Happy New Year! (Parking Ban Edition)

Be excellent to each other!


... Parking ban info after the jump

...
And PARTY ON, dudes!

Have a happy and safe New Year's eve.

PARKING BANS IN STORM CONDITIONS:
NO PARKING ON HYDRANT SIDE
IF NO HYDRANT, PARK ON EVEN HOUSE NUMBERED SIDE.
NO PARKING ON ODD NUMBERED SIDE

IN EFFECT AT 7:00 AM, WEDNESDAY 12/31/08
THROUGH 7:00AM THURSDAY 1/1/09
Per Order of: Town of Dartmouth, Department of Public Works

Click here to read on!

State will cut THIS YEAR'S aid

More bad news on the fiscal front. In this article in today's Standard Times, the state Secretary of Adiminstration and Finance, Ms. Leslie Kirwan, says, "the first area of local aid the administration might trim is $124 million from the general fund that is being used to cover a shortfall in Lottery aid." Dartmouth's share of that additional aid was $416,585. Elimination of that aid only makes up for 1/8th of the required $1 billion shortfall that ...

..the state needs to cover. More cuts are likely.
The timing of the cuts to this year's budget really puts towns and cities in a bind since they budgeted for the money and now half way through the fiscal year, it is not going to be there. The funds have already been spent in some instances or at least are half spent. Now the town has make up the expended portion and cut the entire amount from the budget. That is what Mayor Lang was referring to when he said in the article, "The problem with the mid-year cut is it's a double cut, which makes it very, very tough."
To quickly illustrate, let's say that the town had decided to use state aid for to hire an employee for $40,000. We hire the employee, spend the $20,000 so far this fiscal year, but then the state aid is cut. Now the budget is short $60,000 because we have expended $20,000 and are not getting the $40,000.
The bottom line is that we are going to have to either spend our reserves or cut from this year's expenditures to get through this year. One possible bright spot is that a $300,000 grant from the state for this year has not been appropriated and is available to plug the gap. Assuming of course, that it is not included in the additional cuts that are being considered.
CORRECTION!!!!!!!!!!!! Error in my comments below.
I have been corrected on my statement in comments here that no additional money was put into the Stabilization Fund in anticipation of state aid cuts. Mr Lynam reminds me that $500,000 was added to the $1.1 million appropriation to the stabilization fund for that reason. That money would be released in the spring for capital needs if not needed. Thank you for setting the record straight, Mr. Lynam.
Click here to read on!

Hotel California?

Or is it Dartmouth Town Hall?


Last thing I remember, I was
Running for the door...


...I had to find the passage back
To the place I was before
relax, said the night man,
We are programmed to receive.
You can checkout any time you like,
But you can never leave!

Some Select Board members say it was the intention of the former board to give contracts for life to everyone working for the town ? I think that's a bad idea. I'm such an idealist!


Why not have fun?
YouTube embeds in my blog. Wow! I like it!
Click here to read on!

Regionalization? Has the time for reform come?

Bob Unger of the Standard Times has an opinion piece today questioning whether or not we can find the political wherewithall to regionalize services. He quotes a developer for Pennsylvania as saying "That dog won't hunt", meaning that the parochial issues within each town prevent the realization of savings which exist for those who must pay the bills. Some commeters have questioned why there is any dismay over the sweetheart contracts given to a few town employees. The reason I am dismayed is that these contracts represent the very problem that Mr Unger hopes will be addressed. Will our town and others continue to protect and reward narrow interests or do what is best for those who are footing the bill, the taxpayers? Recent developments are not hopeful...

...in that regard. The taxpayer was not represented at the table when employees are given lifetime appointments. The patrons and the taxpayer are not represented when the Library Trustees refuse to even try to find out if they can save tens of thousands of dollars while continuing to provide service at our library. The taxpayer is not being represented when Dartmouth has three separate Fire Districts, all with their own narrow interests, providing service to one town.
When the town government refuses to pursue cost saving by means such as contracting out trash collection or library services, regionalizing dispatch services, animal control, and many other services, consolidating fire districts and town departments, or creating competition for delivering public education by having charter schools, the largest group that is being disadvantaged is the taxpayer. The taxpayer is more often than not the forgotten group in discussion about layoffs and service reductions but they are the group who lose the most. The taxpayer is paying more than they need to for services or is losing services while not getting any reduction in the cost to themselves. I am well aware that bringing up all these points means that I am going against the entrenched interests in the Fire Districts, schools, police, town employees, Library Trustees and others. I was elected by the voters and taxpayers to represent their interests on the Select Board. I try to keep that in mind at all times. The primary question should and must be, Is this good for the taxpayer? Other considerations must take a back seat to the best interest of those who pay for it all. What are your thoughts? Can the town do this or are we too beholden to special interests and old patterns?

Click here to read on!

Who and Why?

The Standard Times has an article by Curt Brown today about the protection clauses in employee contracts. Link here. The paper also has published the letter from a Boston law firm that, while providing language for the contract clause, strongly advises against it. Read that letter here Joe Michaud has asked the Executive Administrator for more information on the matter. You can read his letter here
I have asked Mr. Gagne for the minutes of the meetings where these contracts were discussed many months ago. I have never received them ...

...despite having made a Public Records request which requires a response within ten days. I have personal knowledge that others have asked for them as well. Seems that despite continuing interest in this matter, Mr. Gagne has never made the slightest effort to prepare the documents that were requested. He is quoted in the paper as saying he can't remember who saw the letter from the Boston firm. Mr. Gagne went on at some length at the last Select Board meeting assuring the Select Board and community the he takes copious notes at these sessions and that they have been preserved.
Click here to read on!

