Governor Patrick seeks public input for FY2011 budget

The Governor will have a series of public meetings to get public input on the upcoming budget for fiscal year 2011 that begins in July 2010. You can go to the Governor's website at this link to add your comments on a blog.
The meetings are:

Tuesday, December 15 7:30pm
FY 2011 Budget Forum in Melrose(map), Moderated by Governor Deval Patrick

Wednesday, December 16 6:00pm
FY 2011 Budget Hearing in Boston (map), Moderated by Secretary Reville (EOE)

Thursday, December 17 6:00pm
FY 2011 Budget Hearing in Springfield (map), Moderated by Secretary Bialecki (EOHE

This is your chance to make your priorities heard. Go add a comment or attend a forum. If you don't make your thoughts known, ...

... you can't complain if the budget doesn't match your priorities.
Click here to read on!

Town Charter and Bylaw review

Our town charter sets up periodic review of its provisions as well as periodic review of the town bylaws. 2010 is the year designated for the first charter review and also meets the criteria for a bylaw review year. I have copied the relevant sections of the Town Charter below. The bold emphasis is mine and not in the original.
The charter review committee can recommend modifications to our charter to the Town Meeting. The Town Meeting can adopt or reject the recommendations. If they adopt them, the changes are put on the ballot at the next town election and require 2/3 affirmative votes to be adopted.
The Town Charter cannot be modified to change the form of government except in the manner detailed in this post
The current charter basically codified the structure of the town government as it existed at the time. Our new Executive Administrator, Mr. Cressman, has been tasked with making recommendations to the Select Board on revising the structure of the town departments. I think that he should be one of the two persons appointed by the Select Board to the charter review committee.

SECTION 6-7: PERIODIC REVIEW, CHARTER AND BY-LAWS
(a) Charter Review - At least once in every ten years, beginning in 2010, and thereafter in each year ending in a zero, a special committee to consist of nine members shall be established for the purpose of reviewing this charter and to make a report, with recommendations, to the town meeting concerning any proposed amendments which said committee may determine to be necessary or desirable. The committee shall consist of nine members who shall be chosen as follows: the select board, the finance committee and the school committee shall each designate two persons, the planning board shall designate one person, and two persons shall be appointed by the town moderator. Persons appointed by the said agencies may, but need not, be members of the agency by which they are designated. The committee shall meet to organize forthwith following the final adjournment of the annual town meeting.

More after the jump

Our town bylaws are in desperate need of revision. There are many that are outdated
(Such as this one from 1944 "No person shall ride a bicycle or tricycle upon any of the sidewalks of the town" Hey kid! Get that tricycle into the street and off the sidewalk!)
or are duplicative or have been superceded by the charter or the General Laws.

(b) By-Law Review - The select board shall at five year intervals, in each year ending in five, or in zero, cause to be prepared by a special committee appointed for that purpose, a proposed revision or recodification of all by-laws of the town which shall be presented to the town meeting for reenactment at the annual town meeting in the year following the year in which the said committee is appointed. The by-law review committee shall consist of the town clerk who shall serve by virtue of office, two representative town meeting members appointed by the town moderator and two persons appointed by the select board. The said committee in its final, or in an interim report, shall include recommendations for such substantive change in town by-laws as it deems necessary or advisable. The review of town by-laws shall be in conjunction with the town counsel, or, by special counsel retained for that purpose. Subsequent to enactment by the town meeting, copies of the revised by-laws shall be forwarded to the attorney general of the commonwealth for approval, and they shall be otherwise published, all as required by general laws. Copies of the revised by-laws shall be made available for distribution to the public at a charge not to exceed the actual cost, per copy, of reproduction.

Do you think it is time to get started? What sort of changes should be made? Tell us in comments.
Click here to read on!

State Fiscal woes deepen

A report by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation (MTF) predicts that the Commonwealth is still hundreds of million dollars short of a balanced budget for the current fiscal year, FY2010. The prospects are equally bad for next year FY2011 when they predict a $3 billion shortfall in the state budget despite the cuts already made. One fault that the MTF consistently found was the use of one time revenue to plug budget holes. You can read the entire report here.
Given their findings, it would seem that ...

