Belmont Voters To Decide Assessors Future As Town Meeting OKs Change To Appointed Board

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Select Board Chair Roy Epstein

It will be up to Belmont voters to decide the future of the Board of Assessors when a special session of Town Meeting voted 156-87 with two abstentions to place a ballot question on this April’s annual Town Election to change the structure of the three-member board from an elected to an appointed body.

The vote, which took place virtually on Monday, Jan. 22, came nearly a year after a special Town Meeting voted 185-46 to change the town treasurer’s post to an appointed position, which town voters seconded in April 2023.

For Roy Epstein, chair of the Belmont Select Board, who shepherded the article through the public process and at the special town meeting, the article’s passage was a nod by the majority of Town Meeting Members on the willingness of town government to employ town resources to improve the town’s fiscal future.

“I would like to think people responded a little bit to what I said, but in a large sense, the vote was an expression of competence in the town administrator [Patrice Garvin],” said Epstein a day after the meeting. “It’s a vote of confidence of policy changes that the town will value and improve governance. That’s what people are looking for. And I think [Garvin] has been incredibly thorough in identifying ways to improve how government works, and I’m glad people are recognizing that.”

Supporters of the article were willing to agree that while there is a consensus the current assessors “operate at a very high standard” in determining the value of the real estate in town, said Epstein, there is an increasing need for the board to become a partner in the finance team – which includes the town’s appointed treasurer, the financial director, the town accountant and – that sets the town’s fiscal policy. The select board and town officials point to areas such as creating a PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) program and assisting in significant changes to the town’s zoning map in which the assessors’ knowledge and data will be the final critical piece in formulating “a more cohesive, collaborative working finance team,” said Garvin.

The select board or town officials expressed little confidence the current elected assessors are willing to support the town’s requests as both Epstein and fellow Select Board member Elizabeth Dionne each voiced their disappointment with the board’s response to numerous requests – such as establishing senior tax relief – from town committees and the board which were allowed to die on the vine.

“It didn’t happen and after four years of trying to make [senior tax relief] because it is a tax policy question. I just don’t think the collaboration between the Board of Assessors and the Select Board in the current form is working out. My view at this point is that there are better prospects for that type of coordination between different parts of town government if the board of assessors became appointed rather than elected, and that’s my principal reason for supporting the article in its current form,” said Epstein.

The Assessors’ long-time chair, Robert Reardon, defended the elected board in its current form since the town’s incorporation in 1859, calling it “an important aspect of checks and balances” in town finances with the prime role of the assessors “to set the [real estate] values independent of the budget process.”

While the assessors answer questions at public meetings and work with the town and committees on several fiscal areas, Reardon said the board rarely ventures beyond their core responsibilities of appraising real estate, deciding to grant or deny abatements, and voting on exemptions based on the person – such as seniors or disabled veterans – who owns the property. It has not expanded its reach into town fiscal policy due to state directives from the Department of Revenue.

“We don’t make policy,” said Reardon. “We have to take an oath to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and that oath is to uphold the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. And by doing so … we’re limited on what we can do. We cannot implement any new tax policies in the town without the approval of the state legislature.”

Reardon also said that an elected board of residents “shows a commitment and a dedication by the candidates to serve the town,” which would be lacking by an appointed body that doesn’t have a residence requirement.

For most of the meeting, Town Moderator Mike Widmer successfully limited the debate to changing the board’s structure rather than discussing how either variation would alter town policies or finances.

Cosmo Macero from Precinct 5 said he would vote against the article as “there is accountability in elections … and being an elected official.” As for the lack of collaboration with town boards and elected officials, “it’s possible that the Select Board may need to look elsewhere as to what the problem was with the collaboration.”

“As a non-policy making body, I want them to only collaborate a little on policy. I want them to perform their very important duty which is to measure and assess the value of our property for the purpose of tax information,” said Macero.

Angus Abercrombie, Precinct 8, who submitted the citizen’s petition to bring the article before Town Meeting, asked if changing the Town Treasurer to an appointed post had produced efficiencies in that department that could be replicated in the Assessors’ office. Garvin said Treasurer Lesley Davison’s experience and knowledge in the position have resulted in “finding efficiencies every day which will only benefit the residents of Belmont.”

“I believe, based on the town and [its] managerial structure, we will be able to implement efficiencies that have long been long wanted by the finance team,” said Garvin.

Ira Morgenstern, Precinct 7, advocated the belief first mentioned by Liz Allison, Precinct 3, at a public forum a week earlier: Don’t fix what’s not broken.

“It’s not needed,” said Morgenstern of the article. Calling the current board “a great team,” Morgenstern then suggested that a “yes” vote would be “a further concentration of power to the Select Board [who would have appointing powers] and the Town Administrator … while reduces the oversight and … our internal controls.”

But for Claus Becker, Precinct 5, giving the Select Board the final say in appointing the assessors’ is the correct step as residents voted for the three-member body to enact its vision of the town’s fiscal future.

And just like last year’s vote to make the Treasurer an appointed position, the tally wasn’t that close, with the “yes” category garnering 64 percent of members.

Belmont Winter Special Town Meeting: Virtual Session Set For Jan. 22 On Board Of Assessors

By Leave a Comment

Photo: The current board of assessors (from left) Charles R. Laverty, Robert P. Reardon, Patrick Murphy with Dan Dargon, the Assessing Administrator

A winter Special Town Meeting is all set as the Belmont Select Board opened and closed the warrant for an all-virtual meeting assembly dedicated to a single proposition: to transition the Board of Assessors from an elected to an appointed council.

The fully remote meeting will occur on Monday, Jan. 22, 2024, at 7 p.m.

The article awaiting the members originated as a citizen petition from Precinct 8’s Angus Abercrombie for the fall Special Meeting in November. Due to the heavy agenda facing the meeting, Moderator Mike Widmer asked Abercrombie to have the petition moved to the new year, where it would receive the attention it deserved.

