NOTES OF JANUARY 31, 2015 RYE DELIBERATIVE SESSION
Part One: Articles 1-15
Final Revision B – Provided by the Rye Civic League
Present on the stage (left to right as viewed from the audience): Town Clerk Beth Yeaton, Town Counsel Michael Donovan, Selectman Priscilla Jenness, Chairman of the Board of Selectmen Craig Musselman, Selectman Joe Mills, Finance Director and Assistant Town Administrator Cyndi Gillespie, and Town Administrator Michael Magnant. Present at the podium: Bob Eaton, Town Moderator.
Additional persons present from the Town included: Police Chief Kevin Walsh, Interim Fire Chief Tom Lambert, Public Works Director Dennis McCarthy, Recreation Director Lee Arthur.
Town Moderator Robert Eaton called the meeting to order at 9:06 a.m.
Editor’s
note: The elapsed times are relative to
start of each video segment. Segments
consist of one or more warrant articles.
To access the video for a particular warrant article, click on the
heading for the warrant article. The
video will be positioned to the beginning of the segment. You may then use the slider to position the
video to the appropriate elapsed time.
The video is available at http://vimeo.com/118397834/
SUMMARY
1. New rule was announced by Moderator Eaton, preventing those seeking the floor when the question is called from speaking. Note, if less than 2/3 of the people supported the question being called, those people seeking the floor could still speak.
INTRODUCTION (0:00
elapsed) (click to view video)
Mr. Eaton introduced himself and started the meeting by reading a long list of “friends and neighbors” who had passed away in the past year. Mr. Eaton then introduced the persons sitting at the table on the stage, left to right as viewed from the audience.
CANDIDATES
(3:50 elapsed) (click to view video)
Mr. Eaton then announced the candidates for town office (all are for 3 years unless noted):
Board of Selectmen
Craig Musselman
Town Clerk/Tax Collector
Beth Yeaton
Town Treasurer
Jane Ireland
Town Moderator (1 seat, 2 years)
Bob Eaton
Cemetery Trustee
Ken Moynahan
Library Trustee (2 seats)
Phil Boynton
Gary Layman
Karen Oliver
Trustee of Trust Funds
Kerry Pope
Budget Committee (2 seats)
Doug Abrams
Mae Bradshaw
Ray Jarvis
Planning Board (Editor’s
note: 2 seats though not stated)
Mel Low
Tom McCormick
Ray Tweedie
Zoning Board of Adjustment (2 seats)
Russell Bookholz
Burt Dibble
Patty Weathersby
Sewer Commissioner
Peter Kasnet
School Board
Kevin Brandon
Theresa Kobylinski
School District Moderator
Bob Eaton
School District Clerk
Beth Yeaton
Mr. Eaton announced that the
Candidates Night, hosted by the Rye Civic League will be held Wednesday,
February 16 at 7:00 p.m. at the Rye Public Library. Editor’s
note: This has been changed to March
2.
Mr. Eaton announced that the Town election will be Tuesday, March 10 from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Rye Elementary School. The School District Deliberative Session will be Wednesday, February 4 at 6:30 p.m. at the Junior High School Cafeteria.
RULES
(6:51 elapsed) (click to view video)
Mr. Eaton then went through the rules that appeared to be the same as in prior years except as noted below.
(11:34 elapsed)
He indicated that he was making a change this year. A motion to call the question requires a two-thirds majority and is not debatable. When the question is called, the person speaking would be permitted to finish before a vote would be called for. However, unlike in years past, those seeking the floor to speak would not automatically be permitted to speak.
ARTICLES 1-4,
ELECTIONS AND ZONING AND FLOOD PLAIN ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS (13:55 elapsed)
(click to view video)
Mr. Eaton explained that Articles 1 and 2 related to elections. There is nothing to debate or discuss, he said. Article 3 relates to six amendments to the Zoning Ordinance recommended by the Planning Board. Article 4 relates to one amendment to the Rye Floodplain Ordinance. Both are recommended by the Planning Board. Traditionally these have not been discussed at the Deliberative Session as, by law, they may not be amended. There is a right to discuss them if there is a motion. There was no motion.