... Dartmouth may see additional cuts to school and local aid before the end of FY2010.
The Governor has not issued a proposed 2011 budget as yet but it is sure to contain even more cuts. Our projection was for a 5% cut in state local aid and a level funded Chapter 70 amount. I have to say that both predictions seem pretty conservative but when you see reports such as this one, it gives you pause.
A major problem is that revenues will inevitably lag the actual recovery and the states and municipalities have been burning through reserves and have little left to fall back on. Our Commonewealth is by no measure in the worst shape among all the staes and I hope that the federal government will provide a lifeline to the states. It is not a good time to be governor anywhere in the nation and I expect that the voters will turn the current occupants out next year. I am not sure that there is much the governors can do about it though.

Click here to read on!

Bristol DA hints at Attorney General run

The Fall River Herald News thinks Bristol District Attorney Mr. Sutter may take a crack at the Commonwealth Attorney General post if the current AG, Ms Coakley, is elected as our new US Senator. Their article is at this link.

What do you think? Will Coakley be the new Senator? Should Sutter run for her position?
Tell us in comments.
Click here to read on!

Wind turbine forum report

The Standard Times article about the forum can be found here.
I think that the information presented was helpful to residents in understanding the impact and benefits of the wind turbines. You can download the presentation here
One particularly interesting question came from the Fire Chief. He asked what provisions are made for getting someone down from the top of the 100 meter (328ft)tower and would the fire department receive any special training needed. I did a little investigation this morning and found that there are ladderways with intermediate platforms within the towers for access. These ladderways are equipped with fall protection devices. In addition, there is a rescue and descent device stowed in the top nacelle by some turbine manufacturers which allows descent outside of the tower. I think that the town should make these devices a requirement in the request for proposal when issued.
Several of those in attendance expressed concern about health effects and decreased property values. Jeanne Nesto of Chase Road was worried about "wind turbine syndrome" and others about property values. I have posted my thoughts on those subjects here.
I spoke with Ms. Nesto and others after the forum and invited them to send me information about health effects and property values. I am open to valid concerns and want to weigh all the information. What I asked for were reports that applied science and statistics to show that there are deleterious effects. Reports, such as that by Dr. Pierpoint, do not constitute a scientific or statistical approach. What I want to see are reports that apply the scientific method of data collection, analysis and conclusion to reach verifiable results. Statements of belief are not persuasive to me.
As an example, there are millions who believe that flying saucers exist. Some claim to have seen them, others to have met them. Despite many books, reports and websites claiming their belief in otherworldly visitors, I have yet to see any conclusive verifiable proof. I don't believe that they exist and require proof that they do.
Another example is the belief ...

... that vaccinations cause a variety of ailments including autism. Many believe this to be true. There are long lists of websites that promote that belief. However rigorous scientific investigation has not found a causal relationship between vaccinations and autism. So what to believe? Should I not vaccinate and expose my child to known diseases which can definitely harm them or vaccinate even though many hold the unproven belief that it can cause autism? I would choose the vaccination because that is where objective science tells me the correct course lies.
I think that these examples show what I am asking for. If you have evidence that I should consider about wind turbines, please let me know in comments or by email.
Click here to read on!

UMass Law School approved by Trustees

The Standard Times reports in this article that the Southern New England School of Law will become a part of the UMass system.
Great news for our town and UMass Dartmouth, I think.

Congratulations to Chancellor MacCormack and the UMass community!
Click here to read on!

Fiscal Year 2011 shows shortfall in town budget

The Select Board and Finance Committee met jointly last night to review the revenue and expense projection for the next fiscal year, FY2011. The projections show that the town budget will be in the red (i.e expenses exceed revenue) by over $850,000.
The projections can be viewed in MS Excel format at this link The Finance Committee and Select Board agreed to use the revenue forecast, shown in the linked file, of $68,630,059 as the basis for next year's budget planning. These numbers are not certain ...

... as the Commonwealth may need to make additional cuts to local aid in order to balance their budget. There is no doubt that the state will have to make cuts to balance their budget. The unknown is where those cuts will fall.
The revenue projection was set at 1% increase for new growth in property tax and a 5% decrease in local receipts. About 50% of local receipt revenues are derived from automobile excise tax and new car registrations have declined.
Total expenses are forecast to rise about $1.745 million. The school contributions are projected rise by about $837K while medical insurance and pensions for town employees will increase about $414K. These categories constitute the bulk of the increase in expense. There is a modest wage increase for town employees included for FY2011 but no funds for an FY2010 increase. The contracts of nearly all town unions expired at the end of Fy 2009 and the town and bargaining units are currently negotiating new contracts.
Town departmetns have been asked to submit their FY2011 budgets and to look for opportunities to cut costs. As of this date, no mandated reductions in budget have been required of department heads.
That is the current state of town finances, what do you think about it? Tell us in comments.
Click here to read on!

