The Return: Solar Power Article To Be Reconsidered by Town Meeting

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Belmont Town Meeting.

The solar power article – effectively killed off by an amendment postponing indefinitely a vote on the measure on the first night of the Belmont Town Meeting, Monday, May 4 – has returned from the grave after newly-elected Selectman Jim Williams requested the Town Meeting revisit the contentious initiative possibly one more time. 

While voting for the amendment submitted by former Ralph Jones, Williams told the Belmontonian that the decision didn’t “sit well the day after” so he approached Belmont Town Clerk Ellen Cushman early Tuesday to request “a motion to reconsider” which is allowed under town meeting rules.

While Town Moderator Mike Widmer will inform Town Meeting on the reconsideration on the send night of Town Meeting, Wednesday, May 6, the earliest the actual vote on reconsideration will take place is in June, according Cushman.

At that time, Williams will speak on his request, discussion will take place before Town Meeting takes a vote on the reconsideration, which must pass by a 2/3 margin to be placed back before the members. 

If it does reach that plateau, Article 9 will be debated and will need to reach the standard 50 percent plus one vote to be adopted.

William said he believed his vote Monday, which passed overwhelmingly by Town Meeting, was “basically a ‘timeout’ for all parties to settle down and let the new Light Board do its work,”  referring to the board made up of the Selectmen which approves policy for Belmont Light, the town’s public electric utility. 

“[I] learned that the motion to postpone indefinitely was primarily used as a motion to dismiss and is normally employed by town officials when an article has been overcome by events and should be dismissed,” said Williams.

“This clearly was not my voted intention and so the decision to file for reconsideration was straight forward,” he said in an email Tuesday, May 5, 

Williams said, in his opinion, Town Meeting deserve to hear all sides debate the article “and … vote up or down on what [Town Meeting] want to do or should not be able to do.”
The article, which came to Town Meeting as a citizen petition, would place on the town ballot a non-binding resolution to request the town’s state legislators to vote for state legislation that would require Belmont and other municipal utilities to provide solar users favorable treatment when crediting solar owners for the electricity they add to the grid.
Yet many Town Meeting were incredulous with the measure when they discovered there is not state legislation for the legislators to vote on, and that the measure was presented to Town Meeting as a method to begin a discussion on promoting solar power. 

Preview of the Second Night of Belmont Town Meeting, May 6

By Leave a Comment

Photo: 

The second night of the 156th edition of Belmont Town Meeting takes place on Wednesday, May 6 as the meeting reconvenes at 7 p.m. at Belmont High School to hopefully complete the remaining non-budgetary issues before the 290-member legislative body.

The evening will revolve around debate on the $1.1 million in grants coming from the Community Preservation Committee.

They include:

  • Belmont Veterans Memorial Project: $150,000,
  • Wellington Station exterior restoration and rehabilitation: $26,300,
  • Electrical upgrade at units owned by the Belmont Housing Authority: $522,500,
  • Digitization of historic Belmont newspapers from 1890 to 1983: $25,000.
  • Rehabilitation and restoration of the 1853 Homer House: $100,000.
  • Upgrade and restore the Pequossette Park: $295,000.

There will likely be questions from Town Meeting on public money being used on a private residence such as the Homer House (owned by the Belmont Woman’s Club) and why residents tax money (the CPC receives its funding from a surtax on property taxes) is being used to repair the electrical wiring at buildings which are run by the state. 

In addition, a Special Town Meeting will be convened to allow for the transfer of money from reserve accounts to pay down the deficits in the school department (about a half-a-million dollars due largely to skyrocketing special education costs) and about $750,000 in the snow removal account. 

Recycling Saturday: Town, Butler Elementary Ready To Reclaim Material May 9

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Recycling Saturday in Belmont.

This Saturday, May 9, Belmont residents will have the opportunity to recycle just about anything they could ever hope, thanks to the town and the parents at the Butler Elementary School. 

