Board of Selectmen, May 12, 2015
HOLDEN BOARD OF SELECTMEN
MEETING MINUTES
MAY 12, 2015
5:30PM Starbard Building
Members Present: Chairman Anthony Renzoni, Kenneth O’Brien, Jeremy Kurtz, Tim Ethier, Robert Lavigne (via phone conference)
Others Present: Jacquelyn Kelly, Town Manager
Peter Lukes, Assistant Town Manager
Elizabeth Fotos, Recording Secretary
Chairman Renzoni called the meeting to order at 5:30PM. The Board stood to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Chairman read a statement that acknowledged that Sel. Lavigne was able to participate in the meeting via phone based on his distance from the meeting location.
Chairman Renzoni stated that all votes during the May 12, 2015 needed to be taken in roll call format. He stated prior to elections/ nominations he wanted to thank Sel. O’Brien, Sel. Kurtz, Sel. Lavigne, and the Town Administration for working with him over the past year. He stated that he would not accept any nominations for Chairman at this time. He also suggested that the next Chairman abolish all procedural changes that he (the Chairman) had previously establish. He stated that he believed the Board was able to return to “Selectmen’s Miscellaneous” and discussion with the current Board.
Chairman Renzoni also encouraged the new Chairman to work with the Town Manager and the Chief of Police to remove the police presence from the Selectmen meetings.
Chairman Renzoni confirmed with Sel. Lavigne that he was on the line and aware of the roll call votes.
Sel. Lavigne was present and agreed.
- Reorganization of the Board of Selectmen
A motion was made by Sel. Ethier, to nominate Sel. Kurtz to the position of Chairman. The motion was seconded by Sel. O’Brien.
Sel. Ethier stated that he believed that Sel. Kurtz has shown solid abilities and would be up for reelection so he believed he was a good choice. He stated that he believed the position could be held by either Sel. Kurtz or Sel. O’Brien and both would do a great job.
Chairman Renzoni asked Sel. Kurtz if he would accept the nomination. Sel. Kurtz accepted it.
Sel. Lavigne stated that he too believed Sel. Kurtz or Sel. O’Brien would make phenomenal Chairman’s; he stated with Sel. Kurtz looking at his third year on the Board and reelection he had earned the position.
Chairman Renzoni agreed with Sel. Lavigne and Sel. Ethier.
Motion by Sel. Ethier, seconded by Sel. O’Brien, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO APPROVE J. KURTZ FOR THE POSITION OF CHAIRMAN FOR THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN. (Lavigne: yes; Renzoni: yes; O’Brien: yes; Ethier: yes; Kurtz: yes).
Chairman Kurtz thanked the Board. He opened the floor for a motion for the vice chair.
A motion was made by Sel. Renzoni to nominate Sel. O’Brien to the position of Vice Chair. The motion was seconded by Sel. Ethier.
Sel. Renzoni stated that in his tenure as Chairman, Sel. O’Brien served him (Renzoni) as a valuable vice chair and was often the voice of reasons during recesses. He stated that he brought much value to the position and encouraged the Board to nominate him.
Sel. Ethier agreed.
Sel. O’Brien accepted the nomination to Vice Chairman.
Motion by Sel. Renzoni, seconded by Sel. Ethier, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO APPROVE K. O’BRIEN TO THE POSITION OF VICE CHAIRMAN FOR THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN. (Lavigne: yes; Kurtz: yes; Renzoni: yes; Ethier: yes; O’Brien: yes).
A motion was made by Sel. Renzoni to nominate Sel. Ethier to the potion Clerk for the Board of Selectmen. The motion was seconded by Sel. Lavigne.
Sel. Ethier accepted the nomination to Clerk.
Motion by Sel. Renzoni, seconded by Sel. Lavigne, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO APPROVE T. ETHIER AS THE CLERK FOR THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN. (Lavigne: yes; Renzoni: yes; Kurtz: yes; O’Brien: yes; Ethier: yes).
- Licenses and Permits
Ms. Kelly stated that there were no licenses or permits at this point.