Facts about wind turbines.

The University of Massachusetts Renewable Energy Research Lab weighs in with this letter on Dr. Pierpoint's claims saying,

At the University of Massachusetts, we presented a white paper on the subject: (http://www.ceere.org/rerl/publications/whitepapers/Wind_Turbine_Acoustic_Noise_Rev2006.pdf) with its latest revision in 2006. Similar conclusions have been presented by a well-respected consulting firm in New York State- AWS Truewind. In no case do these reports support the conclusions of Dr. Pierpont or others holding similar views. We also note that this subject is a topic most used by wind turbine opponents, and that not all the information found on the Internet is reliable.

This letter from Massachusetts Maritime Academy states that there have been no complaints of noise from their wind turbine which is within 522 feet of the nearest residence in 18 months of operation. (more after the jump)

Hull's second wind turbine is much closer to residents than proposed in Dartmouth and is not shielded by trees. Below is an actual photo of that turbine.
Watch these videos of what the nearby residents have to say in Hull
Bernadette White 1
Bernadette White 2
Beth Parker
Hardly a nightmarish tale. In fact, Hull residents like their wind turbines and are proud of them. Here is a link to a children's book about Millie, the Hull wind turbine. The Hull Assessor says in this memo that Millie has not hurt property values.
This report from the Union of Concerned Scientists says,

“A national study of more than 25,000 real estate sales near wind farms across the country found no evidence of a negative impact on property values, and in some cases it even showed a positive effect. In the coastal community of Hull, MA, property sales near Hull Wind One since it began operating in January 2002 show increases in property value consistent with the rest of the town, according to local realtors. A long-standing real estate firm serving Hull and the neighboring towns of Cohasset and Hingham highlights Hull Wind One in its sales materials, touting the far-sighted thinking that the use of wind power represents, the stable electricity rates it provides, and the overwhelming town support for a second turbine, which was erected in 2006”

Once again I am sure that this information will not sway those who have already decided that these turbines are not suitable for our town. However if you have an open mind, I think all the above deserves consideration.
Click here to read on!

Data shows wind turbines do not effect property values

This article from the Berkeley National Laboratoty details a nationwide study which found that wind turbine sites had no effect on residential property values in the vicinity. The full report can be downloaded at this link.
Some commenters have raised a preliminary study by pediatrician Dr. Nina Pierpoint about a "wind turbine syndrome". This report is a compilation of anecdotal information from people who claim that they have a malady caused by nearby wind turbines. The subjects from her study are self selected, i.e. they reported their symptoms and were included rather than surveying all residents who live nearby. There are no causal relationships established in the report as one would expect in a rigorous scientific document. The report is not in a scientific journal but rather is self published by the author. There are serious questions about the peer reviews of this publication. While no one can prove there are no deleterious effects from living near wind turbines, the opposite is also true. No proof has been provided that deleterious effects do occur.
An article on the CleanTechnica website says,

A spokesman for the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) said that the size of the sample group and the methodology for the study "simply does not stack up scientifically". "This is research based on the symptoms of 38 unspecified people in a small number of unspecified locations," he argued, adding that a recent, more extensive study by acousticians at Salford University had concluded that there were no health risks arising from the noise from wind turbines.

I do not expect that the opponents of our wind turbine project will be persuaded by this evidence. They have reached a conclusion and ...

... are casting about for evidence to support their position.
I think I have arrived at my support for the project in the opposite manner. I have looked at the evidence and found that the installation will not be harmful to residents, will not affect property values, and is beneficial to the town.
Let us know what you think in comments.
Click here to read on!

Recent history of microbes in town wells

New regulations about water system reporting came into effect on December 1. These new regulations require water system operators to publicly announce microbial contaminates when they occur in the source water, even if it is prior to treatment. There have been instances in the past where wells have seen positive results for microbes but the regulations at the time did not require a public announcement. There has not been an instance where microbes were detected in the distribution system following treatment.
The linked document shows the 3 year history of microbe detection (MS Word format) and the affected wells. Many of these events occur after heavy rainfall ...

... and the water department takes steps during such times to shut down those wells that they know are more susceptible to contamination.
Given the past history and the new reporting rules, it is likely that we will see more of this type of reporting in the future. I want to emphasize that the detection was prior to treatment and no microbes have been detected in the distribution systems.
Click here to read on!