Annual Town Meeting, Schools get money for tech and books, no new TM format
Published on May 16th, 2001
STONEHAM, MA - Day two of the Annual Town Meeting was not kind to the sponsors of the final 22 articles. Three failed and five more were indefinitely postponed by the 161 citizens at the May 10 session.
Articles are numbered as they were listed on the posted warrant.
Town says no or not now
Townspeople voted down Article 26, a proposal from Selectmen to require the Town Administrator to live in Stoneham. Town Meeting also decided against Articles 28 and 29, Franklin Street resident John DeGeorge’s proposals to increase the number of Selectmen from five to seven, and to require a four-fifths vote to hire the Town Administrator (TA) instead of a simple majority.
Selectmen decided to hold off on raising Fire Department inspection fees, calling for indefinite postponement of Article 22. Town Meeting also indefinitely postponed Article 25, a petition from citizen Bill Sullivan asking the Town to accept Sullivan Way as a public road, because Selectmen sponsored and Town Meeting approved a duplicate article, Article 24.
DeGeorge asked Town Meeting to indefinitely postpone Article 27, a proposal to grant Selectmen the right to waive the residency requirement for the TA because Article 26 had already addressed the requirement (see below).
Town Meeting voted to shift DeGeorge’s Articles 30 and 31 to the end of the agenda. The first article asked voters to limit the powers of acting TAs and the second proposed a restructuring of Town Meeting with a secret ballot phase. Around 11:15 p.m. after failing to convince the meeting to adjourn until Monday, May 14, DeGeorge called for indefinite postponement of his articles.
The remainder of the articles passed.
Debate
The TA post, school funding and Town Meeting procedure were at the center of contentious debate at the Thursday meeting.
•Article 26 asked voters to create a Stoneham residency requirement for the TA. DeGeorge offered an amendment to leave the Town Administrator Act the way it stood with a requirement that the TA live “within a reasonable distance from Stoneham.”
“It’s unrealistic to make people relocate for such a short period of time,” said Linda Corapi of Marble Street. Several TAs have served Stoneham for little more than a year.
“My concern is where does the residency requirement end,” said Finance Board member Brenda Boyle. “Police, teachers...”
Charlie Houghton of Kimball Drive said that a residency requirement would limit the candidates applying for the TA position and prevent Stoneham from hiring “the best of the best.”
Bill Sullivan of Charles Street disagreed.
“I think a Town Administrator should live in town to really know what’s going on,” Sullivan said.
But another woman argued that living in Stoneham would make the TA post a 24 hours, 7 days a week job.
Town Meeting approved DeGeorge’s amendment and passed the article as amended.
So there is no residency requirement in the law. But a policy change made by Selectmen last month making the law more restrictive and requiring candidates for the vacant TA position to live in Stoneham is still in place.
The current confusion over residency adds to an already muddled past. In 1995 Town Meeting approved a residency requirement among other changes to the TA Act. The Town Clerk submitted the article to the State Legislature for approval. The State approved the changes but somewhere in the process the residency requirement was accidentally omitted.
Selectmen knew this history when they instituted their residency policy in April. But the May 10 Town Meeting vote undercuts the motivation for the policy — to respect the will of the people.
However, Selectman Mary Pecoraro said that Article 26 will not affect the TA hiring process under way. As of this week, Selectmen are looking at a pool of 10 to 15 candidates, trying to narrow the field to five semi-finalists. Applicants were told they would have to live in Stoneham.
•The School Committee sponsored Articles 38 and 39. The articles are phase two of a two-year School Department plan to pay for large onetime costs outside the school budget.
Town Meeting passed both articles.
Article 38 asked citizens to approve borrowing $136,000 to cover technology needs of the schools. This money is for computers and equipment. Last year a similar article funded wiring the schools.
Article 39 asked for $194,000 worth of borrowing for textbooks and materials for curricula geared to preparing students for the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment Systems (MCAS).
School Committee Chair-woman Jeanne Craigie called the new curricula “an unfunded mandate.” The State says do it, and the local schools figure out how.
Richard Mangerian of Cricklewood Drive wanted to know why the School Department wasn’t paying for textbooks as an operating cost. He asked if the Schools level-funded other textbooks to balance the budget. His fear was that the core curricula was being sacrificed to prepare for one test, the MCAS.
“MCAS is the curriculum,” Craigie said.
The MCAS exams test how well students have learned state-mandated curricula. The textbooks in Article 39 are not all test prep books; most are math, science, history and English books teaching the new curricula.