Sel. Renzoni stated that there was a small housekeeping matter he wanted to bring up. He stated that the Selectmen had adopted a Code of Conduct that the Board has decided to sign every year, he suggested passing the documents (sexual harassment and protected classes, and code of conduct) out and bringing them back to the next meeting, May 18, 2015/ prior to Town Meeting.
Chairman Kurtz stated that he would pass them out but would take them back at the first meeting in June so the Board could have time for discussion.
- Selectmen Positions on Warrant Articles
Chairman Kurtz stated that the last time the Selectmen met, they had left budgetary articles open. He recapped the warrant articles.
Chairman Kurtz stated that Articles 1-5 the Selectmen supported 5-0; Articles 7/8 the Selectmen supported 5-0; Articles 16-22 the Selectmen supported 5-0; Articles 23 and 24 the Selectmen supported 5-0.
Ms. Kelly stated that she thought the Board voted to not support Article 26. Sel. O’Brien stated that they had voted no action.
A motion was made by Sel. Renzoni, to not support Article 12, General Stabilization Fund, the motion was seconded by Sel. O’Brien
Sel. Renzoni stated that Fin Com had intended to increase taxes $1.2 Million more than the Town Manager suggested and more than she needs. He stated that they intended to increase taxes and place the funds in the IIF, however the Selectmen removed the IIF from the Town Meeting Warrant Articles. Sel. Renzoni stated since the removal of the Warrant Article, Fin Com wanted to put the funds in the General Stabilization Fund with the intent of saving the funds for a project in the future. Sel. Renzoni stated that he was objecting to doing this and urged the other Board members to object as well as there was no sound policy in place. Sel. Renzoni stated that Fin Com had taken a vote and announced its intent to set a group to see how much should be saved. Sel. Renzoni stated that Fin Com believes that it is a good idea, however without a policy in place, he does not support it.
Ms. Kelly stated that as a point of information, the total amount according to the Fin Com vote to go into the General Stabilization Fund would be $1 Million, 850 thousand. Ms. Kelly recommended using $450,000 from free cash to put into the stabilization fund which would have no tax implications. She stated the current balance is $2.5 Million so those funds would be in addition to the ones already in there.
Sel. Renzoni stated that amount would have tax payers seeing an increase in the hundreds.
Sel. O’Brien asked about who controlled the language of the warrant article.
Ms. Kelly stated that Fin Com would make the motion.
Sel. O’Brien asked if Fin Com dictated the language of the motion.
Ms. Kelly agreed they did. She stated the warrant article is the general information set and the motion is much more specific including the amount.
Sel. O’Brien asked the Town Manager if the actions of Fin Com were contrary to what she wanted.
Ms. Kelly replied that they were.
Sel. O’Brien confirmed that the Town Manager did not support this.
Ms. Kelly stated she did not support it.
Sel. O’Brien stated in addition to Ms. Kelly not supporting this article, the other Towns are going to drive a lower school assessment which would raise additional monies. He stated that there was no reason to do this and it was not following the professional advice of the administration.
Sel. Ethier asked what the rational behind Fin Com doing this was.
Ms. Kelly stated that in her words, there is an excess levy capacity, an amount that they can tax up to. She stated Fin Com wants to use up the excess levy capacity and that is why they suggested the increase in taxes.
Sel. Ethier asked if the Town loses it if it is not used.
Ms. Kelly replied that the Town doesn’t lose it, it’s a levy.
Sel. Ethier asked if they could still go up to 2.5% of property values.
Chairman Kurtz stated that the state auto calculates the 2.5%. He stated that by not raising the taxes it is a one year savings to the people.
Sel. Ethier asked if the threshold would be down.
Ms. Kelly replied that it was not incremental like that, it is recalculated every year. She stated that many people think that if we don’t use it, we lose it; however it just stays in the budget.
Sel. Ethier asked if it was a one year thing.
Ms. Kelly replied that it was not.
Chairman Kurtz stated that when the state calculates the 2.5% the Town would be able to use the whole amount, however the Town won’t be able to recapture the previously years amounts.