A recommendation in a 2022 review of the town’s financial structure by the Edward J. Collins, Jr. Center for Public Management at UMass Boston, the change in the Board of Assessors structure will bring an essential element in the town’s fiscal structure under the umbrella of the financial director. Earlier this year, the post of Town Treasurer was made an appointed position.

The current board comprises long-time Chair Robert P. Reardon, Charles R. Laverty, III, and Patrick J. Murphy, IV.

Back Live! Annual Town Meeting Begins On May Day At BHS Auditorium

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Town Meeting is coming to the Belmont High auditorium

For the first time since November 2019, Belmont’s Town Meeting will be held live and in person at the Belmont High School auditorium.

The 2023 annual Town Meeting begins at 7 p.m. on the following dates:

  • May 1, 3, 8, 10  (Segment A); and
  • May 31, June 5, 7, 12 (Segment B, the budget section). 

These dates the town has reserved as per custom; it is not likely that all eight nights will be required.  

The meeting will not be using any mobile voting for in-person, rather there will be a return to using of handheld voting devices, often referred to as “clickers.”

The Town Moderator has designated specific areas of the Belmont High School Auditorium for those Town Meeting Members who wish to observe a social distance from other Town Meeting Members during the meeting.

For those Town Meeting Members whose email or phone has changed, and for all new Town Meeting Members, submit a new contact sheet to the Town Clerk as soon as possible.

The order of articles will be determined by the Town Moderator, Mike Widmer, and will be distributed with the motions. In addition to articles and citizen petitions, the town meeting will have a “special” dropped into the proceedings.

How the Special Town Meeting will work

On the second night May 3, the meeting will begin at 7 p.m. At 7:30 p.m., the Town Moderator will briefly adjourn the annual Town Meeting and convene the Special Town Meeting to take action on the only article, the appropriation for the Rink and Sports Facility, the debt exclusion approved by Belmont voters on April 4. Once the votes under the Special Town Meeting are completed, the Moderator will dissolve the Special Town Meeting, and we will return to the business of the annual Town Meeting.

The Handbook for Belmont Town Meeting Members is available on that webpage but here’s a direct link.

Amending Articles

The deadline for amendments to the articles is at the close of business, three business days before the date the article will be taken up:

For Segment A:

  • Monday, May 1 deadline is 4 PM April 26
  • Wednesday, May 3, deadline is Noon April 28
  • Monday, May 8 deadline is 4 PM May 3
  • Wednesday, May 10 deadline is Noon May 5

Precinct 6 caucus

Due to a failure to elect at the annual Town Election held on April 4, Precinct 6 Town Meeting Members will attend an in-person caucus at 7 p.m. on April 27 at the Homer Building in the Town Hall complex. All Precinct 6 Town Meeting Members have been sent the notice.

“I hope that the caucus will be completed in time for members to participate in the warrant briefing that has since been scheduled for the same night.,” said Town Clerk Ellen Cushman.

Special Town Meeting Places Appointed Treasurer Question On The April 4 Town Election Ballot

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Special Town Meeting approved the one article on the agenda

In an overwhelming show of support for transforming how the town runs its finances, the Belmont Special Town Meeting voted Monday, Jan. 30, to place a ballot question on the 2023 annual Town Election to convert the elected town treasurer’s post to an appointed position.

The vote – 195 yes, 52 no, with one abstention – will place before town voters at the April 4 election the opportunity to implement a major recommendation proposed by the 2022 Collins Center Report in reshaping Belmont’s fiscal structure or to retain the current framework that stretches back to the town’s founding in 1859.

On Monday, the 247 members who attended the virtual meeting expressed a clear preference for change.

“The town would be best served by being able to hire the most qualified person available, not the most popular resident who wins an election,” said Belmont Select Board Adam Dash who presented the board’s position.

In his final Town Meeting as a member of the Select Board, Dash noted the Treasurer’s position requires a state-regulated set of technical skills and experience which, by, “restricting the pool of people to just Belmont residents prevents us from casting a wide net which includes looking outside for the hire.” According to the Collins Center report, 821 Belmont residents work as financial managers in the finance and insurance industry, while Middlesex County has 40,000 in the same occupation.

Mark Paolillo, chair of the Select Board, said adopting significant change in the town’s financial management – as recommended by the Collins Center report and advised by a 2011 Division of Local Services analysis of the town – which has been hampered for years by the lack of a unified approach in the budget process.

“The town of Belmont is one of the most decentralized towns in Massachusetts … and it really diminishes our effectiveness around financial management,” said Paolillo.

The meeting also heard from Treasurer Floyd Carman, who decided not to seek re-election in April, ending 18 years in the post. Carman – who received unanimous praise from the meeting for his stellar tenure at treasurer – primarily spoke on the duties and requirements of the job. Carman did not expand on the Special Town Meeting article itself, remaining agnostic on his personal views of the article.

If voters approve the ballot question, the town will begin a process of advertising for and vetting candidates before making a selection while the Treasurer’s Office staff runs the day to day operations. If the measure fails, the person who receives the most votes, including write-ins, will serve three years as treasurer.

While state statute names the Select Board as the appointing agency, Belmont’s Town Administrators Act passed in 2014 supersedes the state law, with Town Administrator Patrice Garvin holding that responsibility.

During the 66 minutes of debate, many members supporting the article concurred with the Collins Center’s findings that Belmont needs to revamp its management structure to meet current and future budget challenges effectively.

“The town is in a financial crisis and I strongly support making this position an appointed one for all the reasons described in the Collins Center report,” said Roger Fussa, precinct 8. Speaking from the report, Fussa said effectively dealing with Belmont’s structural deficit is rooted in its financial organization. If the residents and town officials back away from the 19 Collin Center recommendations being proposed – which an appointed treasurer is considered a priority – long-term solutions “will bare little fruit,” said Fussa.