2010 town budget

I don't know how many saw my presentation to the Select Board last night but I noted that the town has a budget shortfall of $818K next year. I asked the Board whether or not they are going to entertain an override. If not or if the override should fail, I asked whether the Board would direct the budget cuts that will be required to specific departments. What are your thoughts on these topics? Should the voters be asked for an override? Should the Select Board decide were the cuts are to fall?

Peace!
Click here to read on!

Recall petition sent to town meeting

The Select Board decided last night to send the recall provision for the town charter to the Special Town Meeting to be held on Jan 8th as written. You can find a link to the proposed legislation in this post. AS always discuss in comments. I'd like to see the discussion limited to whether or ...

...not the recall provision is a good idea for the town, leaving aside the purpose for which it is being pursued at this time. THanks for your co=operation in that regard.
Click here to read on!

Executive Administrator search committee selected

The Select Board named the members of a search committee to identify and recommend candidates for the position of Executive Administrator for the town. The townspeople chosen are Mark Eisenberg from the Personnel Board, David Ferreira from the Finance Committee, Mary Louise (ML) Nunes, Ed Goulart, and Sharon Wulf. Bernard Roth was named to the committee as an alternate. The committee will select and hire a personnel recruiting firm to assist them in ...

... advertising for candidates, selecting qualified candidates, verifying their credentials, and interviewing candidates. The committee will select two or three from among those considered for recommendation to the Select Board. The Select Board will then interview the two or three candidates and vote to hire one as Executive Administrator.
My apologies if I misspelled anyone's name.
Click here to read on!

Merry Christmas and God bless us, every one

Joyeux Noël!
Feliz Natal!
Gledelig jul!
Frohe Weihnachten!
Vrolijke Kerstmis!
Feliz Navidad!

Luke 2:8-14 -And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people...

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

Wesoły Boże Narodzenie!
Χαρούμενα Χριστούγεννα
Buon Natale!
С Рождеством Христовым
Click here to read on!

Library Trustees meet with Finance Committee

The Library Board of Trustees met with the Finance Committee last night and the FinCom was unable to convince them to issue an RFP for library services.

Merry Christmas to all!!!
Click here to read on!

Select Board to meet Monday night

The Select Board will meet on Monday Dec 21 at 6:30PM in room 304 of the Town Hall.
Here's the agenda

6:30 p.m. Commence Meeting

Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Moment of Silence
Signing of the Warrant

I.Workshop items for Discussion:

-Select Board to make appointments to the Executive Administrator Search
Committee.

-Board to discuss Legal Counsel review of the citizen’s initiative petition, and financial implications to the Town.

-Date for Special Town Meeting.

-Presentation by Select Board Member, William Trimble

II. New Business:

A.Vote on Annual Renewal of Liquor Licenses and Sundry Licenses.

The presentation I will make ...
...can be found here as a MS Powerpoint file
Click here to read on!

Still don't get it!

The Library Trustees have issued a report in which they conclude that they should not even consider contracting out of library services. Link to the report here. What this report does not get is that the funding for the library and every department in the town will be cut in FY2010. I am talking about reductions from last year's funding, not a cut in their requested increase. These cuts are likely to fall disproportionately on services that are nice to have, not those which the town must have. I think most would agree that the library is in the nice to have category. The Trustees disagree.

"Many Dartmouth residents ... see the library as a vital community resource like Police and DPW and are willing to support it financially."

We shall see how the town feels. Whether the Library Trustees or any other department care to acknowledge it, the town cannot continue to employ the same number of people and deliver the same services. The town must reduce the number and cost of direct employees. I have written about why this is so many times on this blog. The level of benefits that are mandated for town employees by state statute and our bylaws make those employees very expensive to the town. I am not talking about their wages but benefits. Don't take my word for it, ask the Finance Committee. The town has no control over increases in energy prices or health care benefits. We can only control the increase in the costs of services that the town provides. The main component of those costs is the people we employ and their benefits.

An excerpt from the Library Trustees report...

"There is no evidence that outsourcing of the public library operations has saved any of the communities involved any money."

From this post

"In the first four years of operation by LSSI, we have saved a documented 2.6 million dollars. At the same time, we increased hours, increased programs five-fold, doubled the amount of dollars dedicated to new materials, and the customer service at the library increased significantly."

The Trustees report concludes,

"After lengthy study, the Dartmouth Public Libraries Board of Trustees believes it is not in the best interest of the residents of Dartmouth to pursue the outsourcing of additional public library services at this time."

Again what they are not getting is that either the town will have reduced or no services at all or we will find innovative ways to deliver them at lower cost.
Click here to read on!

Public input at Select Board meetings

For some time now, I have wanted to allow time for public input at Select Board meetings. Given that we spent several hours allowing such comment at our last meeting, I plan to put forward a policy for the Select Board that routinely allows such comment. We have a full agenda for tonight's meeting but if the chair will allow it, I will ask for a policy as follows:

Moved that,
The Select Board shall have a brief period for the public to express their views on motions before the board in the following manner:

· After a motion is moved, seconded, and discussed by the Select Board but before taking a vote, the chair will inquire whether any member of the public in attendance wishes to speak on the motion before the Board.

· After determining the number of people wishing to speak, the chair will set a brief period of time for those comments, state the time period which the chair feels is adequate for those comments, and the time to be allotted to each speaker. The time to be equally divided among the speakers. The time allotted for an individual speaker will not be less than one minute or more than 5 minutes unless otherwise set by majority vote of the Board

· Other members of the Select Board may request a different time period for comment by a motion to amend the time period allowed by the chair. The motion must be seconded and voted by a majority to override the decision of the chair regarding the allotted time for comment.