Sel. Ethier confirmed that they could not do 2.5% and then the $1.7 Million on top.
Ms. Kelly confirmed.
Sel. Lavigne stated that one of the things that the Selectmen had been accused of being was short sited. He stated that the Town had plenty of money in reserves and Standard & Poors had increased the Town’s bond ratings. He stated that they would not do that based on short term thought process. Sel. Lavigne stated that it was a fiscally and socially responsible move to do this and it was a good opportunity for the Selectmen to do something for the tax payers.
Sel. Renzoni stated that he was not opposed to saving for a future project but not without a policy or plan in place. He stated that this was the tax payer’s money and it needs to be studied so they can come back in a year and do it responsibly.
Motion by Sel. Renzoni, seconded by Sel. O’Brien, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO NOT SUPPORT WARRANT ARTICLE 12, GENERAL STABILIZATION FUND. (Renzoni: yes; Kurtz: yes; Lavigne: yes; O’Brien: yes; Ethier: yes). 5-0 to not support Warrant Article 12.
Chairman Kurtz asked if Ms. Kelly could create an amendment back to the original $450,000 from free cash.
Ms. Kelly stated that she would but that it would be up to the Selectmen to stand up and be recognized by the moderator.
Sel. Renzoni suggested having Sel. Lavigne stand up and speak regarding this matter. Sel. Lavigne agreed to do so without any objection.
A motion was made by Sel. Renzoni to support Warrant Articles 6-1 through 6.7 as presented; the motion was seconded by Sel. Ethier.
Chairman Kurtz asked if the Town expected any of the rates to increase around water/ sewer this year. He stated that the Selectmen vote to fund this warrant article yearly and come June during a Selectmen meeting the rates get revised. He asked if any of the rates would be revised based off of this year’s budget.
Ms. Kelly replied that there was no rate increases for the next year for water, sewer, or trash.
Motion by Sel. Renzoni, seconded by Sel. Ethier, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO SUPPORT WARRANT ARTICLES 6.1 THROUGH 6.7 AS PRESENTED. (Renzoni: yes; Lavigne: yes; Kurtz: yes; O’Brien: yes; Ethier: yes).
A motion was made by Sel. Renzoni to support Warrant Articles 9, 10,11,13,14, and 15, as presented. The motion was seconded by Sel. Ethier.
Sel. Renzoni stated that he had gone to the Fin Com Budget Hearings this year and that it is a very responsible budget. He stated that Fin Com modified a few things, but other than the excess taxation he supported everything in the budget.
Sel. Lavigne asked about Warrant Article 14; Mayo School HVAC System. He asked what would happen if the project comes back under the $25,000 threshold.
Sel. Renzoni stated that they would authorize up to $29,000 to be appropriated to the Mayo School. He stated any project under $25,000 the school district pays for, however the school district has already said that this item would fall to the bottom of their list of things to do.
Sel. Renzoni stated that this project will pay for itself in a year and a half and is a twenty year system. He stated that if the Selectmen don’t support this project even if it falls below the $25,000 threshold it will not get done because it is not in the school districts operational budget.
Ms. Kelly stated that the Town will be using funds available to them left over from the Dawson School project and no funds need to be raised or appropriated.
Chairman Kurtz stated that he was in support of this as well as the school district does not know when it would get to the top of their list. He stated that it does not impact the Town’s taxes and there are left over funds from the Dawson School Conversion Project. Chairman Kurtz suggested if the project came in under $25,000, reaching out to the district to see if they had funds available.
Sel. Lavigne replied that he didn’t know if it needed to be so black and white. He stated that maybe the Selectmen and the district could come up with an agreement to split the cost in some manner. He asked if there was a plan in place where the Selectmen could speak to the Superintendent to see if the Holden Tax Payers could save some money.
Sel. O’Brien stated that the district was going to lay off teachers this year and they do not have the money in the budget to do this. He stated that while it was good to save taxes, this investment is going to pay for itself in savings by heating more efficiently. Sel. O’Brien suggested maintaining the building and taking care of this item for the district.
