BOARD OF SELECTMEN
Natick Town Hall
January 12, 2009
6:00 p.m.
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman John Ciccariello at 6:05 p.m.
PRESENT: John Ciccariello, Joshua Ostroff, Kristine Van Amsterdam, Carol A. Gloff, John Connolly.
ALSO PRESENT: Martha White, Town Administrator; Donna Challis, Secretary
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, moved to enter into executive session to discuss matters pertaining to litigation. By roll call vote the motion passed on a 5-0-0 vote. At 6:06 p.m. the Board entered into executive session after announcing that the meeting would return to open session.
WARRANTS: Payroll warrants were signed by the Board of Selectmen on January 12, 2009 in the amount of $1,726,265.97. This figure was included in total warrants signed by the Board of Selectmen of $5,557,744.74.
The open session was reconvened at 7:20 p.m.
LETTER OF APPRECIATION: ROGER WADE
Roger Wade, Director of Public Health, was presented with a Letter of Appreciation in recognition of his retirement after 36 years of service to the Town.
Mr. Wade thanked the Board and noted that Natick had been a wonderful place to work and live and raise a family. Retirement was something to look forward to, but he also looked back with a feeling of loss not just with his department but the people with whom he had worked in Natick generally.
JOINT MEETING WITH LEGISLATORS AND SCHOOL COMMITTEE
Joining the Board were Senator Scott Brown, Senator Karen Spilka, Representative David Linsky, and Representative Alice Peisch, Chair of the School Committee Stephen Meyler, and members of the School Committee.
The first question posed was on funding for charter schools and Representative Peisch advised that charter schools were being looked at but she wouldn’t want to say if that would pass. The revenue was declining and if the state were to fund charter schools directly, the money would have to be made up and she wasn’t sure it would have the impact many people thought.
Senator Spilka noted the Senate was working on some municipal relief and this (charter schools) was an important longstanding issue that was being considered. With the tough fiscal times a lot would be considered and some things were on the table today that may not have been last year or the year before.
The legislators were asked about funding of Chapter 90 for Fiscal 2010 and Representative Linsky responded that it would be funded. He couldn’t imagine that being on the chopping block. He added that he had a conversation with Representative Markey’s office and it was of utmost importance that Natick prepare shovel ready projects because a federal stimulus package would be done by the first week of February. This was a one shot opportunity and the importance couldn’t be emphasized enough. Transportation was a big part of the stimulus package but it didn’t have to be just transportation. He recommended staying in close contact with Representative Markey’s office. State funds won’t be as available in many different areas but the stimulus package may more than make up
for that.
Ms. Gloff inquired if Representative Linsky was suggesting that if there were projects on the list on which some small progress could be made during that 4-5 week period, it was worth being able to say we moved it along. Representative Linsky’s reply was, “yes” and then nag, nag, and nag some more.
Mr. Meyler asked the legislators to comment on freezing tuition rates for special education out-of-district placements at FY09 levels, prohibiting mid-year tuition increases for same, adjustment of mandated ratios for specialized teachers and aides, and transitioning all municipalities and school districts to a program like GIC.
While he understood the impact of special ed on municipal budgets, Representative Linsky noted that special ed schools had the same cost increases as everyone else. If the tuition rates were frozen, the only place they could make up the difference was cutting services to special needs children and he couldn’t support it.
Prohibiting mid-year tuition increases was fair and Representative Linsky said he could go along with it. The mandated ratios for teachers vs aides was not something he was really seeing.
The GIC bill passed last year and a lot of communities have joined at great savings. It may not work for everybody and he knew Natick looked at it and it didn’t seem to make sense because the Town was in a large group and getting better rates.
Representative Peisch agreed with Representative Linsky. She had visited some of the special needs schools and they were run on a tight budget. If they were frozen with respect to cities and towns, the money had to come from somewhere. It didn’t seem like a long-term solution. Mid year increases was something that should be avoided. The GIC was looked at from two perspectives: 1) allowing a municipality to look at it without the collective bargaining requirements. The Speaker of the House has indicated a willingness to look at that. Weston recently joined the GIC and were saving a great deal of money; 2) The GIC can make some independent decisions such as co-pays and some thought was being given to giving municipalities the same flexibility.
Senator Brown stated that the position of the Senate was that it was difficult to ask citizens and others to increase taxes or tolls before doing reform. There will be a battle with the unions over the reform Representative Peisch mentioned. The years of overspending were over. In the last few years not one veto has been sustained. He thought it was
important to support the Governor and find some realistic reforms before being able to tell the Town what’s left in the pot.