· Each person rising to speak will be asked to state their name for the record. Comments will be confined to the motion under consideration before the Board

· Select Board members will be given an opportunity to respond to the comments of the public before the vote on the motion is taken.

This policy will apply to both televised and workshop meetings of the Select Board. It is the intent of this policy to allow the public to express their views prior to a vote by the Select Board. Discussion among the public and Select Board or questions from the public about the motion may be allowed by the chair at the discretion of the chair.

What do you think? Is this a good idea?
Click here to read on!

2010 budget preparations

The work by the town departments on the 2010 budget has begun. Mr. Iacaponi has issued a memo establishing some guidelines. Here are some excerpts:

At this time, the town’s budget forecast indicates that estimated revenues will not be sufficient to cover the minimum budget needs for fiscal year 2010. Each budget should be calculated by using the minimum cost to deliver you department’s services and by identifying which services or functions would have to be reduced or eliminated during these fiscal constraints. Prepare the budget by using the Revenue Allocation method as a guideline with a minimum reduction of at least 15% from your fiscal 2009 total budget. (Some budgets will be reduced more than others based on priorities)

and...
...Preparing the Budget

At this time, there will be no provisions in the 2010 for any salary increases.

Complete review of personnel needed to deliver services to taxpayers. Include a brief description of services. Are there any services that could be computerized or combined or eliminated? List 1 or 2 additional goals/objectives that you would propose besides the normal operation of the department. (Primarily one, which could lead to increased productivity and cost savings, including privitization, consolidation or elimination).

The whole memo in PDF format can be found here The font color added by me.
Click here to read on!

Proposed recall amendment

I have a copy of the proposed recall amendment to the Dartmouth Town Charter and have posted it here. The Town Clerk has received petitions containing the required number of signatures to call a Special Town Meeting in accordance with our Town Charter (Charter here in MS Word format or here as a webpage). The Select Board must call a Special Town Meeting within ...

...45 days of receiving such notice from the Town Clerk. The purpose of the Special Town Meeting is to petition the General Court (our state legislature) to enact a special act to revise the Town Charter. I don't think the state legislature has the authority to amend our charter. As I posted here, MGL chapter 43B, section 10(a) lays out the method of revising or amending the charter which mirrors Article LXXXIX of the Constitution of the Commonwealth which says,

Article II. Section 1. Right of Local Self-Government. - It is the intention of this article to reaffirm the customary and traditional liberties of the people with respect to the conduct of their local government, and to grant and confirm to the people of every city and town the right of self-government in local matters, subject to the provisions of this article and to such standards and requirements as the general court may establish by law in accordance with the provisions of this article.

Section 2. Local Power to adopt, revise or amend Charters. - Any city or town shall have the power to adopt or revise a charter or to amend its existing charter through the procedures set forth in sections three and four. The provisions of any adopted or revised charter or any charter amendment shall not be inconsistent with the constitution or any laws enacted by the general court in conformity with the powers reserved to the general court by section eight.

No town of fewer than twelve thousand inhabitants shall adopt a city form of government, and no town of fewer than six thousand inhabitants shall adopt a form of government providing for a town meeting limited to such inhabitants of the town as may be elected to meet, deliberate, act and vote in the exercise of the corporate powers of the town.

Section 3. Procedure for Adoption or Revision of a Charter by a City or Town. - Every city and town shall have the power to adopt or revise a charter in the following manner: A petition for the adoption or revision of a charter shall be signed by at least fifteen per cent of the number of legal voters residing in such city or town at the preceding state election. Whenever such a petition is filed with the board of registrars of voters of any city or town, the board shall within ten days of its receipt determine the sufficiency and validity of the signatures and certify the results to the city council of the city or board of selectmen of the town, as the case may be. As used in this section, the phrase "board of registrars of voters" shall include any local authority of different designation which performs the duties of such registrars, and the phrase "city council of the city or board of selectmen of the town" shall include local authorities of different designation performing the duties of such council or board. Objections to the sufficiency and validity of the signatures on any such petition as certified by the board of registrars of voters shall be made in the same manner as provided by law for objections to nominations for city or town offices, as the case may be.

Within thirty days of receipt of certification of the board of registrars of voters that a petition contains sufficient valid signatures, the city council of the city or board of selectmen of the town shall by order provide for submitting to the voters of the city or town the question of adopting or revising a charter, and for the nomination and election of a charter commission.

If the city or town has not previously adopted a charter pursuant to this section, the question submitted to the voters shall be: "Shall a commission be elected to frame a charter for (name of city or town)?" If the city or town has previously adopted a charter pursuant to this section, the question submitted to the voters shall be: "Shall a commission be elected to revise the charter of (name of city or town)?"

The charter commission shall consist of nine voters of the city or town, who shall be elected at large without party or political designation at the city or town election next held at least sixty days after the order of the city council of the city or board of selectmen of the town. The names of candidates for such commission shall be listed alphabetically on the ballot used at such election. Each voter may vote for nine candidates.

The vote on the question submitted and the election of the charter commission shall take place at the same time. If the vote on the question submitted is in the affirmative, the nine candidates receiving the highest number of votes shall be declared elected.

Within [ten months] after the election of the members of the charter commission, said commission shall submit the charter or revised charter to the city council of the city or the board of selectmen of the town, and such council or board shall provide for publication of the charter and for its submission to the voters of the city or town at the next city or town election held at least two months after such submission by the charter commission. If the charter or revised charter is approved by a majority of the voters of the city or town voting thereon, it shall become effective upon the date fixed in the charter. [See Amendments, Art. CXIII.]