Motion by Sel. Renzoni, seconded by Sel. Ethier, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO SUPPORT WARRANT ARTICLES 9,10,11,13,14, AND 15 AS PRESENTED. (Lavigne: yes; Kurtz: yes; O’Brien: yes; Renzoni: yes; Ethier: yes).
A motion was made by Sel. Renzoni to support Warrant Articles 6.8 and 6.9; it was seconded by Sel. Ethier.
Sel. Renzoni stated he supported these budget items.
Ms. Kelly stated that the budget was going down based on renegotiation.
Sel. Renzoni stated that the Town was successful in renegotiating tipping fees. He stated the account was healthy and that Dennis Lipka was running a great operation.
Sel. O’Brien asked Ms. Kelly about the letter that she circulated regarding water rates in Worcester. He asked if that would impact Holden water rates.
Ms. Kelly replied that eventually it may as fees will be passed on to Holden; however there was not an increase in FY 16.
Chairman Kurtz told the Board to finish the Warrant Articles and then they could come back to the water questions.
Chairman Kurtz asked if there were any changes to the library or cultural funds.
Ms. Kelly replied that there was an increase to the library fund.
Motion by Sel. Renzoni, seconded by Sel. Ethier, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO APPROVE WARRANT ARTICLE 6.8 AND 6.9 AS PRESENTED. (Renzoni: yes; Kurtz: yes; Lavigne: yes; O’Brien: yes; Ethier: yes).
A motion was made by Sel. Lavigne to take no position on Warrant Article #25, Revocation of Article 28 of May 19, 2014 Annual Town Meeting, it was seconded by Sel. O’Brien.
Sel. Lavigne stated that this was the topic of much debate even internally and he thinks it is a good Warrant Article for discussion at Town Meeting. He stated that there are opportunities and that the Selectmen should let the people decide what they want to do with the property.
Sel. O’Brien stated that he supports Warrant Article 25 but feels as though taking no position on it is the appropriate thing to do because the people of the Town should have the choice as to what they want to do with the property.
Sel. Renzoni wanted to point out that they were the motion makers on this Warrant Article and then they were going to take no position on it. He stated that he does not support not taking a position and he is hopeful that this fails. He stated that this Warrant Article allows the Town Manager to do what she deems appropriate for the property. Sel. Renzoni stated that if the Selectmen revoke the Town Managers ability to sell some or all of the property the Town is going to be saddled with a house that needs to be condemned. He stated that the way the Warrant Article is written now, allows the Town Manager to keep, sell a portion, or sell the entire property as she deems appropriate. He stated that he does not feel as though the Selectmen have given the Town Manager the time to do her job.
Sel. O’Brien stated that no matter what is done with the property, the house is going to be a liability and it devalues the property anyway. He stated that the house is not an issue. Sel. O’Brien said that it is wrong to imply that they have not given the Town Manager enough time to make a plan. Sel. O’Brien said that he would like to see the Town keep the property but that he thinks it something for the Town Meeting to decide.
Chairman Kurtz said that he could go either way on this. He said that he would rather give the voters the option to use the property and that if new property was needed to be acquired, regular rates would need to be paid for the land. Chairman Kurtz stated that the Town does not need the funds right now and some of the Town’s people have ideas on how the Town can use the property.
Motion by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. O’Brien, it was VOTED TO TAKE NO POSITION ON WARRANT ARTICLE 25, REVOCATION OF ARTICLE 28 OF MAY 19, 2014 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING BY A VOTE OF 4-1. (Lavigne: yes; Kurtz: yes; O’Brien: yes; Ethier: yes; Renzoni: no).
Chairman Renzoni asked if Sel. O’Brien wanted to go back and speak about Warrant Article 6.5; Water/ Sewer Enterprise Fund.
Sel. O’Brien replied that he wanted to talk about water/ sewer rates going up incrementally in the City of Worcester and how that impacted Holden.
Ms Kelly replied that it would not impact the Town in FY 16.
Sel. O’Brien asked what would happen if the funds fell short.