• The town’s Department Public Work will have its annual Recycling Day from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. at the Town Yard, 37 C St. Residents can recycle:

  • large, rigid plastics,
  • textiles (even ripped or stained),
  • clothes,
  • styrofoam,
  • DVDs,
  • CDs and
  • eyeglasses.

They will also provide secure paper shredding with a five box limit.

In addition, children’s clothes collected will be given to the Nepalese employees at dado tea in Cambridge who are flying to Nepal to volunteer with post-earthquake relief. 

Used, clean books should be donated to either the Belmont Public Library or at the Benton Library for their used books sale. Donors can take the donation as a tax deducttion.

• Butler Elementary, 90 White St., is holding its yearly Electronics Recycling and Disposal Drive from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. in the Butler parking lot. For a small fee, you can drop off your old televisions, computer monitors, or anything with a plug. Prices for disposal are lower than the town’s, and there’s no need to purchase a pickup sticker.

The fees are:

  • $10 each for computer monitors,
  • $15 each for TVs 27” diagonal or less,
  • $20 each for TVs more than 27” diagonal or wood console TVs,
  • $25 each for projection TVs,
  • $15 each for large appliances such as washers, dryers, air conditioners, dehumidifiers, etc., and
  • $35 for all you can bring: laptops, CPUs, cameras, CD ROM/DVD drives, servers, speakers, iPods & accessories, computer accessories, mice, keyboards, video equipment, copy/fax/scanner/printers, wires and parts, plugs, audio equipment, phones and phone systems, DVD players, stereos, UPS (back up systems), VCRs, Walkmans and microwaves.

One note: They accept cash or checks only.

Selectmen To Give $386K to Capital Budget Rather than Taxpayers

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Belmont Board of Selectmen.

What would you do with an extra $386,000 in next year’s budget? Give it back to taxpayers? How about spending it right off to repair the roads? 

“That $386,000 has generated quite a bit of discussion around town,” said Sami Baghdady, the chair of the Belmont Board of Selectmen.

Before Town Meeting on Monday, May 4, the Selectmen tentatively decided the $386,000 in additional state aid the town was not expecting into next fiscal town budget will be heading over to the Capital Budget Committee to be used to assist big-ticket items.

“Finally, all our pleading paid off,” said Anne Marie Mahoney, chair of the Capital Budget Committee, after the meeting.

Town Meeting will need to approve the allocation to Capital Budget in June when budget articles are voted.

After debating for more than a month what to do with the funds, the Selectmen’s decision to park the money in a Capital Budget Stabilization Fund comes at the expense of taxpayers. By not increasing the tax levy by the “extra” state funding, residential homeowners would have saved on next year’s tax bill, according to Town Treasurer Floyd Carman.

“Having just voting a considerable override, this would be a little bit of relief, maybe $40 to $50 or so to the taxpayers,” said Baghdady. 

“I’d really like to turn the money back to the residents, but we need to give direction,” said Selectman Mark Paolillo. 

Yet during last week’s Warrant Committee meeting, Town Moderator Mike Widmer called the tax relief move “a gimmick” as there are real needs to be serviced in town. 

Other possible uses included replenishing the Belmont School Department’s special education stabilization fund, the entire $250,000 in the account will be used to fill a $500,000 budget gap facing the department this year.

But there is a real need for the Capital Budget Committee to obtain additional funds since the $240,000 it will receive from the $4.5 million Proposition 2 1/2 override approve by voters in April to finance a million dollars in bonds for miscellaneous items, is about to be used to replace to the 45-year-old fire alarm system at Belmont High School. Belmont’s Fire Chief David Frizzell said if the system fails, the high school building will be closed.

“So the intention of giving us more money to fund our pay-as-you-go capital budget is not happening because it’s going to the fire alarm system,” said Mahoney.

“It’s frustrating to us … expecting that when the override passed we would get some more money to deal with our list,” she said.

When Paolillo asked Mahoney if the committee needed the money, she listed off a half dozen “immediate” projects that requires action. 

By the end of the meeting, the Selectmen believed the best use of the $386,000 is by providing Capital Budget with the extra cash.