Section 4. Procedure for Amendment of a Charter by a City or Town. - Every city and town shall have the power to amend its charter in the following manner: The legislative body of a city or town may, by a two-thirds vote, propose amendments to the charter of the city or town; provided, that [1] amendments of a city charter may be proposed only with the concurrence of the mayor in every city that has a mayor, and [2] any change in a charter relating in any way to the composition, mode of election or appointment, or terms of office of the legislative body, the mayor or city manager or the board of selectmen or town manager shall be made only by the procedure of charter revision set forth in section three.

It looks to me that the Massachusetts Constitution as well as the General Laws prohibit the revision of our charter by Special Act of the General Court. I'll ask the Town Counsel for his opinion on this at the next opportunity. I would be glad to have the town create and charter commission to revise the charter. If that happened, I would ask that the charter commission to investigate changing the form of government of the Town. Click here to read on!

Infamous town employee clause

Select Board member Bob Carney had a letter to the editor in Thursday's paper in which he states,

"I have no problem in excluding this clause from future contracts. It is my belief that had the board approached all the individuals involved in these contracts, they would have agreed to remove this provision."

You can read the whole letter here. Someone has given an attorney-client privileged letter from Town Counsel Savastano to the Standard-Times in which ...
.. he characterizes the infamous clause in this way,

"Clearly it is against the best interests of the Town to allow these employment contracts as currently written, with the renewal clause included, to remain effective in perpetuity"

You can read the entire letter from Attorney Savastano to the Select Board here at the Standard Times website. The letter also contains the text of the clause.
The infamous clauses have put the town in quite a pickle and the renewal clause is only a portion of it. Additionally, the contracts provide that the Town must offer employment at the same salary and benefits in another position within the Town if the employee's job is eliminated. Another provision says that the Select Board has an affirmative duty to budget for and speak in favor of funding the employee's contract. I wonder if they would give up these provisions as well. Mr. Carney, Ms, Dias, Ms. Horan McLean, Mr. Miller and Mr. LeDuc were on the Select Board and signed six of the eight contracts with these clauses. Two additional contracts with similar language were signed by the first four members above with Ms. Gilbert now on the board. To her credit, Ms. Gilbert refused to sign the contracts.
Mr. Carney apparently feels that the employees would voluntarily give up these contract clauses. If so, I look forward to joining him in asking the affected employees to do so.
As the Personnel Board has noted, these provisions do not provide any benefit to the Town since the employee is free to leave at any time. The contract does not restrict their rights, only the Town's rights. It is puzzling to me why these eight positions were chosen and why the Select Board felt they were needed since, as I said, they don't provide anything to the Town. Perhaps Mr. Carney will write another letter or speak at a Select Board meeting and let us know.
Click here to read on!

Select Board forms search committee

Today at the Select Board meeting, we voted to form a search committee to find our new town Executive Administrator. I put forward the following motion which was seconded and adopted by the Select Board after discussion:

Moved that the Select Board create an ad hoc committee to aid and advise the Select Board and to identify, interview and select candidates for the position of Executive Administrator. The committee to be known as the Executive Administrator Search Committee.

The membership of the Executive Administrator Search Committee to be comprised of:
• One member of the Finance Committee, selected by them from among their members
• One member of the Personnel Board, selected by them from among their members
• One member from a town employee union, selected by the leadership boards of those unions
• Two members of the community at large, appointed by the Select Board

The Executive Administrator Search Committee will identify, interview and hire a personnel services company to help them in their efforts.

The Executive Administrator Search Committee will post ...

...and advertise for candidates for the position of Executive Administrator, review resumes received, select candidates for interview, interview candidates, and forward a slate of two or three candidates for consideration by the Select Board for the position.

The Select Board will review the selections forwarded from the Executive Administrator Search Committee and select a candidate to fill the position of Executive Administrator from among those 2 or 3 provided by the Executive Administrator Search Committee.

All actions of the Executive Administrator Search Committee to be by majority vote of the members present. A quorum of members needed to transact business will be three.

The Executive Administrator Search Committee will recommend candidates to the Select Board no later than February 1, 2009 unless the Select Board votes to extend the time

Following adoption of that motion, the board voted to request $7,500 from the Reserve Fund for the purpose of hiring a personnel services company to aid in the search. The Finance Committee will vote on our request at their next meeting. Select Board members will contact those whom they would like to see serve on the search committee and nominate them at the Select Board meeting on Monday. The board will vote on the nominees to fill the two community-at-large committee positions at that meeting.
Click here to read on!

Town Charter

Several people have asked that I post the Dartmouth Town Charter and I have a link to it at the left. That file in in MS word Format and you can get it here. I have also posted it online as a webpage here. The formatting is all messed up with the web version but it is readable. As for particular sections ...

... for me to post, go to one of the two links and read the whole thing. I think that pulling one or two sentences out can sometimes be misleading.
Click here to read on!

Fiscal woes likely to deepen

State House Speaker Sal DiMasi predicted Monday that local aid will be cut from 5-10% next fiscal year, FY2010. The 2010 fiscal year begins in July 1, 2009. He left open the possibility that local aid could also be cut in the current fiscal year.

The speaker's suggestion that local aid could see a 10 percent cut, and that a smaller reduction could be made during the current fiscal year, will likely alarm local officials who rely on Beacon Hill aid to provide services. "There's going to have to be some cuts made across the board in fiscal 2010," DiMasi told a group of reporters assembled in his office. "Now how much of a cut local aid will take is a matter of how much. It's not a matter of whether they will take a cut. Barring any super-bailout from the federal government, cities and towns, from all the information that we have, will take a cut. Whether that be five or 10 percent, I suggest it's going to be at least five and as much as 10 percent."

