Photos
Town Meeting 2012 has come and gone. The town approved its $81 million budget, the Bradstreet building will be sold, and drive-throughs will be allowed on Route 114. It was a relatively uneventful evening -- nothing like last year's meals tax battle royale -- but it had its highlights.
For a riveting play-by-play, check out the transcript from last night's live blog.
CPA Stays
The CPA real estate tax surcharge will stay at 3 percent, but there was much debate about it.
William Callahan, one of the article's co-sponsors, said that the CPA was great for saving the drinking water when it passed, but also said that was a "Pandora's Box" on spending and that now it's no longer needed.
Ted Tripp urged passage of the article, saying the meals tax would pay for needed projects.
"It's not like these things can't be taken care of out of other tax money," Tripp said.
Selectmen, who voted to oppose the article, vehemently disagreed.
"There would be less done and more borrowing," Selectmen Chair Tracy Watson said.
Election Stays in March
Voters also rejected Article 14, which sought to move local elections to June.
Supporters of the article said the new election date, after Town Meeting, would make candidates and incumbents to campaign on Town Meeting issues.
"An advantage would be that candidates for town office would have to know about, and take a stand on, budget issues," Frank MacMillan said.
One young man said that March elections disenfranchise college-aged voters.
But opponents said it would be too difficult to hold elections in June when so much is going on to prepare for Town Meeting (and someone mentioned the massive amount of work that would be involved for Town Clerk Joyce Bradshaw if she had both Town Meeting and elections at the same time), as well as the fact that hosting elections at the schools in June would be too difficult given all that happens with the schools then.
Selectmen said they didn't want to have to take focus off of Town Meeting preparations to run campaigns.
"The way the article's worded tonight, the election would be today," Selectman Bill Gordon said. "Also, the amount involved in running a campaign, I guess I'm speaking for incumbents, preparing for Town Meeting is also very involved."
Reserve Fun Wrestling Match
Article 31 passed, which means the town will have its $25,000 Capital Stabilization Fund.
This represents a victory for Town Manager Andrew Maylor, who pushed for this in his budget. While the money was not major -- $25,000 is crumbs in the perspective of the whole $81 million budget and the money was just coming out of another fund -- but the Finance Committee was opposed to it.
Selectmen agreed with Maylor, and in the end so did voters. It passed with the two-thirds majority needed.
But the town will not have a $25,000 retirement reserve fund, which Maylor and Selectmen also pushed for and the Finance Committee opposed.
The Finance Committee insisted that the problem was too large and nationwide, and that it was the federal or state governments' problem to fix. Maylor said he doesn't think the federal or state governments will pay for it and the price tag is only getting bigger.
"How do you address the $118 million gorilla in the room?" Maylor said.
But people who opposed it said they were uneasy about the fact that once put into the account the money could not be used for anything else.
Eventually Maylor jumped back in and negotiated the $25,000 added to the general stabilization fund if this fund article failed.
So Town Meeting moved to Article 32 (transferring $200,000 from free cash to general stabilization fund), which passed unanmously with an amendment to increase it to $225,000.
So basically, after more than an hour of debate, Maylor and Selectmen got their capital stabilization fund and the town voted to add the $25,000 for the proposed retirement fund to the general reserve fund.
Now that's what you call a negotiation.
Capital Improvement Yes, But...
The Capital Improvement Plan article (25) passed, but without the Route 125 sewer design, which the Finance Committee motioned successfully to scrap.
What this means is that the town will not fund a design plan for sewer along Route 125 but will fund a design plan to move school administration offices to the old Police Station on Main Street and building a gym for Kittredge Elementary School, among other things.
Town Manager Andrew Maylor and Superintendent Chris Hottel pushed for the article as a means of longterm development and streamlining of town offices.
For the school administration transfer and the new gym ($359,500), this will fund the design only. Town Meeting next year will have to vote whether or not to fund contruction.
Opponents questioned the expense. The Finance Committee opposed the sewer design funding and school administration transfer. Advocates pointed out the cost savings that could be involved with not having to pay rent at Osgood Landing for school administration.
Selectman Rosemary Smedile spoke out against the sewer design funding because she said it needs to be studied more, and she also said businesses are not developing now.
In the end, voters chose to approve the plan without the $300,000 sewer design.
"We talk and we talk and we talk about 125," Selectmen Chair Tracy Watson said, adding that she and other selectmen had campaigned on it. "It's the last corridor in town that can be developed without infringing on our community. The time has come to do something about it."
And the town will say "bye bye" to Bradstreet. Town Meeting voted unanimously to authorize the Board of Selectmen to sell it.
Energy Savings... Not Now
Article 26 did not pass, though. That was an article to fund more than $4.3 million for energy savings initiatives.
The Finance Committee opposed the article based on its cost, and they questioned whether or not these projects are needed now. They also pointed out that, with interest, it would cost $6.4 million.