ARTICLE 5: TOWN HALL $4,100,000 (13:50 elapsed)
Mr. Eaton read the warrant article, which provides for $4.1 million to renovate the existing 1839 building as well as constructing additional connected space, provide equipment and furnishings, and authorize the borrowing of up to $4.1 million to finance the project as well as the obtaining of private donations or grants. A three-fifths vote is required.
Selectman Jenness spoke to the article, stating that the Town Hall had begun life as a Methodist Church in 1839, and was purchased by the Town for use as a Town Hall in 1873. In the 1930s the day-to-day functions of Town government were very few and were scattered all over town. After World War II, the town was selected as a location for a Municipal Court and the basement was partitioned. Later, another portion of the basement was taken over as an office for the Town Clerk. In 1953, zoning was passed, so an office for a Building Inspector was needed, which took up the rest of the basement. After other offices were provided for a variety of functions, no meeting hall space was left. Ms. Jenness spoke about the Town Hall Committee and its various forms and asserted that public input had been encouraged.
The plan is based on (1) providing functions at the current site; (2) renovation rather than restoration, including the tin ceiling and the stage; (3) a separate addition which is subservient in appearance and simple in form (i.e. rectangular). Advantages include (1) no land purchase is needed and (2) no temporary space is needed.
Three long-term bond and one short-term bonds have been retired in 2014, so the timing is good, Selectman Jenness asserted.
Eric Palson of SMP Architecture indicated that the equipment for his presentation had not yet been set up.
Paul Goldman, current Chairman of the Town Hall Committee spoke and held up a brochure that was available. He stated that there is insufficient office space for efficient delivery of services with the current Town Hall. As a result of the passage of the warrant article in 2014, SMP was engaged following a rigorous search process. Bids have been received based on the final work product of SMP. The building has to be brought up to new standards for safety, earthquake and wind loads. It will enhance the centerpiece of the Town.
Alex Herlihy 55 Lang Rd., spoke in support of the project. He stated that the Rye Historical Society, of which he is president, had provided historic information regarding the Town Hall which has been placed in binders. He encouraged people in town to work with their neighbors to ensure passage.
Cyndi Gillespie, Town Finance Director, spoke about the favorable position of the Town financially in order to go forward with the project, with the last payment being made in 2014 on the Library addition, the Public Safety Building and a Conservation Land Bond. A recent new Conservation Land bond was obtained at 2.3 percent, with a $178,000 premium, meaning that, of the $1.3 million borrowed, only $1,122,000 would need to be paid back, plus interest. Another $1.7 million has been authorized, but has not yet been issued. She spoke of graphs that are available showing the impact of the debt.
Steven Borne, 431 Wallis Rd., pointed out that the graphs, while appreciated, look at the project in isolation. The CIP Plan includes a number of projects and some that are known but not included, for example fixing up of the Transfer Station and resolution of the bacteria at Parsons Creek. There is potentially a lot of debt that may be incurred in the future. The overall impact of what could be coming down the road could be very large. The last time debt was piled on like this, with the $5 million conservation land and the Public Safety Building, donor towns also went away so that taxes were not impacted. With everything on the plate coming up, there is the potential of rising taxes.
Mae Bradshaw, 106 Harbor Rd., said that she had served on the Town Hall Committee as a representative of the Historic District Commission and the Heritage Commission. Everything had been vetted very, very well. There is a very healthy 12 percent contingency built into the budget price to provide for unknowns with the renovation. That may come back to the Town if problems do not arise during construction. Peter Michaud of the State Historic Commission believes that the building scale is wonderful, and that the relationship to the old building has been effectively done. The Heritage Commission is seeking grants, including for the large monumental windows and the steel work to make the building more secure. There is also the potential of revenues from the Meeting Hall for receptions and the like, she said.
It appearing that technical details were taking longer than expected to resolve, poster boards that were outside in the hall were brought in so that the Town Hall drawings could be displayed. However, the matter was tabled.
Click here for further discussion.