Dartmouth's current budget projections assumed no increase in state aid for next year. A cut would ...

... balloon the projected shortfall which is already more than $800,000. That shortfall also assumed no pay increases for town employees which is unlikely. What categories of state aid are included in the cuts is important but unknown at this time. Dartmouth gets about $13 million in Chapter 70 school money, lottery, and state aid funds. The reduction could be as little $20,000 if only direct state aid is cut by 5% or as much as $1.3 million if lottery and Chapter 70 funds are also included and the cut is 10%. Here is a link to the Standard Times article on Speaker Dimasi's remarks.
Click here to read on!

Alternative forms of municipal governance

Since the inception of this blog, some have commented that Dartmouth may be ready for a different form of municipal government. In Massachusetts, Town Meeting is the standard form of town government. There are 6 other approved forms. The laws for these forms are found in MGL chapters 43, 43A, 43B and 43C
The approved alternative forms are defined as:

“Plan A”, a city government and legislative body composed of the mayor and a city council, the councillors being elected at large.

“Plan B”, a city government and legislative body composed of a mayor and city council, the councillors being elected partly at large and partly from districts or wards of the city.

“Plan C”, a city government and legislative body composed of a mayor and commissioners as hereinafter specified. The city council shall consist of the following five members: a mayor, who shall ...

... be the commissioner of administration; a commissioner of finance; a commissioner of health; a commissioner of public works and a commissioner of public property. Each commissioner shall have charge of the department of city affairs indicated by his official title

“Plan D”, a city government and legislative body, to be known as the city council, composed of seven or nine members, one of whom shall be mayor and shall be the official head of the city, and an administrative officer, called the city manager.

“Plan E”, a city government and legislative body, to be known as the city council, composed of seven or nine members, one of whom shall be elected as mayor by and from such members and shall be the official head of the city, and an administrative officer, called the city manager; the members of the city council and the elective members of the school committee to be elected at large by proportional representation.

“Plan F”, a city government and legislative body composed of a mayor and a city council, the councillors being elected partly at large and partly from wards of the city, with the mayor and city councillors to be nominated in party primaries.

If we are going to have a charter commission to look into recall, may as well change the form of government at the same time. Once it's up on the rack let's check everything and not just rotate the tires. Discussion anyone?
Click here to read on!

Town charter and recall petitions

I read in the Standard Times today that Mr. Carney is proposing a change in the Dartmouth Town Charter. His aim is to revise the charter so that Select Board members can be recalled. I think that Mr. Carney may want to do a bit of research on the Massachusetts General Laws. I think he is mistaken about the process for amending the Town Charter as it relates to a recall provision. From MGL Chapter 43B, section 10(a)

Amendments to a city or town charter previously adopted or revised under this chapter may be proposed by the city council of a city or the town meeting of a town by a two thirds vote in the manner provided by this section; provided, that amendments of a city charter may be proposed only with the concurrence of the mayor in every city that has a mayor, and that only a charter commission elected under this chapter may propose any change in a charter relating in any way to the composition, mode of election or appointment, or terms of office of the legislative body, the mayor or city manager, or the board of selectmen or town manager.

Bold emphasis added and not in the original
So it would seem from the section above that ...

... a charter commission is where we are headed. Perhaps a charter revision can be made by Special Act of the General Court, but if not, there are a few more than 200 signatures needed. MGL Chapter 43B section 3,

The adoption of a charter for any city or town under sections two and three of Article LXXXIX of the Amendments to the Constitution and the revision of any charter so adopted shall be initiated by filing with the board of registrars of voters of the city or town a petition signed by at least fifteen per cent of the number of registered voters residing in said city or town at the preceding state election.

Bold emphasis added and not in the original
There are about 20,000 registered voters in Dartmouth, so approximately 3,000 signatures will be needed. I'll leave it up to interested readers to review the remaining provisions for charter commissions and amendments to charters. You can start here, MGL chapter 43B, Table of Contents I will emphasize that I am not an attorney and nothing here should be taken as definitive. I can read and comprehend English and base this post on reading the language of the statute.
Click here to read on!

Report on Refuse District

Mr. Lynam has emailed me a report on the Greater New Bedford Refuse District year end results that he will present to the Finance Committee tonight in room 315 of the Town Hall. I asked him if I could publish it here and he consented, so here it is. The post below has only the text of his report. You can view the report with the spreadsheets here.

FY08 has come to a close and the Greater New Bedford Regional Refuse Management District [ Dump ] reconciliation report has been submitted and accepted, having been so voted on November 18th, 2008. I thought this 4th of December, 2008 is as good a time as any to give ya'all a situation report on the facility.
Fy08 was a good year, all in all. The District realized $879,041 in revenues in excess of those projected. That coupled with an under-expenditure of the Fy08 budget of $347,845 totaled $1,226,886 in available monies at years end. In accordance with District policy, all available revenues will be retained and allocated to various reserves.
With the exception of the initial funding needed to start the Landfill District, it has been the policy of the District to "Pay-As-We-Go", thus avoiding the interest and other borrowing costs associated with expansion of the facility. Given the finite life of the facility it was thought to be unwise to enter into long term borrowing that might outlive the life of the landfill itself, resulting in a negative cash flow to the member municipalities [ Dartmouth & New Bedford ] at the end of its useful life . Fy13 will be the final debt payment, leaving the District debt free.

