fee would be pro-rated, at 50 percent. Selectman Bourque asked if the Board can modify the fee. Mr. Gustus said that the fee is set by bylaw, but that the Board could pro-rate the fee as an administrative act.
On the articles on street acceptances, Mr. Miller said he would prefer to use a consent agenda to handle the articles by a single vote. He said four-fifths of those voting would have to approve the consent agenda, and that any voter could have an article removed by asking that it be held and considered on its own.
On the article regarding a tree bylaw and the article adopting a schedule of fees for violations, Mr. Gustus said that Town Counsel has some serious reservations about the wording of both articles and the legality of the second. The language cannot be modified because the articles were submitted by petition.
On the stormwater management bylaw, Town Engineer Charles Richter said that this bylaw is required by the federal government as part a stormwater management plan, and is a condition of the Town’s stormwater discharge permit. It covers illicit discharges, construction runoff and post-construction management. It would help regulate these issues on sites over an acre, requiring erosion control and other measures.
Selectman Bourque asked dhow this might affect residents who have been advised by the Town to discharge their basement sump pumps directly into the stormwater system. Mr. Roy said that since the water being pumped in groundwater, it would not be affected. He said the illicit discharge provision would be enforced by the Department of Public Works, and that illegal connections and discharges could result in fines and homeowners being ordered to make repairs. Fines are based on those established in other communities, as there are no state and federal mandates on fines. Public Works Director Dennis Roy said that he does not expect disturbances of an acre of more of land to occur more than a dozen times a year.
Chairman MacKendrick asked whether a violation would be considered to be a day, a week, or other time frame. Mr. Richter said that in non-criminal disposition, each day is considered a separate offense. Mr. Roy said the rules and regulations would be completed shortly.
On the article on the vocational district merger, Selectman Bourque said he is full support of the merger but the Town must make sure its financial interests are protected.
On an article that would amend the charter to expressly allow financial articles and expenditures to come before any town meeting, Mr. Miller said that the language may need some work and that the Board should hold a public hearing on the matter. Patricia Campbell of Patrice Lane questioned the placement of such an important matter at the end of the warrant. She said she was comforted by the fact that voters would have to approve the measure at the polls as well. She said the 1971 charter is overdue for a complete review and did not favor a “hasty discussion at the end of a town meeting.”
Administrative matters
On the motion of Selectman Bourque, seconded by Selectman Merritt, the Board approved a block party on Coleman Avenue for October 31.
On the motion of Selectman Bourque, seconded by Selectman Merritt, the Board approved the placing of a banner for the Lynnfield Education Trust’s Taste of Lynnfield fundraiser at the common from October 24 through November 8.
On the motion of Selectman Bourque, seconded by Selectman Merritt, the Board set a public hearing date for the petition of Verizon New England and Reading Municipal Light to place a utility pole on Village Row for 7 p.m. on Monday, November 2 at the Selectmen’s Hearing Room, Town Hall.
On the motion of Selectman Bourque, seconded by Selectman Merritt, the Board approved minutes for the Board’s meetings of December 8, 2008; December 17, 2008; February 9, 2009 and February 17, 2009.
Other business
Thomas Manning of Main Street asked if the Board had received information he had sent regarding a motorcycle noise abatement ordinance adopted by the City of Boston and asked if the Board would support the adoption of a similar bylaw in Lynnfield.
Patrolman Nicholas Secatore said that the Boston ordinance has a $300 fine for a violation and that its requirements are already incorporated into state law. He saw no need to enact this measure locally. Selectman Bourque said that the intent of adopting the bylaw would be to increase the fine from the state fine of $50 to $300. The Board agreed to refer the matter to the Police Department for review. Chairman MacKendrick congratulated Police Chief Joseph Dunn and the department for its efforts to curb loud motorcycle noise that had been disrupting church services and other Sunday activities.
Executive session
Chairman MacKendrick said there was a request to enter executive session for the purposes of discussing collective bargaining.
On the motion of Selectman Bourque, seconded by Selectman Merritt, the Board voted to enter executive session under the provisions of Mass. General Laws, Chapter 39, Section 23 B (3). A roll call vote was taken: Selectman Bourque, aye; Selectman Merritt, aye; Chairman MacKendrick, aye.
Chairman MacKendrick announced that the Board did not plan top conduct any further business in public session that evening.
At the close of the executive session, on the motion of Selectman Bourque, seconded by Selectman Merritt, the Board voted to adjourn at 9:32 p.m.
| 