Article 6: $100,000 Hwy. Equipment Capital Reserve
(39:50 elapsed)
Mr. Eaton read the warrant article. Selectman Mills referred to this as a “savings account” and asserted that the money was not wasted. There was no discussion.
Article 7:
$65,000 for one-ton pickup truck (41:03 elapsed)
Mr. Eaton read the warrant article. He stated that the Selectmen had recommended the warrant article 2-1, and the Budget Committee 8-0. Selectman Musselman stated that the existing truck to be replaced is eight years old.
Steven Borne, 431 Wallis Rd., asked if Public Works Director Dennis McCarthy could address what would happen if this did not pass and multiple purchases are stacked up.
Mr. McCarthy stated that there is a program involving about 15 pieces of equipment. The replacement cost increases about 2.5 percent each year. The total value of replacing the equipment is about $1.4 million. The average service life is about 16 years. This will be the last year in which money needs to be raised at this level, which is $165,000. Next year will be more workable. In future years less than $100,000 will need to be asked for and there will not need to be additional funds to purchase equipment. The program that he has laid out has only a single purchase annually for the next sixteen years, except one year in which two smaller pieces of equipment are planned to be purchased.
Peter Crawford, 171 Brackett Rd., stated that he noticed that the CIP Plan has two $150,000 six-wheel dump trucks in one place, but there is no project sheet for the second truck. He asked about the plans in that regard.
Mr. McCarthy stated that this is probably an error in the CIP Plan. The town owns four such trucks. There is probably a sheet missing for one of the trucks. There is no year in which two of the trucks are to be replaced. The list and assumptions are always being looked at, he said.
John Hoyt, 891 Ocean Blvd., asked whether the recommendations by the Budget Committee and the Board of Selectmen was influencing the votes. Mr. Eaton responded that this is required by State law. Selectman Musselman stated that it was required so that the voters could see that each entity had reviewed the expenditure.
Ms.
Gillespie pointed out that a warrant article passed two years ago indicated
that the citizens passed a warrant article indicating that the recommendations
should appear. Editor’s note: 2013 Warrant
Article 17 provides that the numerical tally of the votes on whether or not to
recommend be provided. State law, RSAs
32:16, IV and 32:17 require that the recommendation be present in any event,
Article 17 adds the requirement of a numerical tally.
The motion to call the question, made by Frank Drake, carried.
Article 8:
$50,000 Town Empl. Accum. Leave Fund
(50:47 elapsed)
Mr. Eaton read the warrant article. Selectman Jenness stated that the liability is $486,968.38. The Department of Revenue Administration (“DRA”) recommends that 50 percent of the liability be kept on hand. The liability indicated what the cost would be would if all of those employed by the Town left at once. Currently, $174,339.78 is on hand. Even with the $50,000 addition the account would be under the 50 percent recommended.
Steven Borne, 431 Wallis Rd., asked about the concessions made in some of the recent union contracts. Town Administrator Mike Magnant stated that leave accumulations have now been capped in all of the contracts.
There being no further discussion on Article 8, it was ordered placed on the ballot as written.
Shawn Crapo moved to restrict reconsideration on Articles 6, 7 and 8, which motion was seconded by Randy Crapo. The motion carried.
Article 9:
ADDED police officer ($47,250 in 1st yr.) (54:30
elapsed)
Mr. Eaton read the warrant article, indicating that it was supported by the Selectmen 2-1, and by the Budget Committee 8-0. The cost for a full year is $91,450.
Selectman Jenness spoke to the warrant article, indicating that it was almost identical to one the prior year, which failed 839-803. She spoke of documentation supporting the request provided by Police Chief Walsh. North Hampton, which is slightly smaller, has 12 full-time officers while Rye has nine.
Chief Walsh stated that the department tried to be proactive and visible to prevent crimes. The officers need to do their own follow-up as the department has no detective. Quality of life complaints, including alcohol, dogs, bicycles and motorcycle noise must be investigated. The biggest complaint is the speed of motor vehicles. There is a gap on the midnight shift. On December 6, 2009, an officer was dispatched to Sea Rd. for a burglary in progress. Two people were arrested, convicted and spent time in the State prison. Subsequently, after their release, they committed a similar crime, which resulted in serious bodily injury to a person who woke up and saw them in their home.