Click below to read the rest

Phase 2, cells 3 & 4 have just been completed and are entirely paid for. Phase 2, cells 5 & 6 are estimated to cost $6 mil. Of the $1,226,886 available, $ 626,886 will be deposited into the reserve intended to fund this next phase of construction. This deposit will bring the construction reserve to $2,009,376 or 33.5% of its goal ...... and on target.
The district has completed the GASB45 assessment which addresses the monies necessary to guarantee the future health benefits of all current and retired employees. Our current liability is $1,028,000, a number that changes with rates of return realized on fund investments, personnel characteristics and other factors beyond our control. From the year end revenues, $400,000 will be added to this fund bringing the balance to $662,158. .... 64.4% of the current target. GASB45 is not yet required by the state, but given the finite life of the facility, failure to address this liability today would saddle the member municipalities with a large and growing bill in the future. That will not happen .... we are on target to reach this goal.
$150,000 will be deposited into the Land Acquisition Reserve bringing that fund balance to $1,019,000. Land acquisition is always a controversial issue, but the need to own surrounding properties is based on experience. As fancy as its long name would suggest, this is a dump after all, and dumps smell despite the best efforts of man and technology. To avoid impacting the ground water, these facilities are built mostly above the ground and rise quite high into the air. Mt Trashmore is not as majestic to look at as is Mt Rushmore. The views and the occasional odors threaten to bring about law suits intended to put us out of business and / or limit future expansion. If successful, such action would cost 'us' collectively $millions in closure costs, monitoring costs and, of course, the cost of now disposing of our trash at full industrial prices.
We have to date spent considerable funds fighting legal actions from a neighboring manufacturing plant [ Ahead Headgear Inc. ] located in the Industrial Park. We have successfully fended off those actions but at a cost in excess of $100 K. It has been the practice of the District to acquire any parcels that border the land fill when they become available in order to fend off future challenges to its operation. There are two key parcels yet to be acquired... value undetermined.
When the Landfill is finally retired, the value of these bordering properties will be considerable. Their eventual sale will bring a windfall of monies to both Dartmouth & New Bedford. For FY08 the cranberry bogs, rental income from a District owned single family home and the sale of hay grown on the property added revenue totaling $83,835, helping to keep our annual assessment low. Our target for this fund is $3mil ... with this deposit we will be at 34% of that goal.
The "Environmental Contingency Reserve" is a set aside to cover the insurance deductibles and other costs associated with the unlikely occurrence of ground water contamination due to a leak in a cell liner. Should local well contamination occur, we would be required to pipe-in water from the New Bedford municipal water supply. We do have insurance designed to mitigate these expenses. The goal for this contingency reserve is set at $500,000. With this deposit of $50,000 the fund will now total $ 322,000 or 64% of goal.
Other reserves are Closure & Post-Closure Reserves are required by DEP to insure the cells are properly capped and monitored for the legally required period of time. These amounts are recalculated each year by the District's engineer to adjust for additional cells built and for existing cell areas that have been capped.
The District Agreement divides the facilities operating costs among the two participants according to the tonnage received at the Landfill. Dartmouth's Pay-As-You-Throw program has caused a significant drop in our tonnage, effectively shifting the cost burden in New Bedford's direction. The result is that Dartmouth's share of the operating costs for its 6,595.98 tons is 13.06% where New Bedford's 43,910.64 tons accounts for 86.94%.
These figures are different from what was estimated for Fy08 resulting in $46,638 being 'owed' to Dartmouth. This amount will be deducted from Dartmouth's FY10 assessment. Bottom line is that Dartmouth paid ( $109,155 / 6,595.98 tons ) = $16.55 / ton in Fy08. We charge private haulers $71 / ton.
New Bedford has greatly stepped up its recycling efforts and this shift is not expected to continue .. in fact it is expected to begin to shift back the other way. Because of the large disparity in tonnage between Dartmouth & New Bedford, recycling success on the scale of Dartmouth's would result in a significant increase in future assessments to Dartmouth as our percentage of deposited waste climbs while New Bedford's falls.
The recyclables NOT deposited into the Landfill that led to this low per ton cost generated $149,336 in recycling revenue for Dartmouth in Fy08 [ $313,073 for New Bedford ] essentially resulting in FREE disposal of our solid waste ... PLUS a little profit. This money is held in separate accounts custodially by the District for the member communities . It is released upon request for use in recycling efforts. Such efforts include the purchase of trucks, 'Blue Bins', promotional material and the like. That's the good news ......
.... The bad news is that the prices paid for recyclable materials have been depressed because of the global economic condition :
Paper hit a high of $110 / ton this summer ... now it is worthless. China, a big purchaser of old paper, has stopped buying it. Some customers are having to PAY to recycle their paper or have their shipments refused. This means that paper would have to be land filled, raising our tonnage once again. A.W. Martin is still accepting our paper and cardboard ... at $0.
Commingled Containers [ i.e. metal cans, glass bottles & plastics ] was paying $ 12 / ton, now $0. A few years ago they charged us $30 / ton to take it off our hands.
Scrap Metal went as high as $200 / ton, dropped to $30 / ton and currently is at $60 / ton.
The two municipal recycling accounts held on the behalf of Dartmouth & New Bedford are used to pay the recycling expenses. Normally a profit is realized, but very little money is expected to be coming in for at least the next 6 months. The current balances of $109,000 for Dartmouth and $ 117,000 in the New Bedford account 'should' tide us over.
Summary:
The Landfill was originally envisioned to last 20 years, until the year 2015. Its current life expectancy is another 10 years beyond original estimates to at least 2026.
Exceptional efforts have been made to generate revenue from the facility and its properties. Income realized from these efforts include the rental of the facility owned single family home, the sale of scrap metal recovered from the land fill, the sale of hay, 20% of the gross value of each crop of cranberries and the capture and sale of Methane Gas, which by itself brought in $565,996 [ including $397,634 in energy credits ] All total, $654,425 in "Other Income' was realized for FY08.
Costs are under control and debt is low and going lower. The future and all reasonable contingencies are planned for, quantified, goals set, the means to hit the goals identified and progress toward those goals is on target.
The Greater New Bedford Regional Refuse Management District is a great resource that is expertly managed both for today and for our many tomorrows.
Greg

Thank you Mr. Lynam for allowing me to publish this information.
Click here to read on!