Town Manager Andrew Maylor and Superintendent Chris Hottel pushed for the article, pointing out that the guaranteed savings from it would be $7 million in 15 years, so the project would pay for itself and then some.
In the end, the vote was a tie, 96-96. A two-thirds majority was needed to pass it, so the article failed.
Lisa Conti
7:32 am on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
192 voters are the town meeting, out of almost 11,000 homes?!?!? Such a poor representation and advocate for sustaining our town.
Bryan McGonigle2
9:34 am on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
In some ways, Town Meeting was used to referee the differences of opinion of the Town Manager and the Finance committee.
The view from my living room was fantastic. You could see close-ups of the speakers going back and forth - especially the Town Manager and the Finance Committee chair - almost like on MSNBC. I'm sure it wasn't as dramatic in person.
I thought highly of the new Town Manager and the new Moderator. The Finance Committee chairman is my MVP. The Moderator moved things along very nicely. The proceedings did have a choreographed feel to them at times but I didn't see that as a problem. The Moderator also served as color commentator and play-by-play announcer at times - which some might find annoying - but I found it more entertaining (or at least more entertaining than silence) than over-the-top.
I don't think spending $2.7 million dollars now to save $100k a year in rent to move the school superintendent's office to the old police station is a great deal for the town. Am I missing something? I would hold off on that.
I also don't see the need to hurry up and spend money on the 125 sewer system.
The town has a $118 million dollar retiree health care obligation (correct me if I said this wrong). What should be done about this? Since we'll have to cut spending sometime (and raise taxes?), I wouldn't restore funding the elementary school libraries.
Bryan McGonigle
4:28 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Hi Mike, you seem to have strong, thought-out opinions, so why do watch from your living room and not vote?
Carl Reppucci
10:18 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
I think people don't vote because of the effort it takes to be up to date on the issue.
Like me, i worked that night, I couldn't be there, I am not represented. If I could vote by mail like I can for a stock, then I would be represented.
The cost of this from a $81 million budget would be "crumbs"
Why is the telephone budget for the school $100,000? Where is the news Bryan?
Where are you on notifying people of information. I can't get it. I asked town officials - no response. Why?
Where are the people who want to raise taxes - do they know?
192 people show up and the votes are considered representative. Amazing!
Imagine the assessor raising my taxes because the "consultant" reported I had a basement. 60 homes were built in 1994 in my neighborhood, they have a google image since 2007 - how do they make these errors? Some people I know have checked and they don't have basements but are charged as if they do because it is on their property card. How?
Bus fees up, no vote? Meals tax - when should I show up, how many times to vote?
People don't come and vote, I wonder why?
When will you report when the CPA can be repealed? How about the meals tax?
When will you report it?
Who is helping the ordinary guy? The teachers, people in unions are all pawns for the money makers: insurance companies etc.
Just like the trash tax - a major battle luckily we had someone fighting against it. Otherwise it would of been in supported by a non-citizen.
Bryan McGonigle
10:35 pm on Wednesday, June 13, 2012
I've reported on several Town Meeting issues including the CPA and the meals tax. And had you gone to Town Meeting (or sent a local family member in your place maybe?) you could have asked a wide variety of questions. If Town Meeting was just for voting, it would be done in an hour. But there is time for discussion and debate as well as questions, which was really my main point in my question to Mike.
Carl Reppucci
12:37 am on Thursday, June 14, 2012
You are not going to get data at that meeting. I have been to many; small issues, and big issues - no real data for support.
Now they want teenagers - NON PROPERTY OWNERS TO VOTE. - This is a bad idea. Keep everyone up to data on this. If they had kids vote - that trash tax would have gone through.
The town doesn't even post results on the website. Just force the data to come out on your site - you will be a hero!
Carl Reppucci
12:40 am on Thursday, June 14, 2012
Data- telephone data - it would be great to see.
Carl Reppucci
12:44 am on Thursday, June 14, 2012
The $1.7 million overide in 2007 is only 2% of the budget - "crumbs" - put services back like no bussing fees or give it back.
Other data - find how often the fancy gym is used in the high school - post it.
Why isn't school committee put there - and cost us nothing. I have seen more small companies that spend millions creating something new than looking pretty.
Bryan McGonigle
9:37 am on Thursday, June 14, 2012
Carl, there is no mandate that you must own property to be a registered voter. In fact, property mandates haven't existed since the early half of the 19th century. Teenagers ages 18 and up are already allowed to vote. As for the gym at the high school, they use it every day for gym classes. In fact it was recently damaged by a sprinkler a kid accidentally hit with a ball. Putting a the school administration in the gym would probably get in the way of dodgeball. But thank you for the suggestions on future stories. I just hope you realize that I already work 16-hour days most days so you will have to be patient.
Carl Reppucci
10:04 pm on Thursday, June 14, 2012
Not the gym, the elaborate weight room next to the gym. Show the schedule for the weight room that would be great. I have heard it is not utilized all that much.
