Board of Selectmen, May 18, 2015
HOLDEN BOARD OF SELECTMEN
MEETING MINUTES
MAY 18, 2015
5:30PM Wachusett Regional High School
Members Present: Chairman Jeremy Kurtz, Anthony Renzoni, Kenneth O’Brien, Tim Ethier, Robert Lavigne
Others Present: Jacquelyn Kelly, Town Manager
Peter Lukes, Assistant Town Manager
Elizabeth Fotos, Recording Secretary
Stephen Madaus, Town Counsel
Chairman Kurtz called the meeting to order at 6:00PM. The board stood to recited the pledge of allegiance
- Licenses/Permits
Motion by Sel. Renzoni, seconded by Sel. Lavigne, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO APPROVE HEATHER PARRY ON BEHALF OF CUB SCOUTS PACK 46 FOR A COMMON VICTUALER-MEMORIAL DAY SNACK SHACK ON MAY 25, 2015 FROM 10:00AM UNTIL 2:00PM PENDING THE APPROVAL OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH.
Ms. Kelly asked the Board to grant her authority to approve any stray approvals that come in from the time of the meeting (May 18, 2015) until the Memorial Day Parade, (May 25, 2015).
Motion by Sel. Renzoni, seconded by Sel. Lavigne, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO GRANT MS. KELLY THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE ANY STRAY APPROVALS FOR LICENSES/PERMITS THAT ARE SUBMITTED FROM MAY 18, 2015 UNTIL MAY 25, 2015 (MEMORIAL DAY PARADE).
- Positions on Warrant Articles
Ms. Kelly provided the Board with a document and pointed out the motion changes that were made for Town Meeting.
Ms. Kelly stated that on Article 20, the Light Department Payment in Lieu article, the amount was transposed and should ready $140,050 not $104,050.
Sel. O’Brien, the motion maker confirmed the amount.
Ms. Kelly told the Board that for Article 22, the Street Acceptance, they had received the recommendation from DPW regarding the street acceptance and of the four that were originally going to be put up for street acceptance, only one, January Lane was ready for street acceptance.
Sel. Renzoni volunteered to present Article 22; Street Acceptance for January Lane.
Ms. Kelly stated that the last change was with Article 26; the Zoning by law. She told the Board that this would require a 2/3 vote to pass because it was a change in bylaw.
Chairman Kurtz asked if there any additional updates.
Ms. Kelly asked if the Selectmen had read Article 12 and if they had any questions on it.
Sel. Lavigne stated that he had his talking points on the issue but that questions arose and he wanted clarification as to what happens if we don’t tax to the levy limit this year.
Ms. Kelly replied that it is recalculated; the Town does not lose it but it is not incremental. She stated that if you use your levy limit this year, the excess limit will be less next year.
Sel. Ethier asked if we would lose the money forever if we are not taxing to the maximum amount.
Mr. Madaus replied that the ability to increase is limited to 2.5% each year.
Chairman Kurtz replied that the overall tax limit is 2.5%; which is the ceiling each year.
Sel. Lavigne asked if we go 2.5% off what we tax or 2.5% off what the levy limit would have been.
Sel. O’Brien stated that the tax base grows each year; that it is a moving target each year.
Sel. Lavigne replied that he thought it was off what we taxed, not what the levy limit would have been.
Chairman Kurtz cautioned the Board to be careful in their thoughts; he stated that the Town could go up 2.5% by state based off the total valuation of the Town each year and then the Town adds on new growth.
Sel. Renzoni stated that an easier way to explain the Selectmen’s position was to state that the rate was a little higher than they felt it should be. He stated last year the tax rate was $18.12 and in the real world it should have been at like $17 because we have been bringing in more money. Sel. Renzoni stated that the Town has not had the need to tax the maximum about of 2.5% and that they don’t see the need to do so in the foreseeable future. Sel. Renzoni stated that they were using this year as a reset year because in the future the Town could be back to the 2.5%.