Where do we go from here?

The Select Board will meet on Wednesday December 10th at 4PM in Town Hall room 301 to discuss the method for hiring a new town administrator. Here is the selection method for which I will advocate.
First, the Select Board will identify and interview personnel recruitment companies. The company chosen will develop a timetable for the recruitment effort, develop a list of required experience and professional qualifications for the position, advertise for and recruit applicants, review and rate resumes, perform background checks of selected applicants, assist in interviewing potential candidates.
The Select Board should ...

...form a committee to do preliminary interviews with prospective candidates. That committee to consist of one member of the Personnel Board, one member of the Finance Committee, one representative of town employee unions and two members chosen from the public. This committee will work with the recruitment company to narrow the list of prospective candidates to two individuals who would be presented to the Select Board for their choice.
Finally, the Select Board will negotiate and execute a contract with the selected individual. What are your thoughts on this proposal?
Click here to read on!

The drama continues, Carney and Lee star

Here is the latest Email being circulated by Kevin Lee, the town Youth Advocate.
You might wonder when he finds time to, you know, like, actually do work for the town?

Dear neighbors and friends,
Even though most of us didn't expect the three SB members to change their vote on Monday night, it was difficult not to feel deflated at the end of the meeting. What struck me in particular though was how embedded the three were in their positions even at the end of the night. Mr. Michaud, as you know, delivered to us all his lengthily pre-written sermon from the mount, clearly designed to put us all in our places. What insulted me mostly though was the unwillingness for them to even entertain a motion to reconsider their previous vote….. meaning that they were not even willing to put the issue on the table fair and square….even though they knEw that they had the votes to re-vote the way they did on Nov. 13th.
IMPORTANT NEWS: Many have talked about a recall, and it has already begun. Yesterday afternoon Bob Carney began distributing three formal recall petitions for Michaud, Trimble and Gilbert.
A forth petition is also being circulated, alongside the three recall petitions, to seek a special Town Meeting who's only agenda would be "To see if the Town, in light of the actions of Joseph Michaud, Diane Gilbert and William Trimble, will vote that it is the conscience of the Town that Michael Gagne shall be retained as the Executive Administrator, and that the Select Board negotiate and execute a new contract to insure that Mr. Gagne continues to serve the Town of Dartmouth as he has faithfully and competently done for the past twenty-two years, or to take any other action relative thereto."
These petitions must be returned to the Town Clerk's Office within 18 days.

More after the break, click below

I have four clipboards with petitions on each ready to go. Is there someone who is willing to take these and start collecting signatures of registered voters ASAP? If you can do this, please call my cell at 508-287-9056 and I will arrange to get them to you. There are instruction sheets attached as well with the petitions.
My limitations: I support whatever recall and drive to get a Special Town Meeting scheduled. However, as a town employee, and as an employee whose agency, the Dartmouth Youth Commission, answers directly to the Select Board, I have decided that it would be unwise for me to be a front person in a campaign designed to oust the majority of my appointing authority…. the Select Board! I trust that you all will understand. I will work diligently behind the scenes, but cannot be the lead person speaking with the press, or physically hauling petitions around town.
Other concerns: These are just my thoughts and concerns, but I would welcome the wisdom of others on this: I'm not so sure that trying to oust all three SB members is the right way to go. As one former Town official said to me, "We only need to replace one of them." If I had to choose one to go after, it would be Mr. Michaud, because he is clearly the principal architect of the drive to dump Mike Gagne. I also feel that many residents are very much insulted by what they feel is Mr. Michaud's arrogant, surly, and "I know what's right for Dartmouth" attitude. And many residents, myself included, voted for Michaud the first time around….which I would never do again. I think that there are many people who voted for Michaud who are now very dissatisfied with his performance.
But if you go after Trimble and Gilbert (and she may not be running anyway) we run the risk of energizing the Barry Walker group, who will surely put up their own candidate in a special election as well. And any three-way race may well mean a win for the incumbent that we are trying to recall!
Another concern I have is making sure that these four petitions have, or will be able to, pass legal muster. While I think that it's important that we be ready to capitalize on the anger and dissatisfaction that's out there in the community, I feel we need to be equally sure that the steps we're taking are legally sound, in both procedure and statute. I emphasized this point with Mr. Carney yesterday morning, but I still have some concerns….
Again, that's what I'm feeling…. but please share your thoughts on this as well.
Finally, we need to meet. Where would be a good location? We can meet in Town Hall as a community action committee, but I have been told that we have to post our meeting… which requires a 48 notice. But if someone has a big living room, church basement, warm barn…. Let's hear from you!
Kevin Lee

I'll comment about the email later, I had a long day at work. One thing that Bob and Kevin and crowd should know is that I have no ego at all tied into my position as Select Board member. Trying to have me removed, matters to me not a whit. I have no agenda except to advocate for the taxpayers and promote good government.
Click here to read on!