•On Monday DeGeorge and substitute Town Counsel Judith Pickett, from Pickett, Miyares and Harrington in Boston, butted heads over procedure on Article 16. DeGeorge made a motion on Thursday to reconsider the article but then changed his mind before Moderator Rotondi could call for a vote.
The crowd could not see or hear what was going on, but the following discussion may help:
Article 16 in the warrant read as follows: “To see if the Town will vote to delete the requirement for the biennial updating of the Personnel By-Law since adoption of any change to the By-Law is contingent on Town Meeting approval; or to do anything in relation thereto.”
DeGeorge’s main motion explained that he wanted to remove this requirement from the TA Act because the TA wouldn’t have the authority without Town Meeting. And DeGeorge specified that the change would need to go to the State Legislature for approval.
Kathleen Sullivan of Spring Street questioned whether the article was altering the Town Code or the TA Act.
Pickett advised Moderator Michael Rotondi to rule DeGeorge’s motion on Article 16 out of order because the original article was not clear and specific enough about what was to be done.
In a separate interview, DeGeorge said that he was upset that Town officials hadn’t advised him to correct his article when he first presented it to them months before the meeting. However, he conceded that he had been rash and rude when he withdrew his request for reconsideration before the Moderator could speak.
The rest sailed through
•Article 23 approved by Town Meeting accepted portions of Daniel Drive, Dapper Darby Drive, Ellen Road and Roberts Way as public roads.
•Article 32 sponsored by Selectmen asked citizens to approve establishment of an account funded by revenue from vending machines and pro shop sales at Stoneham Arena.
Town Meeting passed the article.
The money will go toward stocking the pro shop and vending machines. It’s a revolving fund.
•Article 33 sponsored by the Board of Selectmen asked citizens to vote to petition the State Legislature to pass legislation (subject to a later town election vote) to specify restrictions on rehiring personnel who want to return to municipal work after a period off the job.
Town Meeting passed the article.
The relevant department head has to OK the potential rehire. The former employee must meet all criteria met by current employees. And the former employee must swear that he did nothing while off the job that would have been grounds for dismissal.
•Article 34 sponsored by Attorney Charles Houghton, representing Stoneham Theatre owner Al Symes, asks citizens to petition the State Legislature to pass legislation (subject to approval by a town election vote) to allow theaters with 300 or more seats to sell and serve alcohol.
Selectmen opposed the article by a 3-2 vote. The Finance Board supported it. Town Meeting passed the article.
Rita Covelle of Erickson Street said that allowing for more alcohol consumption in town would contradict the message sent by the D.A.R.E. program and parents to teach children not to drink.
Boyle, speaking as a parent, disagreed.
“I have wine in my refrigerator, and I have kids at home,” Boyle said. “It’s my responsibility to teach my kids about responsible drinking... I don’t believe I have to regulate the behavior of adults.”
•Articles 35 and 36 sponsored by Selectmen are the annual water main maintenance and sewer maintenance articles. The Selectmen asked citizens to appropriate $300,000 each from water and sewer receipts.
Town Meeting passed the articles.
•Article 37 sponsored by Selectmen asked the citizens to spend $385,000 to balance the fiscal 2001 budget. Utility costs and the extent of snow removal surprised the town.
Town Meeting passed the article.
Florino said that the money will come from surpluses in line items and funds left in open articles. For example, $12,000 is left over from the North School fuel tank article appropriation.
•Article 40 asked for $20,000 from the fiscal 2002 tax levy for the Beautification Committee.
Town Meeting passed the article.
•Article 41 was sponsored by the Board of Assessors. Every three years the Board asks the town to appropriate money from the Overlay Surplus Account (money leftover from a reserve fund to pay property tax abatements) to carry out a revaluation of town property. Assessors asked for $150,000 in fiscal 2002 to get started.
Town Meeting passed the article.
•Article 42 was an annual article, asking citizens to spend $50,000 from the Perpetual Care Cemetery Trust Fund on Lindenwood Cemetery.
Town Meeting passed the article.
•Article 43 sponsored by property owner John Aruda of 18 Emerald Court asked the Town to build and pay for a sanitary sewer extension under school property to Emerald Court.
The School Committee OKed the project last month.
Town Meeting passed the article.
Residents who want to hook into the system will each pay $1,500, and the Town will cover the remaining $7,000.
“I recommend doing this so we can take these septic tanks off line,” said Conservation Commission Chairman Robert Conway.
Moderator Rotondi dissolved the 2001 Annual Town Meeting of May 10 at 11:22 p.m.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!