Others believed Belmont can no longer roll the dice on selecting one of the most important posts in town based on politics.

“This position is simply too important and requires too much expertise to leave up to a vote and up to chance,” said Nicole Dorn, precinct 1, who works in a financial role for a public entity. “There is an incredible amount of complexity and compliance that goes into these roles. Imagine if we got someone in this position without the skills to manage our bond rating and it tanks? That would have a greater negative impact on our town that perhaps any action taken by the Select Board or Town Administrator or even ourselves.”

While politics plays an integral and essential role in shaping Belmont’s future, Paul Joy, precinct 7, said some positions in town government require “a different set of skills and experience, a level of professionalism that simply can’t be politized.”

“It is imperative that we separate politics from the professional role in town government to ensure that our financial health remains strong and secure,” he said.

Those seeking to preserve the current elected Treasurer’s post view the proposed change as taking the resident’s voice out of the selection process. Judith Ananian Sarno, precinct 3, said “my perspective is our town officials are proposing we take the hiring decision away from the 1,000s of voters … and then want to make the change to making it a position hired by one person. In this case, the town administrator with sole authority to hire,” noted Sarno.

“[Currenty] our elected treasurer is required to be a Belmont resident and in my view, this ensures that the persons running for the office will have a commitment to serving Belmonts financial interests is not necessarily true of the professionals we hire from outside Belmont,” Sarno said.

Judith Feinleib, precinct 6, questioned the “significant unintended consequences” to the town if the Treasurer is no longer providing an independent voice on financial matters.

Feinleib argued – counter to the finding in the Collins Center report the town has too many separate financial entities – that Belmont’s “unusual but effective governmental structure” in which the elected offices such as the Select Board, Town Clerk, Assessors and Treasurer, provides a balance not just to each other, but to influential volunteer committees, ie. the Planning Board and the Warrant Committee, “on which Belmont depends for so much of the work that is needed to keep our town running.”

Feinleib said this “healthy balance” of multiple power structures will be lost if the Treasurer is made into “a mid-level appointed bureaucrat,” resulting in the volunteer committees and “our unelected town administrator … will have too much power.”

A Sleepy Special Town Meeting In Belmont As All Articles Pass By Wide Margins

By Leave a Comment

Photo A view of the new Belmont Public Library that will open in the fall of 2025

No controversy, no post-11 p.m. debates, and no problems.

In an efficient and timely manner, Belmont’s town legislative representatives approved five articles by a wide margin at the Fall Special Town Meeting held over two nights, November 29-30.

Not that there was any foreseen trouble from articles that included a compromised agreement on the future use of leaf blowers, three “housekeeping” financial items, and the reaffirmation of the will of the voters who passed a debt exclusion to build a new town library.

On night one of ”the special,” the body heard a proposed general bylaw to ban gasoline-powered leaf blowers. The impetus for the new regs came after residents stuck at home during the Covid pandemic began complaining to the Select Board about the noise from multiple blowers used by landscape businesses at all daytime hours, including early weekend mornings.

While initial public meetings and Select Board discussions on a bylaw pitted those residents who wanted to limit the noisy and polluting machines and small landscaping businesses who saw the ordinance hurting their bottom line, and residents who find the blowers are far more efficient than picking up a rack.

A first attempt to bring a proposed bylaw to the annual Town Meeting was scrapped as the June warrant was oversubscribed, and the wording was less than ideal. During the summer, Select Board member Roy Epstein and members of the Warrant and Energy committees brought representatives of both sides – including landscape owner Dante Muzzioli – to hammer out a compromise, allowing landscapers to continue to use the equipment until a certain date.

“If you’ve read the bylaw, you’ll see it has several provisions that seem complicated, but the overall intent is actually quite straightforward,” Epstein told the meeting.

With both sides aligned with the fact that gas-driven blowers “produce wall penetrating noise and pollution that is incredible,” according to the Energy Committee’s Claus Becker, under the bylaw, ”in a few years all the leaf blowers in town will be a lot quieter and won’t be stinking up the neighborhoods.” Becker pointed out that communities across the country have established bans on gas blowers and that California – a trendsetter for the country – is banning the sale of this equipment in the next two years.

The Warrant Committee’s Geoff Lubien detailed the provisions in the new bylaw:

  • A ban on gasoline-powered leaf blowers starts in January 2026. The three-year” runway” for the end of gas blowers will correspond with technological improvements to electric-powered blowers, thus building a cushion to give homeowners time to switch. ”We feel this is a reasonable time horizon to give everyone to adjust,” said Lubien.
  • The Select Board will appoint an enforcing person. The property owner or property manager – not the operator – will be the responsible party when considering violations of the bylaw. Belmont Police Chief James McIssac believes the police should not be asking for identification from landscaping employees, many of who are undocumented workers. “I don’t want to put my officers in that situation. I don’t think that is the type of community we are,” said McIsaac.
  • A first violation will be a written warning; subsequent violations will see a citation issued.
  • Commercial landscape businesses will prohibit gas blowers at residential properties – single-family homes and condos and two to eight-unit multi-family – from May 13 to Sept. 30. ”Most noise complaints were coming from the dense residential areas,” said Lubian. The dates were chosen because grass and leave debris are the lightest and can be cleaned up with electrical blowers.
  • Commercial properties – town and public school-owned land, cemeteries, state property (such as Beaverbrook), MBTA property, churches, private schools, golf courses, and large apartment complexes such as Royal Belmont – were to be allowed to use blowers until 2026. An amendment to the article by John Robotham (Precinct 2) would add commercial properties to be added to the residential restrictions. While the amendment was not backed by the group or the Select Board, it narrowly passed by 124 to 114 with nine abstentions.
  • There will now be a limit on the number of blowers of any type used simultaneously on residential property; the number will be determined by the size of the lot. This provision will continue after gas blowers have been banned.