DA weighs in on open meeting questions

The District Attorney has sent a letter to Mr. Gagne, and copied the Select Board members, and the Town Counsel, in response to Mr. Gagne's complaint about open meeting law violations. The text of the letter is below...

...

VIA First Class Mail and e-mail
December 1, 2008
Mr. Michael Gagné
8 Gulf Hill Drive
South Dartmouth, MA 02748

Dear Mr. Gagné:
Thank you for your letter dated November 18, 2008, seeking review of several meetings held by the Dartmouth Board of Selectmen (BOS) in Executive Session. The focus of your letter relates to meetings held in Executive Session to discuss the Dartmouth Executive Administrator’s position and the application of the Massachusetts Open Meeting Law (OML). It is important to keep in mind that M.G.L. c. 39 §23B, the Massachusetts Open Meeting Law, is a very narrow procedural mandate directed at local government. Any local governmental body in Massachusetts must, as a starting point, conduct its meetings under the provisions of the OML. The open and public process of governmental decision making is at the heart of the OML, unless an Executive Session (a closed meeting) is permitted. Your objection focuses on this exception as applied by the Board of Selectmen.
We recognize that the Executive Administrator’s position is currently under an employment contract set to expire early next year. This position you currently hold. Your letter states that the BOS discussed “getting rid of both [subject one] and myself’ in Executive Session. Your letter asserts that the BOS discussed at a later Executive Session meeting “the process of dismissing [subject onej and Mr. Gagné.” You were excluded from attending each
meeting during these deliberations.
Your letter complains that the BOS entered Executive Session while excluding you when in fact you were entitled to appear and be heard with the aid of legal counsel. You cite, in support of your view M.G.L. ch.39 §23B(l) a, b and c. You assert that these provisions were violated when the BOS discussed your reputation or character. Based upon our review we cannot conclude at this time, that discussions took place in Executive Session related to your reputation or character. Therefore, the provisions of M.G.L. c. 39 §23B(l) a, b and c are not implicated.
You also assert that M.G.L. c. 39 §23B(2) a, b and c were violated. These provisions relate to the rights of a person subject to discipline or dismissal. It appears that the issue at hand centers on the expiration of the Executive Administrator’s contract, which you equate with being disciplined or dismissed. We, however, are of the view that the expiration of an employment contract does not implicate the “discipline or dismissal” provisions in the Open Meeting Law.
Next, you state that Chairman Michaud asked other members of the BOS, in Executive Session, to state reasons why you “should not be terminated”. Again, it appears that the issue centers on the expiration of your contract, which you equate with being terminated, disciplined or dismissed. We, however, are of the view that expiration of an employment contract does not implicate “discipline or dismissal” rights in the Open Meeting Law.
Finally, you state that the BOS met on November 13th to “discuss the status of the Executive Administrator’s Contract.” You complain that the discussions were not for contract negotiations for non-union personnel and, therefore, Executive Session was improper. The OML statute does allow the BOS to enter Executive Session “to conduct strategy sessions in preparation for negotiations with non-union personnel.” M.G.L. c. 39 §23B (3). Based upon our review, we have determined that the board voted not to renew your contract. We do not know, at this time, whether prior to the vote, or following the vote, there were any discussions about strategy in preparation for further negotiations with respect to filling the position of Town Administrator. Without any evidence on this issue, we cannot conclude that a violation took place. We will await the minutes from that meeting, and following our review of the minutes, make a determination about whether we need to look into this further.
I thank you for bringing these issues to my attention. A copy of this letter will be forwarded to the Dartmouth Board of Selectmen.

Sincerely,
C. Samuel Sutter
District Attorney
Bristol District

cc: Attorney Howard Greenspan, Dartmouth Town Counsel

I scanned the letter using OCR to capture the text. Some elements are lost in that process such as the letterhead and signature. To view an image of the document with the letterhead and signature, go here(page1) and here(page2).
I doubt the Standard Times will report on this. Lately I find their reporting to be short on facts and long on speculation. But since the legality and propriety of the Select Board action have been questioned, you can read the letter here and decide what you think. As always, leave your comments below.
Click here to read on!

New direction

There have been many comments here and in the newspaper that have questioned what is the new direction that some Select Board members want to take the town. Those who have been reading my posts here should have a pretty good understanding of what that direction is. When I campaigned for election early this year, I said as much (see here). I have posted about priorities, planning (here and here), and changing the way in which the town delivers services through consolidation of departments, privatizing or contracting out services, and regionalizing services with other towns (see here and here). Even though the town government has increased fees ($1.8 million for trash) and the voters ...

...passed a $2.1 million override, our fiscal woes continue. The town is facing a $800K deficit next year even without any pay increases for non-school town employees. What we have done in the past is not going to work going forward. Dartmouth's finances are not in a temporary slump, this deficit is going to be persistent and ever increasing. We need to fundamentally change the way that the town government operates and delivers services in order to change that dynamic.
I and others on the Select Board think that new leadership is needed to provide new direction to meet that challenge. The changes that will be required must be driven by the top administrators of the town. Half measures and temporary fixes have been tried and failed. We need to drastically reduce the number of employees that the town needs to deliver services. That reduction is going to happen whether forced by deficits or by new methods of providing those services. It is not a matter of if, but how these reductions are made.
Some in the papers and in comments have pointed out that our current administrator has not been insubordinate, incompetent or incapacitated. That is not the standard which has lead me to this decision. What I considered is whether or not the current administrator can and will provide the leadership, innovation and new ideas needed to get Dartmouth to fiscal health. I am not discounting his long service, commitment to the town or knowledge. While taking those factors into consideration, I have still come to the conclusion that the town is better served by making this change.
Click here to read on!