Sel. Renzoni stated that even if the rates increased, there was almost $1 Million in the Stabilization Account.
Ms. Kelly stated that rate stabilization has been leveraged before and may be again next year.
Sel. Ethier asked if the rates that Worcester charged us were the same rates as they pay for water.
Ms. Kelly replied that the Town had a long term agreement with the City of Worcester regarding water and we pay in city rates so as it goes up our water rates go up as well.
Sel. Ethier asked about the sewer as well.
Ms. Kelly replied that the Town was engaged in a lawsuit with the City of Worcester and DCR and Sel. Ethier could be updated at a different time.
Sel. Ethier asked if there was surplus in the budget now.
Sel. Renzoni stated that when they were revisiting rates they wanted one month’s reserves and one month’s stabilization in an account so any increase could be offset. He stated that this allowed the Town to not to go back to rate payers and revisit rates every time there is a change.
Ms. Kelly replied that she would need to look up the exact number however the Town does leverage those funds and it is in the budget for next year as well.
Sel. Ethier asked if that money could be accessed to repair the system.
Ms. Kelly replied that it could but it was through a different process and would require Town Meeting to do so.
Sel. Renzoni stated that we currently pay Worcester rates, however in four years (2019) we will be paying Worcester rates plus 10%, which was part of the original negotiations.
- Motion Assignments
Ms. Kelly stated that the Board will be doing two things; for the items that the Board of Selectmen is the ‘Motion Maker’, a Selectman will make a motion and speak to it, the other items, a Selectman will be standing up and making the Board’s recommendations.
Sel. Renzoni to speak to Warrant Articles 1-11
Sel. Lavigne will offer Warrant Article 12 and speak to it.
Chairman Kurtz will speak to Warrant Articles 13-18
Sel. Ethier will make a motion to Warrant Article 19 and speak to it.
Sel. O’Brien will make a motion to Warrant Article 20 and 21 and speak to them.
Ms. Kelly told the Board that there are four streets to be accepted and the Selectmen will get a report about the street acceptance by engineering prior to the meeting. She stated there will be four separate motions made for the four different streets.
Sel. O’Brien, Sel. Renzoni, Sel. Ethier, and Chairman Kurtz will each one of the streets.
Sel. Lavigne will make a motion to Warrant Article 23 and speak to the motion.
Chairman Kurtz will make a motion to Warrant Article 24 and speak to the motion.
Sel. O’Brien will make a motion to Warrant Article 25 and speak to the motion.
Ms. Kelly told the Board that the Planning Board will make the motion for Warrant Article 26.
Sel. Ethier asked what the change to the sign bylaw was.
Ms. Kelly replied that it was mostly housekeeping changes. They were also introducing new regulations for sandwich boards which would dictate where they could be located, how big them could be, etc, and some regulations surrounding gas stations purchasing price/ gallon.
Sel. Ethier received a copy of the sign by law and stated that he would look through it.
Sel. O’Brien told Sel. Ethier that he had supported the Towns position and the rest of the Board was against it. He stated that one thing that they were opposed to was that EDC and the Chamber of Commerce did not have the chance to review or attend public hearing, even though the public hearing was posted, the business community was not specifically notified.
Sel. Lavigne or Chairman Kurtz would speak to Warrant Article 26.
Sel. Renzoni spoke about Town Meeting. He stated that he felt it was the responsibility of the Selectmen to get the word out and to get active voters to fill the seats. Sel. Renzoni stated that 126 was the quorum number and unless the Selectmen did something about it, they will have trouble getting the people in the seats. He suggested posting an hour before Town Meeting in case there is last minute business that needed to be discussed.
Sel. Renzoni stated he would get on social media and offered to meet with residents to help make the process more comfortable for all wanting to participate. He stated that with the large amount of money on the table with Fin Com, it even more important to fill the seats and have the tax payers have their say.
Chairman Kurtz agreed.
Motion by Sel. O’Brien, seconded by Sel. Renzoni, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO ADJOURN THE MAY 12, 2015 BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AT 6:31PM.
APPROVED: __June 15, 2015__________________