The Capital Budget Committee is meeting on Wednesday, May 6, at 6 p.m. at Belmont High School to discuss how the extra money will be allocated.

Late-Inning Heroics (Again) Gives Belmont High Baseball Another Win

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Nick Call about to celebrate his game winning single against Wakefield.

“I’m too old for this,” said Belmont High School Head Baseball Coach Jim Brown.

After seeing the team blow a two-run lead in the top of the 7th inning against Wakefield, Brown was standing in the third base coaching box watching the Marauders load the bases on a walk and two infield singles in the bottom of the inning.

And with the count full with two outs, left fielder Nick Call (2 for 3, 2 RBIs) beat out yet another infield hit to bring home nine-hitting Matt Kerans to give Belmont a 3-2 win over Wakefield (7-3) on Monday, May 4, at Brendan Grant Field, for its seventh win in 11 contests this season.

Belmont is making a “habit” of waiting until the late innings or into extra frames to pull out (or in come cases lose) games this season, said Brown.

And Monday was no exception as Belmont worked hard behind ace junior pitcher Cole Bartels to carry a 2-0 lead into the 7th with single runs in the 4th and 6th.

First base Robbie Montanaro laced a no-out double and came home on an error after DH’s Noah Riley‘s single for the first run, while the second run came courtesy of some good hustle from catcher Cal Christofori (2 for 3 including two singles and an intentional walk) who singled, stole second and came home on Call’s first single of the game.

Unlike previous games, Belmont was able to get on base but couldn’t push across a run early. They left the bases loaded in the first and outstanding freshman third base Kevin Dacey continues to impress at the plate when he ripped an extra-base hit down the right field line only to be caught trying for a triple in the bottom of the second.

Bartels was cruising along throwing 10 strike outs including striking out Wakefield’s 3-4-5 batters in the 4th. And his defense got him out of jams such as when Christofori cut down a Wakefield runner attempting to steal second with two outs and a man on third in the 2nd inning.

IMG_5757

But Bartels nearly lost it all in the top half of the 7th, hitting a batter, allowing a long double and an infield hit loaded the bases. Two consecutive singles brought in the first and tying runs before he settled down to retire the side on two pop ups and his tenth K.

Kerans started the rally with an in-between shot that the Wakefield third baseman could not get over to first quick enough to beat the speedy outfielder. With two outs, Bartels helped his own cause with a squibbed hit to put men on first and second. Rather than face Christofori, he was given a free pass to load the bases so Wakefield’s pitcher would face Call. That turned out to bite the visitors as a long throw pulled the Wakefield first baseman off the bag, allowing Call to reach and Kerans to score.

Just another game in Belmont.

Solar Flare Up: Town Meeting Rejects Petition as Members Voice Concerns

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Town Meeting.

Tempers flared as Town Meeting members rejected an article hoping to spark a conversation about the future of solar power that one member called “too squishy” on the first night of the annual Belmont Town Meeting held Monday, May 4, at Belmont High School.

Tensions rose to a point unseen in recent years when the presenter of the solar power article accused some members of being too scared to debate the subject.

“What are you afraid of? A conversation? An argument? Having different opinions? It’s sort of like ‘let’s not talk about this’. ‘Let’s keep it under the table’,” queried Roger Wrubel, Precinct 5, as fellow members shouted out “point of order!” to Town Moderator Mike Widmer – who previously sternly rebuked a few members for straying from the narrow nature of article – who moments later admonished Wrubel for making accusations against a member of the Board of Selectmen.

Former Selectman Ralph Jones, who filed an successful amendment to the article to delay indefinitely the citizens petition, said bad blood has been boiling over in the past year during the crafting and implantation of a new set of rules for solar customers approved by the Light Board (which is comprised of the Board of Selectmen) in December, only to be set aside two weeks ago.

“[B]oth sides on this issue really want to fight tonight. A fight to the death … A fight to the pain,” Jones said, referring to a quote from “The Princess Bride.”