The debate of the amended article was lively regarding how effective the enforcement of the new bylaw will be, with a few members demanding from Epstein just how beneficial eliminating gas blowers would be to the environment and to residents hearing.

With the debate completed, the article passed 205 yes, 44 nos, and four abstentions.

On night two, Town Meeting was asked to authorize the borrowing of $34.5 million to demolish the existing building, create architectural drawings, and construct the new 42,000-square-foot structure on the current site. The library debt exclusion was passed by Belmont voters in the state election on Nov. 8 by a 1,800 vote margin.

The reason Town Meeting is required to vote on the debt exclusion that was approved by the voters is because each are “two different things, said George Hall, Belmont’s town counsel. Town Meeting is the appropriating authority to allow the town to borrow the $34.5 million while the voters approved that the principal and interest on the debt could be assessed as additional taxes over and above the level limit imposed by Prop 2 1/2. So both need to be passed to allow for the project to move forward.

The article’s presentation by Kathy Kethane, vice-chair of the Board of Library Trustees, and Clair Colburn of the Belmont Library Foundation noted that $5 million of the project’s total cost of $39.5 million would be paid for from fundraising.

With the feasibility study and schematic designs completed, the project calendar for the project is:

  • Starts immediately the design development phase in which the schematics design is refined; there will be public forums during this phase.
  • Construction documentation phase will come after the design development is complete.
  • There will be a competitive bid process for a construction firm to be hired when construction docs are complete.
  • Breaking ground will occur in the first quarter of 2024 with an 18-20 month construction period.
  • The grand opening of the new library will occur in the fall of 2025.

While most of the town meeting members expressed enthusiastic support for the article, a handful of members sought to convince their fellow legislators to spurn the will of the voters and reject the appropriation. Chief among of those members was Paul Looney (Precinct 7), who launched an 11th-hour campaign to defeat the debt exclusion. Looney did not curry the favor of the members when he suggested that most were not as informed as he was on the library’s impact to the town’s finances. (Precinct 7 voted 885 to 544 in favor of the library debt exclusion)

“Based on my personal conversation with well over 100 residents, I can tell you that non of them has a clue about the Collins’ report or the $8 million structural deficit projected for fiscal year 2024. Many are confused by what a structural deficit means. It’s easy to vote for something when you don’t know what may be lurking behind the curtin. I believe most voters fell in that catagory,” said Looney, who said library supporters used a campaign of “fear” that the current structure is a fire hazard.

Chris Grande (Precinct 1) said with the town’s current fiscal” position is “subobtionial and a plethora of other critical financial needs he would vote no. (Precinct 1 voted 901 to 594 in favor of the library). While “respecting” the large margin the library won in his own precinct and in town, Grande said the voters seemed “a bit out of touch” as there are budgetary issues that voters did to consider which he believes they didn’t when casting their ballots. They included contracts for public safety employees, the expenses of using an out-of-town rink due to the current ice skating rink breaking down, and an expected Prop 2 1/2 override in the next few years, and funding the town’s pension contribution.

“Interest rates are high. Inflation is high. We really can’t afford this,” he said in conclusion.

Most meeting members found the arguments from both Looney and Grande to be wanting. Adriana Poole (Precinct 1) said the article being voted on was not if Belmont voters were educated enough about the issues related to the library when they submitted their ballots on Nov. 8. “It’s about respecting the wishes of the voters. The trust they pit in us as their representatives to carry on this issue and finalize the project.”

Heather Brenhouse (Precinct 7) said “it’s dangerous to present our voters as being uneducated on these issues” as her interaction with residents found them to be informed and engaged in the debate. “We’re either going to be throwing good money after bad if we delay this project or we’re going to invest in our future like the voters have already voted for.”

The vote to approve the article comfortably received more than the 2/3 needed for passage: 228-27-8

On Tuesday, the special meeting was suspended to allow a special town meeting within the special town meeting – ”Special Town Meeting 2” – to vote on three financial articles which were seen as housekeeping

  • Article 1: Raise and appropriate $284,000 to add to the Fiscal Year ’23 Recreation Department budget. This was an example of having to spend money to make money: Since the easing of the Covid-19 restrictions, enrollment in Rec Department programs and sports has grown exponentially. The funds will allow the department to hold the programs this fiscal year, resulting in a spike in fee revenue. Passes 235-5-8.
  • Article 2: Reduce the town’s fiscal ’23 budget’s principal debt and interest line item from $15,778,851 to $15,243,002. This is an oops article; the town miscalculated its original budget.This technical change will lower taxes, so it passed 248-0-1.
  • Article 3: An off-cycle Community Preservation Committee appropriation; the committee approved a total of $266,300 to repair Town Hall’s slate roof. This has been an ongoing issue for the CPC.

Select Board Withdraws Civil Service Article Due To ‘Technical Error’; Others See Folding A Losing Position

By 1 Comment

Photo: Roy Epstein, Chair of the Select Board

In a surprise that no one saw coming, the Belmont Select Board voted unanimously to withdraw its controversial article removing civil service for Belmont’s Police and Fire departments mere minutes before it was to be presented before a contentious Special Town Meeting on Wednesday, Sept. 23.

Roy Epstein, Select Board chair, told the members the reason for the removal of the article was due to a “technical error” involving rank and file members taking civil service tests for promotions in the coming months.

“I think this sort of last minute change is one that forces our hand in this case. And I would say a postponement at this stage is certainly the prudent approach,” said Tom Caputo of the Select Board.

Because the article was never read into the warrant, there would be no debate and discussion by the Town Meeting members so Town Moderator Mike Widmer quickly dissolved the assembly as the article was the final item on the warrant.