Sel. O’Brien stated that additionally, the school budget assessments were going to come back in lower.
Assistant Town Manager, Peter Lukes showed the Board the Division of Local Services to clear up any additional questions on the levy limit.
Sel. Lavigne stated that it was based off the limit, not the levy.
Ms. Kelly agreed and stated that it was reset yearly.
Sel. Ethier asked who sets the levy limit.
Ms. Kelly replied that the Department of Revenue sets it; that it is based off information and data that is submitted to the Department of Revenue.
Sel. Lavigne stated that we were not even changing the assessed value to the homes this year.
Chairman Kurtz replied that the Town will do assessment in 2016, but that is a Town wide thing.
Ms. Kelly agreed and stated that it was cyclical.
Chairman Kurtz stated he had received requests to revise the Selectmen’s position on Warrant Article 25 and Warrant Article 26.
Sel. Renzoni stated that he asked to open Warrant Article 25 back up to the Board. He asked Sel. Lavigne to reconsider based off of input from the public. He stated that Brad Creamer had also written a letter that had urged the Town to reconsider the Boards position. Sel. Renzoni stated that he was all in favor of retaining the property and that he trusts Ms. Kelly to make the correct decision on the property but that the highest law of the land is Town Meeting. He stated that the Board has a responsibility to the constituents and he asked Sel. Lavigne to take this off the table.
Sel. Ethier stated that he would second this.
Sel. O’Brien stated that he does not believe this is a conservative or a liberal issue. He stated that if the Town needs money down the line the property could be sold and is an asset for the Town. He stated that he believes this property is a good thing for the Town to retain.
Sel. Ethier stated that it also abuts Davis Hill property and could be useful in the future.
Chairman Kurtz stated that the Town would retain those easements regardless.
Sel. Lavigne stated that he was torn on this issue. He stated that he believes that the Town should keep it but that he doesn’t think that the Board should change their motion at the 11th hour. Sel. Lavigne stated that the Board had agreed to not take a position on this item and just because a few people had reached out in the week before Town Meeting, it should not alter the Selectmen’s view on it.
Sel. Renzoni stated that changing your position when nothing else has changed is not good business however when new information is presented it changes things.
Sel. Lavigne replied that a letter to the editor by Brad Creamer should not change anything.
Sel. Renzoni replied that regardless of the property or who owned it that he believes it adds value for the Town. Sel. Renzoni stated he believed that it was important for the Selectmen to take a position on this.
Sel. O’Brien stated that he would make a motion to take a position of supporting article 25 as Sel. Renzoni could not. (Sel. Renzoni had previously voted against this motion that passed at 4-1 to take no position and therefore could not be the motion maker). Sel. O’Brien stated that he would like to see the Town save this property.
Sel. Lavigne stated that he had said over the last 5 years on the Board that the Selectmen are here to take positions. He stated that he would support it and he agreed that the Town should keep the property. He stated that the Town does not need the money because the public safety building came in under budget.
Sel. O’Brien agreed and stated that it was an asset. He stated that if the Town was struggling financially, he would have a problem supporting this but that was not the case. He stated that the Town could do a number of things with the land.
Motion by Sel. O’Brien, seconded by Sel. Ethier, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO SUPPORT WARRANT ARTICLE 25.
Ms. Kelly told the Selectmen that Fin Com has taken a position against this Warrant Article.
Chairman Kurtz stated that he would like to reopen for discussion Warrant Article 26; the sign by laws. He stated that he had spent the weekend going up and down Main Street and speaking to small business owners. He stated that he had heard from the business owners and they wanted to know why the Selectmen were not in favor of this change. Chairman Kurtz stated that based on his conversation with these business owners, he felt that having the allowance for the sandwich boards was a big win for small businesses. He stated that if the Selectmen take no action/ recommend no action and the by law fails, these businesses could still be in jeopardy of Growth Management telling these businesses to take down their signs and possibly assessing fines to the business owners.