Jones than quoted a citizen who said “… Fighting over this issue is not helping our efforts to reduce carbon emissions. It’s just getting in our way.”

In the end, while the majority of members did not appear hostile towards solar energy, the legislative body once again was reluctant to support an article which was, at best, confusing and apparently counter to the true nature of the measure.

Wubel said just that, noting that the article’s aim, to bring a non-binding resolution to the voters that would ask the town’s state legislators to vote for a legislative measure that doesn’t exist.

“[The article] is to start a conversation on solar energy at Town Meeting,” said Wrubel.

Town Meeting also sent a message that it wished to follow the advice of the newly-constituted Light Board – with the inclusion of newly-elected Selectman Jim Williams and chaired by Sami Baghdady – to allow it to write a Belmont-specific plan to assist in promoting greater solar usage.

“This was a wake-up call for Belmont,” said Baghdady.

And while proponents of the measure – which would have placed a non-binding referendum on the town’s ballot – left the Belmont High School auditorium in a huff after its defeat, it was pointed out that the status quo in Belmont today gives the pro-solar power what they have long been seeking.

“Until a new policy is created, Belmont has full net metering. Isn’t that what they want?” said Baghdady after the meeting. 

Wrubel’s presentation spoke of the success of solar statewide but how past and future policies were affecting progress in Belmont.

The goals of this non-binding resolution is to ensure that Belmont Light [the town’s electrical utility] “treat their solar customers the same as solar customers as they are throughout the state,” said Wrubel, pointing out that 30 of 40 municipal utilities uses a concept called net metering that credits solar owners for the electricity they add to the grid.

Unlike other utilities in the state, Wrubel said what Belmont Light is doing is not providing retail pricing but a small fee to solar generators. That is one of the reasons Belmont has only 20 residents with solar arrays.

“The effects of the policy that the Light Board has been discussing and eventually pass really has a chilling effect on people willing to take on solar in Belmont,” said Wrubel.

Jones introduces Patty DiOrio, of the Belmont Municipal Light Advisory Board – which wrote the draft plan that is no longer being used – who said the article “effectively says that we shouldn’t decide for ourselves whether or not we have certain policies surrounding solar or any other type of green energy.”

DiOrio said many utilities are currently questioning net metering “so we are in good company” and much of that has to do with all customers paying a “subsidy” to allow solar users to use the grid but not pay for the systems upkeep that has a lot of fixed costs.

DiOrio noted that a state task force on solar power released a report last week saying “people using the grid should pay their fair share; it was a consensus agreement.”

“So you can vote no on this article and know that you are not anti-solar,” said DiOrio. “Why do we want to give up our local control? Why would we want to endorse a policy that is neither market-based nor cost based?”

Jones, who spent the previous weekend in a “shuttle diplomacy” to find a compromise between the two sides which proved unsuccessful, presented his amendment to the article tabling the measure indefinitely.

“I proposed postponing this for a while to let tempers cool down,” said Jones, pointing out the Light Board decided on April 22 to indefinitely propose a draft policy approved back in December that would have set a new policy on net metering long opposed by solar supporters.

“Article 9 in a non-binding sort of way instructs our legislators to vote in favor of legislation that does not exist and also asks you as Town Meeting members to vote for legislation that you can not read. That’s fairly rare,” said Jones.

Since any state legislation on solar power – none is being proposed currently – won’t be filed until the next legislative year, “it would be prudent to me to allow our Light Board to act. They have been elected to govern … local officials adopting local policy to meet local needs,” said Jones.

After making his “fight to the death” comment, Jones asked residents “to put down our verbal weapons, stop this fight and postpone Article 9” which the Board of Selectmen asked for favorable action.

During question time, Fred Paulsen, Precinct 1, said he would have voted “yes” on an up-or-down amendment that said are we in favor of net metering. “But [this amendment] is not that simple, the language of this resolution is complex and brings in the state level so we ought to work on this locally.”