The withdrawal of Article 10 removed what many predicted to be a heated debate on the future of civil service in Belmont.

Supporters of ending civil service, which included town officials, Select Board and the leaders of both fire and police, contend the town would see significant cost savings by ending a 105-year-old arcane system for hiring and promotions, replacing it with an efficiently run locally-focused practice.

Opponents made up of the rank and file of Belmont Fire and Police and resident supporters ask why throw out the baby with the bathwater as changes to civil service – such as altering age limits and increasing diversity in the number of candidates – can be made by changes to the existing language of the agreement. Several Town Meeting Members also questioned the validity of the supposed financial savings with such a move.

Paul Roberts (Pct. 8), a vocal critic of the town’s and Select Board’s tactics said Wednesday night’s board vote had more to do with folding from a losing position.

“My belief is that [the Select Board] did some hasty vote counting  and decided to turn back and live to fight another day. Overall, I think it reflects a haphazard effort all around on Article 10,” he said.

During a meeting of the Select Board that occurred during a break after the Special Town Meeting approved Article 9, Epstein said the board was informed late in the afternoon that Article 10 included a “drafting error” which involved setting the effect date of March 1, 2021 to end civil service protection. It was also assumed this date would protect the interests of police and fire department personnel who were taking civil service promotional exams this fall.

“And we wanted them to have full civil service protection in their new position. And that was always our intent,” said Epstein.

But when the article was reviewed, it was determined that March 1 “was not sufficient,” said Epstein. Because the results of the civil service exams could take longer than previously thought, the board was advised that July 1, 2021 was a more appropriate date to protect any future promotions.

“The idea was not to cause a problem for anyone or to be unfair to anyone who was studying for an exam and then pull the rug from under them by yanking civil service before they had a chance to actually take the test and get the results,” said the Select Board’s Adam Dash.

With the new effective date for leaving civil service being pushed back well passed the scheduled date for the annual Town Meeting in early May 2021, the board decided to allow the members to vote on the article in the coming year.

“Patrice [Garvin, the town administrator] and I recognized if it’s going to be as late as July 1, 2021, we may as well withdraw this article tonight and then we’ll see where we’re at in the spring regarding civil service,” said Epstein.

“We don’t want to do something that did not reflect our true intention. And at this late date there was no cure that other than to withdraw the article,” he said.

Roberts provided his own advice to the those supporting the end of Civil Service in Belmont.

“It is my hope that the Select Board use this extra time to properly study the issue, learn from the experience of other communities and – if they intend to bring this forward again – do so with a plan that addresses the issues raised by our public safety professionals and Town Meeting members. A Town Meeting vote should be the last step in the process, not the first,” said Roberts.

Belmont Special Town Meeting; Session 1, Sept. 21

By 1 Comment

Photo:

The first session of Belmont’s 2021 Special Town Meeting resembled halcyon days of the legislative assembly as each article presented to the 290 members easily passed muster while only a few comments turned any heads.

Monday’s remote Zoom gathering may well seem like a floating nest in the Aegean as the body prepares to reassembles in two days time when the storm clouds gather to announce the pending clash over the future of civil service where the debate could make civil hands made unclean.

But on Monday, the eight articles and 11 votes were allowed to meander like a later summer walk with a good friend; taking their time with easy conversation with points made in polite chatter.

Under the expert hand of Town Moderator Mike Widmer, the meeting included a video tour featuring “Mayor” Stephen Rosales (Pct. 8) of the newly renovated DPW facilities – on budget and on time – a view forward of budgets to come as well as remembering two members who recently passed in Penny Schafer (38 years) and Henry Kazarian (29 years) and honoring Fred Paulsen for serving 62 years on Town Meeting, “obviously an all-time record probably never to be broken,” said Widmer.

“Serving as a town meeting member has been a rewarding part of my life in the Belmont community,” said Paulsen in a letter to the members. “I hope that I have helped to make Belmont the wonderful community that it is.”

The night would see four/fifths of the meeting done in little more than four hours.

Article 2: Carleton Circle adoption: It’s been 37 years since the last time the town accepted a private way – that being Middlecot Street in the Winn Brook neighborhood. So it’s not that common when a street is “adopted” as a public way.

The residents who are along Carleton Circle requested in 2018 that their road be accepted as a public way. And it was only when National Grid made upgrades to the street as well as each homeowner abutting the road pitched in $1,400 did the road meet the town’s standards of a public way.

The only question – from Jeanne Mooney (Pct. 6) – was if the adoption of the street will increase the property values – and it will, likely over time.

The vote: 237 yea and two opposed.

Article 3: Authorization for Temporary Easement – Wellington Elementary School Safe Route to School Project
This article authorizes the Select Board to grant eight temporary easements and one permanent easement for a transportation improvement for several approaches to the Wellington Elementary School as part of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation’s “Safe Routes to School” program. The project, worth $1.4 million, includes sidewalk reconstruction, traffic signal reconstruction at the intersection of Common Street at Waverley and School streets, ADA compliant wheelchair ramps, pavement milling and overlay, pavement markings, signs, and minor drainage improvements.

All questions from the body were supportive. Lucia Gates of the Shade Tree Committee did ask if there could be funds to plant replacement trees for the ones which will need to be cut down.

The vote: 237 yes, 2 no and 2 abstained

Article 4: The five Community Preservation Committee Projects approved in the spring by the CPC. Each Special Town Meeting vote is next to the project.