Sel. O’Brien stated that he had spoken to Ms. Kelly on this item and that he did not support speaking against this originally. Sel. O’Brien stated that when speaking with Ms. Kelly she had told him that Bill Ritter, Chairman of the Planning Board, expected that the Selectmen would take a position in favor of this article to support the Planning Board. Sel. O’Brien stated that he felt the Selectmen should be supporting the Planning Board and that there is a lot of preparation done and to speak against this was concerning. Sel. O’Brien stated that passing this would not preclude the EDC from having hearings on this item in the future and making different recommendations.
A motion was made by Sel. Renzoni to have the Selectmen endorse Article 26; the motion was seconded by Sel. Ethier.
Sel. Renzoni stated that he agreed with Sel. O’Brien, that something was better than nothing and to show some improvements for small businesses was positive. He stated that EDC, the Chamber, and the Planning Board could work together in the coming year to come up with additional changes that they felt would work for the business community and the Town. Sel. Renzoni stated that he did think it was short sighted to not speak with the Chamber but that something was better than nothing.
Sel. Lavigne stated that he could not be more against this and that he felt this was a slap in the face of the EDC and the Chamber. He stated the Town had made it this far without a sandwich board by law and it could last another year without one. Sel. Lavigne stated it had taken four years to get this as an agenda item for Town Meeting and that it was worth it to wait another year and have it done right.
Ms. Kelly stated that the Planning Board was one of the hardest working Boards in the Town. She stated that she does not know what the Board had heard from businesses on Main Street but this item has been on the agenda for the last six months She had also provided a memo to the Selectmen regarding this issue and given detailed changes and a summary. Ms. Kelly stated that right now there is no section in the by laws about sandwich boards. She stated the Town and growth management do hear complaints and could potentially fine businesses. Ms. Kelly stated that putting this off another year was not going to solve anything and that this by law takes proactive steps and gives businesses some direction as to where the sandwich board could be located, etc.
Sel. Kurtz stated that being involved in the EDC he has a clear understanding as to where they are coming from. He stated EDC felt as though they did not have a seat at the table but that he himself felt conflicted after speaking with businesses. He stated from EDC perspective, he does not support the changes, however from a Selectboard perspective there are different responsibilities and they needed to look out for citizens as well as businesses.
Sel. Lavigne stated that he understood regulations and enforcement however the by law change was not going to stop the phone calls the Town Manager’s office receives. He stated that this has taken so long to get done and believes it needs to be addressed properly.
Sel. Ethier stated that EDC was opposed to this and the Chamber was opposed to this; and the Planning Board supports it and the Town Manager supports it. He asked if the Board should not make a recommendation on this Article.
Sel. O’Brien stated that this item just puts some basic controls on sandwich boards.
Sel. Lavigne stated that he and Chairman Kurtz had sat on the EDC for three or four years and that they have been trying to get Growth Management, EDC, and the Chamber together for some time. He stated that this item had come to them a few weeks ago and that while posted, the Chamber had not seen it. He stated that it took so long to get here and will take longer to get back and therefore he did not support moving forward until all parties could collaborate.
Sel. O’Brien stated that it needed to start somewhere and that if it was a burning issue, EDC should invite people into their meetings. He stated that this has been on the Planning Boards agenda for six months. He stated that Dennis Lipka, Growth Management does not want to ask businesses to remove their signs and this would give him structure and guidance regarding that. Sel. O’Brien stated that even if they don’t take a position, at least the Board should not vote against this.
Sel. Renzoni removed the motion from the floor.
Motion by Sel. O’Brien, seconded by Sel. Renzoni, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO TAKE NO POSITION ON WARRANT ARTICLE 26.
Motion by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. Renzoni, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO RECESS TO TOWN MEETING AT 6:40 AND RECONVENE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF ADJOURNMENT.
Motion by Sel. Lavigne, seconded by Sel. Renzoni, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO ADJOURN THE MAY 18, 2015 BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AT 9:11PM.
APPROVED: __June 15, 2015__________________