Anne Mahon, Precinct 4, said that solar companies will not come to Belmont since the current conditions are preserved to be so anti-solar. “11 cents a household a year to support the people with solar. Is that really going to kill you? If it is, call me. I’ll pay the bill.”

Then, suddenly, things got heated. Paul Roberts, Precinct 8, said he wasn’t going to talk to Jones’ amendment but rather “we need a municipal electric company that really represents the values and priorities of this town” while this issue was “foisted upon this town by some ideological leadership on the Municipal Light Advisory Board.”

That’s when Widmer told Roberts he had moved beyond the scope of Jones’ amendment. When Roberts objected, Widmer would not have any more discussion on the matter.

Claus Becker, Precinct 5, questioned the claims by DiOrio that subsidies are provided to solar users. When Widmer asked that he returned to the narrow question before Town Meeting, Becker asked to “please allow the conversation that we’ve been elected to have to proceed.”

Widmer said while there are worthy questions to ask about global warming and solar power, “we are considering a motion for indefinite postponement, and it is incumbent for us to stick to our business.”

Baghdady, in answering a question on when the Light Board would begin debating new rules, said that Belmont Light is currently operating “right now pure net metering” and was going to remain that way until a new policy is adopted.

Despite given an opportunity earlier to speak against the postponement of his article, Wrubel asked to address the meeting.

“The reason that we brought this because at meetings that we … ” Wrubel attempted to say before calls from the members rang out of “point of order” as they felt Wrubel had veered off the subject.

Widmer allowed Wrubel to continue until he made an accusation that one of the Board of Selectmen told solar supporters “that you don’t matter” when drawing up regulations.

Widmer sternly told Wrubel his statements were “inappropriate” and “[T]his kind of accusation, I’m not going to put up with it. So, please, sit down.”

Julie Crocket, Precinct 5, and Phil Thayer, Precinct 6, supported continuing debate to help determine the sentiment of Town Meeting towards solar power.

But Bob McLaughlin, Precinct 2, said he supported Jones’ amendment “because I don’t know what we’re voting on. This is too squishy for me.”

“This has to come into a lot more focus on the vote of this board means anything,” said McLaughlin.

Nearly 70 percent of Town Meeting voted to determinate debate and Jones’ amendment was approved overwhelmingly. 

For Baghdady, it is now up to the Light Board “to come up with a plan that truly meets all the demands from both the solar supporters and Belmont Light. We have this opportunity which I believe we can accomplish.”

Babysitting 101: Library Holding Workshop for Kids and Teens

By Leave a Comment

Photo:

Many of the first paid jobs young teens have is babysitting for siblings or neighborhood children. They learn and demonstrate responsibility, autonomy from parental control while coming up with their own spending money. 
The Belmont Public Library is holding a Babysitting Workshop this Saturday, May 9, from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. in the Flett Room. Presented by Janice Nolan Henry, R.N., M.Ed, learn the basics of babysitting, child safety, age-appropriate play and basic first aid to become a great care provider. Students aged 10 years and older are eligible to sign up for the course. Bring luck and a doll.
Registration fills up quickly, so go to the library’s registration site, or call 617-993-2870.

Belmont Town Meeting: Night 1, May 4

By 2 Comments

Photo: Belmont Town Meeting.

Welcome to the first night of the 156 annual Belmont Town Meeting, Monday, May 4, 2014, the town’s legislative body in action.

So, what’s in store tonight? Likely we’ll get through the first nine articles in the warrant which includes a non-binding resolution on a solar power referendum (the debate on this could go one and on), a McMansion zoning article, storm water review, and other stuff.

And the meeting is on Belmont time, five minutes late.

7:08 p.m.: We’ve had the invocation, the flags were brought into the auditorium by the Boy and Cub scouts, the Pledge of Allegiance and the singing of the National Anthem by the Belmont High A Cappella. Very nice.

7:15 p.m.: I wonder when the Town Meeting will be comfortable with electronic voting that we don’t need a demonstration. I’m guessing a few more decades.

7:20 p.m.: New and recently re-elected members are given the oath of office by Town Clerk Ellen Cushman.