I will respond to Bill about the pre-registration. Certainly people renting can vote and don't need to own property.
Bill Callahan
10:51 am on Thursday, June 14, 2012
And just to clarify, Carl, no one is considering allowing younger teenagers to vote. It would allow them to file their registration paperwork at age 16-17 that would become active at age 18.
Here is the text of the legislation:
If such person is at least 16 years of age and has not attained the qualification of age, the affidavit of registration shall be re-examined by the registrar until such person will, on or before the day of the next preliminary, primary, special or general election or town meeting, attain full age, at which time the registrar shall enter such person’s name in the current annual register of voter.
Carl Reppucci
10:39 pm on Thursday, June 14, 2012
Thank you for the clarification- But even with that, just to bring out a point.
Why another government job for someone to pre-register teenagers? If the schools and parents teach properly they will register to vote when they become of age, just like registering for the draft (draft is a law but voting is a privilege) or learning how to drive (they all know how to text, drink and break the law occasionally).
Pre-registration is just not necessary, and you do have to be aware that it can lead to a next step of being able to vote. When someone turns 18 they are either continuing education or working - and if they are working, then sure - they should vote. If they go to college in my town - they should not vote in a town election, national election or vote, yes.. But if teenagers 16-17 are ever able to vote, I think it would be bad. And the money makers like to manipulate a system like this.
I am just suggesting to watch where this leads, and to pay attention. Most people aren't aware.
Just like this past warrant, I was not aware and didn't think to look for another attempt at re zoning an area near my neighborhood for a drive thru restaurant. Again how many times do I have to represent my interests only to eventually lose because lack of time on my part or lack luster reporting ( a "hey, watch out"), or "a call from the town" to tell me to be aware of the next exciting thing I should fight for.
Bryan McGonigle
12:11 am on Friday, June 15, 2012
Voting is actually a right, not a privilege.
Michael Quinlan
2:47 pm on Tuesday, June 19, 2012
The idea is to get the children to register while they're still in the schools. Starting at 16 they can be 'encouraged' to support more school spending. Once they're 18 and off to college their concern with North Andover High withers and they don't bother to register.
Diane Huster
4:28 pm on Friday, June 15, 2012
Just perhaps the elimination of a "mailed" Annual Town Warrent with its built in notice of its "Town Meeting Time" and a booklet to read with budget and town information has contributed to the lack of engagement in Town affairs. The CPA project information was available only at the last moment. The Warrant was not posted in a timely manner. Where is the consultants Town Facilities Master Plan Report asking for millions to be spent? Not available on the web site that I could find. It is the responsibility of town officials to inform the public with as much information as they can in a timely manner well before town meeting. Numbers may change but not the basic information behind the numbers. Citizens should not have to "dig" for the information and spend fruitless time on the website to find it.
It may be time for the Town to reconsider if the loss of citizen participation and and even more important the knowledge of their town government is worth the dollars saved in not mailing the Warrant.
Carl Reppucci
11:37 pm on Friday, June 15, 2012
At our meals tax vote. Notice how less than informed people were, many not knowing it was up for a second vote. Also, no talk during that meeting that there would be rate increase. And no talk of when it could be repealed.
Not just in North Andover - read Andover Patch, Chelmsford Patch, Haverhill, etc.
All similar complaints - Major problems with "town meeting voting" with lack of information and participation. I suppose if something were significant it could make people turn out but I am not sure.
Some tactics seem to play from this. But again if you want to push an agenda I suppose no one is stopping any of us. Although I requested the proper paperwork to file an article - and was never helped, even with requests in person.
Find this on google:
By Laura Barrett, MTA Communications
Design by Nina Kumysh
This manual was produced for MTA staff and local leaders to assist
in Proposition 2 ½ override efforts. Additional copies may be
obtained through MTA Regional Offices or MTA Communications
in the Boston office.
Thanks to the many MTA staff members and local leaders who
provided assistance.
Special thanks to Maria Plati, former MTA Communications
consultant, and to Barbara Goodman, a Lexington teacher and
a member of the Arlington School Committee. Both were generous
with their time, insights and samples of override material.
© Massachusetts Teachers Association, 2002
Bryan McGonigle
12:07 am on Saturday, June 16, 2012
Carl, Haverhill does not have a Patch (or a Town Meeting, for that matter... it's a city). And if memory serves me Chelmsford has a representative Town Meeting. But anyway, you seem to be implying that people who do go to Town Meeting and give up their evening to vote are uninformed. I'm really not sure that's the case. Are you saying the Town Clerk stopped you from filing an article for the Warrant?
Carl Reppucci
11:38 pm on Friday, June 15, 2012
Better Funding Better Schools,
Is your demographic described in here?
Bryan McGonigle
12:09 am on Saturday, June 16, 2012
Not even sure what that means or where it came from.