Chief Walsh stated that the Police Department is out there consistently giving 110 percent, however they are strapped and an extra person is needed. They will do their best regardless of whether this passes. Particularly during the summer months there is an increase in the number of quality of life complaints. They are trying to be as proactive as they can, but the investigations are tying them up.
Selectman Jenness stated that the tax impact of the officer for half a year is $.026 or three cents. There should not be one person alone on a shift, she asserted.
Lori Carbajal, 18 Tower Ave., stated that anything violent happening would likely occur on the night shift. County dispatch would follow up about 3 minutes after a traffic stop, however if the officer is shot, it would be a long time before a backup arrived from a neighboring community after the absence of a response. Seconds may really count.
Selectman Mills asked whether this would mean an additional cruiser. Chief Walsh stated that it would not.
Peter Crawford, 171 Brackett Rd., stated that he support the article. He stated that there are 7 times 24, or 168 hours in a week. That is four shifts of officers at 42 hours per week. If there are two officers on each shift, that would be eight officers. However, there is vacation and holiday and so forth, making it nine. The Chief needs to manage the Department so that makes the need ten officers including the Chief to have two officers on duty at all times, and there are only nine.
Alan Gould, former Police Chief, 1210 Washington Rd. stated he always slept with one eye open in case anything happened on the midnight shift. He urged everyone to support the article.
There was no further discussion so Article 9 was ordered placed on the ballot as written.
Article 10:
$20,164 for Firefighters Union Contr. (65:19 elapsed)
Mr. Eaton read the warrant article and stated that it was recommended 2-1 by the Selectmen and 8-0 by the Budget Committee.
Selectman Musselman stated that this is a long story. There are three unions, which are typically all on the same three-year contract term. Last year, agreement was reached for the Police and Public Works unions. However, there was a disagreement regarding a contract provision with the firefighters. The firefighters insisted that an employee out sick, injured, or on vacation would need to have his shift filled. There was a grievance and the Public Employees Labor Relations Board (“PELRB”) found in favor of the firefighters, determining that the Town had engaged in an unfair labor practice. The Town had a choice of appealing to the New Hampshire Supreme Court. The cost would have been $20,000 in legal fees. The liability relating to unfilled positions was $60,000 and growing. In December or early January of this year the problem was resolved by making a payment to the firefighters. That is not part of this warrant article. The contract language has now been clarified and it is the Town’s choice as to whether shifts are filled when someone is out, he said.
This article ratifies the remaining year and nine month months of the contract. They did not receive a cost of living increase last year. This begins cost of living increases as of October 1, the date at which they believed that an agreement was reached, Selectman Musselman said.
There was no discussion on this article, so it was ordered placed on the ballot as written.
Shawn Crapo’s motion to restrict reconsideration, seconded by Mr. Tweedie, carried.
Article 11:
Special meeting if above is defeated (71:55
elapsed)
Mr. Eaton read the warrant article. Selectman Musselman addressed it briefly. There was no discussion.
Article 12:
$25,000 municipal buildings expend. tr. (72:28 elapsed)
Mr. Eaton read the warrant article. Selectman Mills stated that this is a fund for any major repairs. He asserted that the money is not wasted.
Frank Drake, 5 South Rd., Rye Beach, asked about typical repairs. Mr. Mills stated that they just replaced the roof on the Parsonage.
Article 13:
$5000 Library Bldg. Maint. Expend. Tr. (74:12 elapsed)
Mr. Eaton read the warrant article. Selectman Jenness addressed the warrant article briefly.
Frank Drake asked about the balance. Cyndi Gillepie stated that there was $18,158 in the fund.
Article 14:
Reallocation of Beach Parking revs. (75:44 elapsed)
Mr. Eaton read the warrant article which increased the allocation of parking permit revenues allocated to the Beach Cleaning Fund from 25 to 50 percent and added the monitoring of water quality and other environment issues on Town beaches and watersheds affecting Town beaches to the purposes for which expenditures could be made. He stated that a two-thirds majority is required.