7:25 p.m.: Town Moderator Mike Widmer telling the members about the new rules; five minutes per speaker, one question and a follow up question, and direct questions through the moderator.

7:28 p.m.: Two proclamations to a pair residents “beloved by Belmont,” said Selectmen Chair Sami Baghdady; Anne Allen and Bob Dally.

7:35 p.m.: So we’re off – time to hear the order of the motions. The first nine articles will be debated in May, “hopefully within the first two nights,” said Baghdady.

“I am very upbeat on Belmont,” said Baghdady.

Anne Paulsen is giving an update on the new Underwood Pool. Everything is swimmingly. “Work is going on in a feverous pace” so the pool can be completed by August for a “short season.” So get passes at a discounted rate at the Recreation Department.

7:42 p.m.: Housecleaning articles up first.

7:44 p.m.: Up is Article 3, amending the Storm Water Management and Erosion bylaw to allow more updated rainfall data to apply to the bylaw. But the Conservation Commission uses the old data, which would be a mess as half the town would be using different data. The amendment would allow the ConCom to use the new data, while asking the Board of Selectmen to use the new data set. With a few questions, the article is adopted, with a single no vote. 

7:57 p.m.: Article 6, the citizens petition to control the building of McMansions in the Shaw Estates neighborhood. You can read what the beef of the residents here. Basically, the residents are seeking to limit the height of residential properties to 32 feet to the mid-point. This will sunset on June 30, 2016 unless extended at the next Town Meeting. The people, now called the Belmont Citizens for Responsible Zoning, live in single-family residence, hopes this moratorium will begin a discussion on these “oversized” homes that tower over neighboring homes, crowd out sunlight, and undermines the character of the “Town of Homes.” The current zoning bylaw requires existing homes to obtain a special permit but not for new construction.

Stephen Pinkerton, Pct. 7, said the town faces acceleration oversize construction, especially his neighborhood. Five new McMansions have gone up in the past few years. The before and after pictures of what was there and what is replaced has Town Meeting buzzing, especially the new house on Betts Road currently under construction. “Our neighborhood has been transformed,” said Peg Callahan, who is presenting the petition.

Pinkerton shows that new construction under current bylaw will allow the total height to be 40 feet tall. The 32 feet mid-point “is a compromise” so not to be overwhelming. Callahan said if approved, the new group will meet with Planning Board to construct town-wide limits. A good cheer at the end.

Jim Stanton, Pct. 3, said since the town approved a series of actions in the General Residence district (precinct 3 and 4), one argument against the moratorium is economic harm to seller and developers, but it turns out only the developers reap the great profit when a McMansion is built rather than a more sensible sized house.

Price Armstrong, Pct. 7, asked if the town as a town-wide master plan to come to these goals. He said Cambridge, Lexington and others have such a comprehensive plan. Baghdady said there was one five years ago (but that was killed – tabled – at the 2010 Town Meeting). 

Bob Kennedy, Pct 3, said he lives in Kendell Garden, a neighborhood of small homes, and he was effected when a McMansion was built there. Why would it not be better that the entire town be placed under the neighborhood, because then developers will go to other neighborhoods to beat a town wide change in the bylaw. Selectman Mark Paolillo said you can’t change the amendment but he’s worried about this. Mike Battista, chair of the Planning Board, said even if a town-wide bylaw is not approved, this moratorium can be extended. 

Marty Cohen, Pct. 3, said that this is a “wake-up call.” “Belmont needs a zoning bylaw that’s good for Belmont.”

8:33 p.m.: a voice vote on the article: clearly adopted to the moderator, but why not an electronic vote? And the vote is: 238 to 24.

Wow, only a half an hour to go thorough that amendment.

8:38 p.m.: Next up is Article 7 which is related to the rezoning of General Residences district which passed articles to give special tools to the Planning Board – special permits being one – to make for better housing that is consistent with the neighborhood. Planning Board member Liz Allison said the Board would like another tool. Under the current bylaw, the developer can build a big two-family with a special permit. So this amendment would allow the board to approve a developer with a large lot, 8,000 sq-ft and 90 feet of frontage, to build a pair of single families. 