  • $680,624 Town Field Playground and Court Restoration. (241-5-4)
  • $100,000 Homer House Window Restoration Project. (237-11-3)
  • $173,000 Feasibility study for the redevelopment and creation of new affordable housing units at Belmont Village. (228-17-1)
  • $100,000 Belmont Police Station Front Steps Historic Preservation (228-13-3)
  • $100,000 Supplement to Emergency Rental Assistance Community Housing (221-20-2)

The most debate was directed to the $100,000 the Housing Trust would add to the $250,000 the CPC previously allocated in rental assistance to residents impacted by the COVID-19. Betsy Lipson (Pct. 6), co-chair of the Housing Trust said the money request is due to “the unprecedent need the pandemic presents.” This amount will assist between 25-30 additional residents – the assistance program already has qualified 37 applicants – seeking help to pay their rent and maintain housing stability.

While voting for the measure, Jack Weis, Pct. 2, didn’t question the use of the funds but questioned the Community Preservation Committee backing a short-term measure that didn’t support the larger goal of creating affordable housing.

“I find it very frustrating that the [Community Preservation Committee] does not act as stewards of the CPA money on behalf of the town” and “they’re the only committee that does not recommend, advise, or guide Town Meeting as to whether or not they think that the proposed action is prudent and warranted.”

Elizabeth Dionne (Pct. 2), CPC chair, said it was important for the CPC to be challenged at Town Meeting. She would vote against a permanent rental assistance program because long term housing is the much higher priority.

“We’re considering this a one-time emergency event,” said Dionne.

Article 5: Purchase Police Station Modular Units (Trailers) Using Water Retained Earnings
This article seeks to use Water Retained Earnings to purchase for up to $320,000 the modular units currently being leased for the Police Station Project located on DPW land off Woodland Street. Purchasing the units will alleviate severe space constraints for the Public Works Department and other town departments.

Ariane Goodman-Belkadi (Pct. 3) who lives on Woodland Street, expressed concern that the Select Board would have carte blanche on future uses of the modulars at the site located between the Light Department on Prince Street and the Water Department at the end of Woodland. She was worried about the possible overuse by town vehicles – many heavy trucks – of the private way and dead end.

Goodman-Belkadi said she and her neighbors want a commitment from all town departments that only Water Department vehicles and those owned by Water Department employees will use the roadway.

While the town is supportive of meeting with residents to address concerns, it’s unknown if the town can make those commitments.

Other questions included the durability of the structures. When asked the life span of the trailers, Belmont’s Director of Facilities Steve Dorrance said it would last for “decades” if the buildings are properly maintained over that time.

The vote: 212 yea, 19 nay and 5 absent

Article 6: Transfer Remaining Water Capital Balances
This article transfers the remaining funds from prior year(s) capital in the Water enterprise fund will be re- appropriated to be used for the FY21 Water Main Replacement. The total is $137,641.09.

This is an annual accounting clean-up.

Vote: 221 yup, 2 nope

Article 7: Transfer Remaining Sewer Capital Balances
This article transfers the remaining funds from prior year(s) capital in the Sewer enterprise fund will be re-appropriated to Community Developments Sewer & Drain fund $25,581.20 that is used for maintenance repairs and replacements to the Town’s sewer and storm water system.

Just like Article 6 but replacing water for sewers.

Vote: The first unanimous vote of the night: 228 oui, 0 non

Article 8: Amend Zoning By-law: Grammar in Zoning
Town Meeting adopted a revised nonconforming Zoning By-law for the Single Residence B Zoning District in 2019. It later came to the attention of the Planning Board that certain language in the by-law was ambiguous. The article makes the necessary revisions to state the intent of the bylaw more clearly.

Who needs Grammerly when you have Bob McGaw, who initiated this amendment?

Vote: 228 yes, no opposition and three abstained.

Special Town Meeting Likely To Take Up Ending Civil Service For Police, Fire; Trailers Staying On Woodland

By 2 Comments

Photo: The civil service in Massachusetts

Those hoping Belmont’s Special Town Meeting to be held on the last full day of summer (Sept. 21) would “be so easy” with a few procedural articles that would get passed without much trouble can put those dreams away as it appears there’s likely to be a “knockout drag out” over the future of a long-standing labor hiring practice in town.

Among the draft proposals for the Town Meeting, Town Administrator Patrice Garvin announced that Article 10 would put an end to civil service in the Belmont Police and Fire departments. (The warrant will be finalized on Aug. 31.)

“This has been talked about for some time since I’ve been here, and we felt this was a good time to bring this forward given the financial climate and some of the social climate that’s going around town,” said Garvin, at the end of another marathon Select Board meeting on Monday, Aug. 24.

A public meeting on the article will be held on Sept. 9, said Garvin, whose office will manage the meeting.

Garvin has sent notices out to all union presidents that the town will bargain “in good faith” under the state’s collective bargaining law.

But in a twist to the bargaining process, the board and Garvin will go first to Town Meeting “to see if [it] is interested in removing it and then go to the bargaining table” as opposed to a more traditional negotiating away civil service first and then seek Town Meeting’s approval.

The civil service system in Massachusetts was created in an attempt to end the corruption, patronage, and cronyism that dominated all types of government in the late 1800s when it was who you knew not your qualifications that determined who was hired for a government position. Critics say the civil service laws represent a significant barrier to efficient government operation while its defenders contend it has taken the politics out of municipal jobs especially for the police and fire departments.

While the overwhelming number of Massachusetts cities and towns adhere to civil service rules, Burlington, Lexington, Reading, Wayland, Wellesley and Westwood are some of the nearly 30 municipalities which are not covered by civil service.

While there haven’t been any recent attempts to revoke civil service in town, the topic has been raised periodically by previous town administrations and Select Boards. It resurfaced in the past year specifically during the hiring process of the new police chief and during the current search for a fire chief.

During his public interview for the job, James MacIsaac, Belmont’s current police head, was emphatic that civil service should be taken off the table, saying it would prevent him from hiring qualified residents from a larger pool of candidates and limit placing people of color onto the force as he is required to take the first name off a list of test-takers presented to him by the civil service board.