Selectman Mills addressed the warrant article. He stated that the beach stickers are a lucrative revenue account and they want to add state-mandated water testing to the purposes.
Selectman Musselman stated that last year, it was determined that at Pirates Cove, on the south end of Wallis Sands contamination had been found. A state grant is coming to evaluate the cause. Parsons Creek to the State Beach will be tested in the coming year. They want to make sure that there is not a broader issue. The State has funds to do ocean water quality. This is for testing seeps, he said.
Ann Morrissey stated that she had been born in this Town. “Stinky Creek” is the correct name for. It has been polluted as long as she can remember. Something should be done, but hasn’t been for years.
Lori Carbajal, 18 Tower, proposed an amendment, which she read. It raised the percentage to 100 percent, still added the monitoring of water quality, but added additional beach-related purposes, including the hiring of a Beach Supervisor and renamed the fund the “Beach Operations Fund.” It stated that, if Article 21 passes, all authority to establish beach budgets and expend funds from the Beach Operations Fund would be vested in the Beach Commission.
Ms. Sherman seconded the amendment.
Town Attorney Michael Donovan stated that the wording of the warrant article is dictated by statute. Some of what was proposed would be permissible, but other aspects would not, he asserted.
Mr. Eaton walked over and handed the proposed amendment to Selectmen Mills and Musselman and paused to give Mr. Donovan an opportunity to read the proposed amendment.
Mr. Eaton then stated that Town Counsel was asking for additional time to review the amendment. He then read it so that those at the meeting could be thinking about it. Selectman Musselman moved to table the article, which motion was seconded by Selectman Jenness. The motion to table passed.
Click here for further discussion.
Article 5: Town Hall (85:05 elapsed)
The motion to remove Article 5 from the table carried.
Eric Palson of SMP showed the flyover video and pointed to a number of aspects of both the new building and the old building.
There was no further discussion and no questions for Mr. Palson, so Article 5 was ordered placed on the ballot as written.
Shawn Crapo’s motion to restrict reconsideration on articles 5, 12 and 13, seconded by Mr. Winslow, carried.
Article 15:
Parsonage Lease payments (90:28 elapsed)
Mr. Eaton read the warrant article which would place the revenues from the Parsonage Apartments in a special fund.
Selectman Musselman stated that the Town owns the building. It was set up so that the annual revenue went into the General Fund. The $11,000 per year would, under this warrant article flow to a special fund. This past year a new roof was needed. A long-term financing and look at the long-term needs are being put together. The general maintenance fund is likely not adequate for the needs of the Parsonage building.
Frank Drake, 5 South Rd., Rye Beach, asked why the Parsonage revenues could not accrue in the Town’s general maintenance fund rather than its own fund. He stated that the taxpayers would have been better served if that was done.
Selectman Musselman stated that they are confident that, over the long-term, the expenses are likely higher than the revenue so that they would not be available for other buildings.
(95:10 elapsed)
Ann Morrisey stated that she had lived in the Parsonage for four and a half years. An old home requires continual maintenance. Ms. Morrissey stated that the lease agreement between the Town and the Housing Partnership states that “the Housing Partnership is to maintain the interior and exterior repairs and is responsible for the maintenance of the buildings including the small cottage at the Parsonage Apartments on Washington Rd.” An amount of $250,000 was obtained in 1999 to be used for “modern rehab.” No one knows where that money went or what it was used for. It’s not traceable as far as she knows, she said.
Mr. Eaton asked Ms. Morrissey to stick to the subject matter of the article.
Ms. Morrissey asked where the books were depicting the expenditure of the money. She asked where all of the rent money between 1999 and 2015 went. She said that she knows that it went to the General Fund, and argued that it should have been set up in a special fund in 1999. She has been after the Selectmen to make repairs on the building for four years. Eight elderly women, all handicapped, live in that building.