8:46 p.m.: And the fire alarm goes off! And off we go to the parking lot!

9 p.m.: And we are back! That was delightful. I understand members who left through the music room were serenaded by a chorus. 

Now back to the article; the proponents are looking to “bring back the charm” of the single family (with limits to allow green space between the two buildings) back to the GR zone, said Joseph DeStefano of the Planning Board. 

Questions? Several interesting questions on position of the front door, hypothetical events, and other issues. The question is called and debate is ended. The vote on the article (requires 2/3 vote since it’s a zoning bylaw) is 235 to 10 and the article is adopted.

9:35 p.m.: Moderator Mike Widmer asks if the meeting will want to begin Article 9, the solar power non-binding resolution, debate it for an hour and suspend until Wednesday. Yes, says the meeting.

This is Article 9, the citizens petition on solar power. The Board of Selectmen voted 2-1 to oppose the article. (Jim Williams the lone yes vote). Roger Wrubel, Pct 5, speaks for the petition. Wrubel said this article will bring solar power to a wider audience. This isn’t really about a ballot question, but rather a request for the public utility, Belmont Light, not discriminate against solar owners with special fees. Wrubel explains net metering, required by most utilities which, it turns out, intensifies solar usage. Wrubel said he wants Belmont Light to provide the same retail net metering as 30 of 40 communities. How many Belmont household have solar arrays? 20. Not much. Wrubel said Belmont Light’s policy has punished residents who want to use solar. 

Ralph Jones, Pct 3, introduces Patty DiOrio, of the Belmont Municipal Light Advisory Board – which wrote the draft plan that is no longer being used, who said that the solar advocates will get a subsidy from other users. There is no discrimination to solar users, said DiOrio. This is about keeping local control on how the utility determines how to pay for solar power. 

Jones said its best to wait on the issue so Belmont can create its own standards. He said there are people at Town Meeting who are itching to do battle over the issue. “They want a fight to the death … a fight to the pain.” He proposes this amendment be postpone until a later date to allow emotions to  calm down. 

Fred Paulsen, Pct 1, said its critical Belmont has a strong independent utility. He said with the state task force on solar net metering coming out with a report, the Light Board (it’s made up of the Board of Selectmen) will come up with it’s own standards.

Suddenly the issue is getting people hot under the collar. Paul Roberts, Pct 8, is scolded rather loudly by the moderator for moving beyond the narrow scope of the question. 

Dan Nolan, Pct 2, wonders how long is “indefinite” as in “indefinitely postponed.” Baghdady said the draft buy back plan is off the boards and the Light Board will come up with a plan for Belmont “sooner than later.”

When asked by a speaker if DiOrio has a conflict of interest as she is employed by National Grid, a large utility that supplies Belmont Light with energy, she and Jones said no, this was irrelevant to this measure. For some reason, this is the final straw for Wrubel who goes to the speakers podium and accusing people of “being afraid” to discuss the article and the subject. Calls from the members ring out that Wrubel is “out of order.” Moderator Widmer has heard enough and sends Wrubel back to the bench.

Julie Crocket, Pct. 5, and Phil Thayer, Pct 6, support the measure and requests that the debate continue.

Bob McLaughlin, Pct. 2, questions the entire article, saying it’s far too “squishy” to vote on because it advises the town’s state legislators to vote for legislation that doesn’t exist. 

Then, of all people, Don Mercier, Pct. 8, asked that the questioned be moved, needed a 2/3 majority, it got it. Town Meeting is not in a mood to spend the rest of the night and Wednesday in a debating tournament. Article 9 is voted down by a healthy margin.

10:20 p.m.: Town Meeting will reconvene on Wednesday, May 6.

As Town Delays Policy, Town Meeting Considers Solar Power Resolution

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Solar panels.