The members of the current Select Board have in the past expressed qualified support to bring a measure before the town’s legislative body for a vote and did so on Monday.

“A lot of people have been telling us to do more structural change so there you go,” said Adam Dash, a member of the board.

“The people most directly involved with it, namely the police and fire chiefs think this is a very desirable thing to do,” said Roy Epstein, chair of the Select Board.

But the defenders of civil service are beginning to rally their supporters. At nearly the same time Garvin presented the article at 10:40 p.m., firefighter’s local union 1637 was on social media with a notice whose headline screamed: “Protect The Public From Politics!”

“The rank and file members of the Police and Fire departments feel this is not something that would benefit the town in any manner,” read the email pamphlet.

And the town certainly realize they will have a fight on its hands.

“I definitely think we’ll get some push back [from the unions],” said Garvin. But it is worth exploring especially if the outcome of a yes vote are departments with greater diversity and in future years a larger pool of employees of color in senior positions, she noted.

While this Special Town Meeting warrant is filled with articles that were not taken up during the annual Town Meeting in June, there is one which could prove to be just as contentious. The board will likely approve an article to purchase the two trailers the police department has been using as its temporary headquarters for the past year on Woodland Street.

With its single floor open-design plan, the 5,000 square-foot modular trailers have been a hit with the police – early in the year one senior officer said the department would have been happy to have them set up as its permanent headquarters – the town is viewing the modulars as a solution for the threadbare condition of the nearby Water Department.

“The trailer are in really good condition, we can utilize some offices down there,” said Garvin. “It’s an opportunity for the town to acquire an asset and for the Water Department to use it.”

With potential savings by not making payments and eliminating the moving and disassemble fee, “there’s a high upside for keeping those buildings knowing that there’s a space crunch [in town departments],” said Jon Marshall, assistant town administrator. “There are some departments in town that are actually renting space … so there’s certainly an opportunity to put people in spaces that makes sense.”

But board members noted that several neighbors along Woodland Road were told the trailers would be temporary as they worried about police traffic at the site.

“I’m not saying I’m opposed to it but I think there will be a lot of push,” said Dash.

Other articles coming before the Special Town Meeting will include:

  • Adopting private street Carleton Circle as a public way.
  • Authorize the Select Board to grant temporary easements for the Wellington Elementary’s “Safe Routes to School” plan.
  • Vote on several Community Preservation Committee projects including $680,000 for Town Field Playground renovation and $100,000 to repair the front steps at the Police Headquarters.
  • Reallocating water and sewer capital balances towards other capital projects.
  • Vote to approve changes to the zoning bylaw to allow for the construction of residential housing in a portion of the McLean Hospital property.

Goodbye Minuteman Again As Town Meeting Re-Rejects Membership In Regional Voke

By 2 Comments

Photo: Bob McLaughlin, Pct. 2. speaking against the town rescinding leaving Minuteman.

F. Scott Fitzgerald famously said, “There are no second acts in American lives.” Wednesday night, Belmont Town Meeting affirmed that saying when it rejected the opportunity to again become a member of the Minuteman High School district.

The article to rescind the 2016 Town Meeting decision to decamp from the vocational school failed, 140-95, as a majority of members are hoping there will be plenty of space in the foreseeable future for students from non-member towns to attend the Lexington school.

“It’s a lot to do with how strongly you believe your own projection of the enrollment numbers,” said Jim Gammill, whose argument for rescinding the earlier decision was voted down by the town’s legislative body.

Members who sought to have the school readmitted to the nine-town district – a position supported by the school committee and Belmont Superintendent John Phelan – are worried that a recent enrollment boom at the school could forecast in an increasing number of Belmont students without a desk waiting for them.

Gammill (Pct. 2) who headed the task force to find an alternative to Minuteman, told members that facts have changed over the past three years from the time when Belmont decided to leave to save a significant amount by not taking on the debt of a new building’s while being able to still send students to Minuteman.

“What changed … is the new building,” said Gammill referring to the 257,000 sq.-ft. structure that opened in September, a year early and under budget. With 20 different vocational and technical shop concentrations, Gammill said interest by middle-schoolers has skyrocketed, a trend he believes is sustainable.

“At this rate, three years from now there will be a full school,” said Gammill, with the real prospect of Belmont students looking from the outside in as member school students are expected to take the available slots. If that occurs, “we won’t have the $100s of thousands of savings” as was predicted in 2016.

In addition, “There is no Plan B,” Gammill protested, saying other vocational schools or programs in eastern Massachusetts are unable to accept Belmont’s students as they are filled or the cost in tuition and transportation would make them “cost prohibitive.”

Like Henry V at Harfleur, Bob McLaughlin (Pct. 2) led the Minuteman skeptics “once more into the breach” having been one of the most vocal proponents three years ago for a BelExit.

“This is a bad deal,” said McLaughlin.

While calling the school “the best vocational training for our kids,” McLaughlin reminded the members that the town left the district in 2016 (by a 72 percent to 28 percent margin) after the other members approved building a new school that was “too large and forced us to take on all that debt.”

‘Belmont was trapped in an agreement that it couldn’t get out of and every year they would hand us a bill that was non-negotiable” for a school that spends nearly $36,000 per student.

McLaughlin said Minuteman has seen student population free fall from 1,254 when it opened in 1977 to 383 in 2016 “and it’s going to continue to drop along with the need for vocational education.” Even if the pro-return enrollment numbers are correct, Belmont would see, at most, two to three students being denied a seat at the table.

”We’re going to spend $472,000 (as a re-entry fee), $200,000 a year (in tuition costs) and assume [a portion of the] $144 million in debt” to assure three students will have an education at Minuteman, said McLaughlin.

And with Belmont ready to undertake a $6 million Prop 2 1/2 override on the ballot in one year’s time, “we’re giving sound bites to the opposition [to the override],” said McLaughlin.