Ms. Morrissey enumerated a number of repairs that are needed now. The Town owns the building, the Housing Partnership leases it and Alliance Asset Management is supposed to manage the building but they have no funds with which to do so. The Selectmen have known this. It’s been a secret. “It took me four years to uncover all this information. A lot of secrets in this town.”
Mr. Eaton interrupted Ms. Morrissey and asked her to speak to the article.
Ms. Morrisey asked why the revenue from the lease payments had not been placed in a special fund for large ticket items. Why is a dedicated maintenance fund now being discussed?
Ms. Morrissey started to make an assertion referring to the same people who had mismanaged the building, but Mr. Eaton interrupted her and said that he did not want her slandering people. Ms. Morrissey stated that it would probably be the same people mismanaging the funds in the future.
The con is that it would pull money from the General Fund that would need to be made up by taxation, she said.
Ms. Morrissey asserted that the roof had been leaking into her bedroom. She raised cain and wrote letters and that is why the roof was fixed.
Ms. Morrissey stated that the furnace is patched up periodically and fails to provide adequate heat. Instead, she was provided electric heaters. Although the heat is supposed to be paid for, she must pay the electricity for those heaters.
Mr. Eaton told Ms. Morrissey that she had two more minutes.
Someone called the question.
Mr. Eaton acknowledged that the question had been called, but stated that his rule was that the speaker could continue. He gave Ms. Morrissey two more minutes to speak.
Ms. Morrissey stated that there are eight old women who are suffering, particularly during the winter. There is an infestation of bugs. The Building Inspector has never done a thorough inspection. This money is needed for repairs. This is the first time that she has spoken like this at a Town Meeting, but certain things need to be exposed.
Mr. Eaton stated that the question had been called by Ms. Grote. He said that he there were a number of seconds; he would acknowledge that from Mr. Gould. The motion to end debate carried.
Mr. Eaton ordered Article 15 placed on the ballot as written.
Selectman Mills attempted to respond to the accusations, however Mr. Eaton would not permit it as debate had ended.
Article 14: REALLOCATION OF BEACH PARKING REVS.
(105:55 elapsed)
The motion to remove Article 14 from the table was made by Mr. McDonough, and seconded by Mr. Marion. The motion carried.
Town Counsel Donovan asserted that
“the statutes set out the form of the article that sets up the special revenue fund and restricted revenues and then they go on to say that any changes made to those funds have to follow the same form when they’re on the warrant. The problem that I see with this particular article is the last sentence makes the entire article not lawful, and that says, the lady has proposed, ‘if Article 21 passes, all authority to establish budgets and expend appropriated funds from the Beach Operations Fund shall be vested in the Beach Commission.’ That simply cannot be done under the statute. So, it’s not an appropriate warrant article because of that last sentence. The rest of it is O.K.”
Editor’s note: While RSA 31:95-d provides the form for
adoption or rescission of a Special Revenue Fund, no specific format is
specified for a change in purpose. Thus,
it appears that Mr. Donovan is incorrect.
Based on this, Mr. Eaton ruled the amendment of Ms. Carbajal out of order, but invited her to resubmit the amendment without the offending sentence. Ms. Carbajal indicated that she would like to do this. Mr. Borne seconded the motion. Mr. Eaton read the article as amended.
To see if the town will vote to amend the special revenue fund known as the Beach Cleaning Fund which was established by Article 14 of the 2004 town warrant as follows: (1) increase the restricted beach parking permit revenues which go into the fund from 25% to 100% (of total beach permit revenues); (2) add “monitoring water quality and other environmental issues on Town beaches and watersheds affecting Town beaches and providing additional new beach-related services not already provided by the town in 2014, such as a beach supervisor” to the purposes for which expenditures may be made from the fund and (3) rename the fund the Beach Operations Fund. At present expenditures from the fund are limited to “cleaning town beaches of trash and debris” Note: expenditures from the fund require town meeting approval. (2/3 majority vote required).
Mr. Eaton stated that the recommendations of the Budget Committee and the Selectmen could change with the amended article.