Just two weeks after the Belmont Light Board – made up of the Belmont Board of Selectmen – decided to delayed the start of a payment plan for residents who use solar power, Town Meeting will debate placing a non-binding resolution on the town ballot to ask if the town should support as policy a higher subsidy to homeowners who choose the solar route.

While Sami Baghdady, the chair of the Light Board and the Selectmen, said the delay was so legal language could be clarified in the documents homeowners are required to sign, he did not dismiss the possibility the Light Board – which oversees Belmont Light, the municipal electric utility – could lead to a change in the Residential Rate APV, the new set of rates for customers who use solar panels to generate electricity which was approved in December. 

“At this point, it’s a delay. May it result in a re-evalutation of the policy? I think it might,” said Baghdady after a Selectmen’s meeting on Monday, April 27. 

The Light Board OK’d the postponement after several of the 18 residents who are entitled to participate in Belmont Light’s new program voiced concerns on understanding the legal language in the agreement including a very strong indemnity provision that needed to be signed and returned by April 24. 

“So when [the board] met (on April 22), we raised several questions regarding the packet that went out to residents that were still unresolved. So we agreed to delay the implementation. Concurrent with that, so that necessitated a delay in the filing [by Belmont Light] to the Massachusetts Department of Utilities,” said Baghdady. 

With the new residential rate delayed, Town Meeting will likely take up on the first night of the annual meeting, Monday, May 4, a citizen’s petition from a group of solar power advocates seeking members approval to place a non-binding referendum to gauge the community’s support for either the newly-created buy back pricing program or one which provides a greater payback to households using solar energy. 

Under the newly-delayed plan – which took nearly two years and sometimes contentious debates between advocates and the Municipal Light Advisory Board which drew up the blueprint – residents who install solar power would pay the standard monthly fee every household pays to be hooked up to the Belmont Light system, and a new monthly charge of about $14 for installed capacity.

The new plan also reduces the money homeowners receives as a credit for energy Belmont Light “buys back” when the solar system is generating excess energy as the utility pays for electricity over the course of the entire month, without crediting the homeowner if the electricity is generated during peak-times and how much greenhouse gas emissions they are savings.  

Solar advocates contend they should receive additional credits, (or as the utility calls subsidies) for a myriad of energy and pollution savings.

While the debate in Belmont continues, a state task force on net metering and solar power issued its own report on April 30 concluding that it did did “not support raising the net metering caps in the short term absent a long term sustainable solution.”

“Rather, we believe it is extremely important that any adjustments to the caps be accompanied by meaningful changes to the mix of incentives and proper consideration of the role of the ratepayers,” it read.

È buono: Learn to Cook the Italian Way Thanks to Belmont Food Collaborative

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Penne Ai Peperoni

Ah, Italia! Wine, sunshine, romance and … food.

While you may be unable to travel this year to visit Rome, Sicily or Tuscany, thanks to the Belmont Food Collaborative – the folks that run the Belmont Farmers Market – you and your older children can learn how to cook as if you are in Italy.

The group is holding three hands-on classes about Italian cooking in May, including:

  1. Cook Italian, for High School Students: Friday May 8, 3 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. at First Church Belmont; Unitarian, 404 Concord Ave., Fee: $12, including ingredients. Class size: 10.
  2. Italian Cooking Basics 101: Monday May 11, 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. at First Church Belmont, Unitarian; Fee: $33, including ingredients. Class size: 8.
  3. Italian Spring Menu: Monday May 18, 10 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at First Church Belmont, Unitarian; Fee: $33, including ingredients. Class size: 8.

Find more information and to sign up for the classes, go to the Belmont Food Collaborative’s website.

Instructors Carmen Conte Sivers and Claudia Levi Brizzolara are natives from Italy – respectively of the Amalfi Coast and Torino – as well as Belmont moms who will offer their Italian cooking experiences and share their joy of cooking as it was transmitted to them by their mothers and grandmothers.

Sign up now and you’ll see that delicious and nutritious food does not have to be complicated to make, nor expensive to buy.