Proponents for taking a second walk down the aisle with Minuteman attempted to show the growing need for a quality school by a growing number of students in Belmont.

Caitlin Corrieri

Chenery eighth grade teacher Caitlin Corrieri said that while many students succeed in the current learning environment, “I also have students for whom sitting in a 50 minute traditional class is torture, who learned better using their hands to make and create, whose brains think outside the box.”

“There is no ‘one size fits all‘ school for everyone,” said Corrieri, an 11 year veteran in Belmont. The alternative provided by Minuteman would be a better fit for some students. And that message is being heard at the Chenery; currently 54 eighth graders signed up to tour the school and 10 have submitted applications.

“I’m here tonight on behalf of our eighth grade teachers to implore you to allow our student to have those options in the future,” said Corrieri, noting that higher education and the workforce are evolving “and Minuteman is responsive to these changes.”

“I hate to see students turned away for Minuteman on a long waitlist because we didn’t speak out on this,” she said.

Jack Weis (Pct. 1), who was Belmont’s representative to the Minuteman School Board in 2016, voiced the opinion of many stating “that there is no right or wrong decision on this question as there are risks associated with either vote. Town Meeting members are going to have to decide … which version of the future they think is more likely.”

“And if they are wrong, which set of downside risky they are more comfortable leaving the town exposed to,” he said.

Mike Crowley (Pct. 8) who is a member of the school committee said “continued membership assures access for our kids for years to come … a no vote tonight put the future in jeopardy.” Once students are “squeezed out” of attending Minutemen, “the quality and breadth of programming isn’t there in the other schools that we may be able to offer us a spot or two.”

Warrant Committee member Elizabeth Dionne (Pct. 2) wasn’t convinced there will be an “enrollment crisis” to require Belmont to spend a significant amount of money annually when the town is preparing for a $6 million override in a year’s time.

With the needs of the general student population and special needs pupils to be considered, Belmont should find a way to “provide vocational education in a more cost-effective fashion,” she said.

“We don’t need to buy 40 years of insurance to make sure this happens,” said Dionne.

Jessie Bennett (Pct. 1) agreed with Weis that the financial difference in staying in or leaving Minuteman is relatively small (a cost-benefit of $100,000 being a non-member using the average number of Belmont students and the current student population) considering the $130 million-plus town budget. “If these numbers are so close, than we should vote our values and our values are to support students and provide them with the best possible education they can get.”

“If we don’t have this available for all kids, we are introducing instability into the decision making process for eighth grade families, we are introducing instability into the decision making process for every family … and in our future as a town that provides the best education for all students.”

The final vote – after which the Town Meeting showed its appreciation of Gammill’s work with a standing ovation – revealed the majority of members voted on the belief that interest in Belmont and surrounding towns in attending Minuteman will abate.

“That’s a lot to hope for because we really don’t have a Plan B,” said Crowley.

Special Town Meeting Starts Wednesday At The Chenery With Minuteman Redux

By 3 Comments

Photo: The new Minuteman High School in Lexington.

It’s the return of the Minuteman to Town Meeting as Belmont’s legislative body will convene in a special session on Wednesday, Nov. 13 at 7 p.m. at the Chenery Middle School as the high school auditorium will be filled with student/athletes on Awards Night.

Minuteman Returns As Members Ponder A … Return

The majority of the first night will be a debate and vote on Article 4 will be whether the town should reconsider its 2016 BelExit decision to bolt from its four-decade-long membership (by a 141-81 Town Meeting margin) in the Minuteman Career and Technical High School in Lexington and ask nicely to re-join the school district again.

The Minuteman redux is that since rejecting paying $144 million of its share of funding the new school, two major facts have come to the fore: first, after three years, the town has discovered there is no practical alternative for the two to three dozen Belmont students seeking a vocational education. Second, the new school which opened this year has been extremely popular and it’s forecasted there will not be the necessary classroom seats for all the students who want to attend from non-member towns.

Complicating matters is that the town will be required to hand over a one-time buy-back fee of $472,000 on top of paying the annual tuition assessment of approximately $255,000 in the 2020 school year.

It will be a debate with Minuteman supporters pointing to the corner the town has been painted into and their critics basing its “stay the course” plan on the Groucho Marx quote: I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.

Other Articles Set For Wednesday

Article 1 will allow for reports, proclamations and recognitions. Expect the late Lydia Ogilby to be acknowledged.

Article 2 is a capital appropriation for $347,700 to pay for the second half of the funding (the first at $347,100 was approved at May’s Meeting) to purchase a new fire department pumper truck. Expect easy passage as to why would members only want half a pumper truck?

Article 3 – which will follow the Minuteman article – will seek the approval of transferring an undetermined amount of money from Free Cash, which is at $8.1 million, into the General Stabilization Fund. The amount will be around $2.5 million to forego until November 2020 the all but inevitable Prop 2 1/2 override vote. Some questions on this and the odd “no” vote.

A Word From Mike For The Members: Limits Will Be Enforced

Town Moderator Mike Widmer has asked that Town Meeting Members be reminded of the following:

  • All meetings will start promptly at 7 p.m.; please plan to arrive in time to secure parking, sign in and obtain your electronic voting device.
  • The Moderator will strictly enforce the five-minute rule as well as the Moderator’s rules for speaking on any motion, rules that have already been distributed to Town Meeting Members.
  • Presenters will be held to the 10-minute limit and reminded at the nine minutes mark that there is one minute remaining.
  • Town Meeting Members will be required to sit in the designated sections of the auditorium – for the Chenery, the center section and the left section as seen from the rear of the auditorium and for the High School, the front section of the auditorium. We anticipate that there may be a number of non-Town Meeting Members who will attend these sessions of Town Meeting and by law, we must keep them separate from the Town Meeting Members.