Ms. Carbajal stated that this amendment went hand-in-hand with Article 21. The implementation of Article 21 as intended in 1999 would be continued. The Commissioners were established in 1999 and were to hire a Beach Supervisor. It is a Catch-22 as there was not money to do that.
Selectman Musselman encouraged the Town Meeting not to vote for the
amendment. For years there has not been
a beach supervisor. For years Beach
Commissioners functioned as Beach Supervisors when they were home. That was not working. For the past 4-5 years, the management of the
lifeguard staff has moved to the Fire Department. That has worked well. This year there has been a Beach
Committee. This did not arise from the
Beach Committee. This should have been raised
with the Selectmen by them. This article
would reallocate $25,000 of the $50,000 in beach permit revenues towards these
other operations. This additional
allocation of $25,000 towards a Beach Supervisor is not necessary. What the Beach Supervisor would do has not
been discussed. To the extent that it
should have been discussed it should have been raised any time over the past
year by the Beach Committee.
Selectman Mills asked Ms. Carbajal had been a member of the Beach Committee. Ms. Carbajal confirmed.
Town Finance Director Cyndi Gillespie pointed out that there was a line item in the General Fund for the lifeguards and that that line could be increased if there is a need for a Beach Supervisor.
Scott Marion, 71 Washington Rd., spoke against the proposed amendment as it was obligating the Town to hire a Beach Supervisor, referenced in another article, that is undefined as to salary, job description and term.
Peter Crawford, 171 Brackett Rd., supported the amendment, stating that there are serious problems involving the beach. At the beginning of the summer the Town lifeguards were not on duty but the State lifeguards were. There are serious management issues with the lifeguards and other problems with the beach. Chief Walsh has been struggling to deal with these with a lack of staff. All of the meetings in 2013 and the Deliberative Session last year underscored all of the problems with the beach. This is an additional $25,000 that could be used for any purpose. It doesn’t mandate a Beach Supervisor, that’s only an example. It puts the money aside to address a crying need with the beach. It’s not working now, he said.
Frank Drake, 5 South Rd., sought clarification of the allocation of funds. He then said that he does not support the amendment as it muddies the waters. This is a much larger issue and deserves a lot more thought than a slam bang amendment, he said. He moved to call the question. Mr. Gould seconded.
(119:18 elapsed)
Someone sought the floor. Mr. Eaton stated that, under his new rules, someone had to be speaking to prevent the calling of the question.
Peter Crawford moved that the rules that applied the prior year be re-adopted, providing that anyone standing and waiting to speak can speak even though the question has been called.
Mr. Eaton restated the motion and added that “it has tended to make the session drag on for quite a while…” Mr. Herlihy seconded Mr. Crawford’s motion. Mr. Eaton then called for discussion.
Steven Borne, 431 Wallis Rd., stated that he was not completely comfortable with the rules change and suggested that prior to a vote, the Moderator should ask who is waiting to speak so that those voting on the motion to call the question could be considered. We are quickly cutting off debate, he said.
Mr. Eaton said “I would suggest that that’s up to the body to decide per rules of traditional town meeting. It requires two-thirds present here to call off further discussion.”
Jaci Grote, 124 Washington Rd., said that the purpose of calling the question is to stop debate. That is part of the protocol. If people vote in favor then that’s the way it goes.
Phil
Winslow moved to call the question on the motion to amend the rules. Jim Raynes
seconded. Mr. Eaton called for a vote on
changing the rules. Mr. Eaton announced
that the motion to amend the rules had failed.
Editor’s note: There was no vote on the calling of the
question on the motion to amend the rules.
Mr. Eaton then called for a vote on the issue of calling the question on the amendment to Article 14. That motion carried. He then called for a vote on the amendment. The motion to amend the rules failed.
The question was then called on Article 14 by Shawn Crapo, which was seconded by Mr. Raynes. The motion carried. Article 14 was then ordered placed on the ballot as written.
Shawn Crapo moved to restrict reconsideration on Article 14, which was seconded by Mr. Raynes. The motion carried.
Mr. Eaton then called for a recess until 11:25 a.m.