Senator Brown noted the Governor was asking for expanded 9C cuts, but the legislature didn’t have a plan as of yet from Governor Patrick and he (Senator Brown) wouldn’t vote to give him 9C authority until there was a plan because the Governor may save the cities at the cost of the suburbs. He wished tonight’s meeting was a couple of weeks from now because they would have the Governor’s budget. There were so many things out there and Natick had a different position than some of his other communities. Realistically the Governor has not put forth any proposals. Nothing has been filed for the Legislature to vote on. It was frustrating. The Senate President has said it was reform before revenue.
Senator Spilka said she too believed the legislature would be doing reform before revenue but she didn’t think there was sufficient reform to compensate. In tough times people were more willing to look at a relief bill and she thought there would be a need for some revenues. She filed a hotel meals tax bill so cities and towns could pick and choose what worked best. It was not known yet if the Governor would provide a 9C plan. This was happening very quickly and changed week-to-week. Whatever would help cities and towns there needs to be sensitivity to the cost to the citizens.
Ms. Van Amsterdam referred to the Globe Spotlight on health care and noted all of the legislators may be asked to participate in health care reimbursement rates. The Mass School Superintendents Association was recommending some of the items the Chair of the School Committee provided the legislators. She knew special ed costs have come up in the past and in tight fiscal times the Town was facing now she was curious if any of the Town’s representatives would entertain a discussion with the insurers about assuming some of the responsibility of the cost for the special needs students. Decisions had been made to excuse the insurers from the table, but she was respectively requesting this discussion to start to take place again. The insurers should start to pay, particularly some of the out of district tuition
costs.
Senator Spilka advised that a bill was being worked on that would cover some if not most of what Ms. Van Amsterdam was speaking.
Being engaged in the process with SBA for the Natick High School, School Committee Member David Margil inquired if that would preclude the project from the stimulus package.
Representative Linsky responded that he would not preclude the possibility. There will be some education projects in the package and this (high school) was not beyond the realm. Senator Spilka pointed out that it had to be shovel ready and added that there may be other smaller projects that were shovel ready or about to be and those could be included.
Referring to Senator Spilka’s mention that things were on the table that hadn’t been before, Mr. Margil asked if she could be more specific. Senator Spilka responded that it was almost any idea. In the past the Speaker was not in favor of a meals tax, but he has voiced that he might be. Also the hotel tax and the telecom tax that did not go through last session. There were a lot of other ideas.
Senator Spilka noted that any money bill had to originate in the House. The House and Senate were working together on so many issues whether it be municipal relief, transportation, etc. and working with the federal Congressmen and Senators. This was something she had never seen in the seven years she had been there. She believed any idea was on the table.
Senator Brown noted that a lot of the reforms being talked about have been brought up for the past 10 years and have never been acted on but now the State was in such dire straights they were being mentioned. People don’t want taxes first. They want reform first and he thought generally there was an appetite in the legislature of reform.
Ms. White noted that the Town had submitted $137 million to the economic stimulus projects. The high school was included although the shovel ready could be a challenge. The Community Senior Center was in the stimulus projects and it also had a shovel ready challenge, but she believed every other project met the criteria.
Ms. White continued that something that emerged today was the idea of collaborating with other communities. One Public Works Association offered a mutual aid assistance. One challenge was that the Public Works Association had one version and MMA had one and they did not match, but it was understanding they now matched. This was something she would be discussing with the Board.
She noted there were a couple of home rule petitions on which the Town would ask the legislators to vote. Senator Brown advised that the home rule petitions hadn’t been assigned a number as of yet, but would be pushed through. Representative Linsky expected the petitions would be assigned a committee in February with hearings in March.
Looking at a Town budget deficit of $4.5 million, Mr. Meyler7 inquired as to what upside the legislators saw for the town in the next couple of years.
Senator Spilka thought there had been a lot talk about reform in the way education was approached. The prior Education Department was so understaffed they couldn’t be much of a source. With the life sciences bill she thought there would be more resources. Even in tough times the State was putting a priority in these areas and if there was anything the legislators could do to help with that the Town shouldn’t hesitate to contact them.
Representative Linsky noted that the country was in the worse economic situation it has been in since the depression. The result was there were increased needs in social services across the board and there was less revenue. The good news aspect was that it forced the legislature into making reforms to save money. Some reforms were probably put off in the past because the financial pressure wasn’t felt, but now there was nowhere to turn. The second good news was that going into this year Natick was in a good place. There was about a 12% increase in Chapter 70 and going back over the past four fiscal years there’s been about a 50% jump in Chapter 70.
Continuing, Representative Linsky noted that the four of them worked very hard for the education circuit breaker and it was promising. When the cuts come, he believed Natick would be able to withstand them. It won’t be easy, but as much as the legislators want to maintain local aid and Chapter 70,
all of them (legislators) felt the social services was needed and would like to see that as funded as possible. He felt the legislature had done a great job funding education and local aid over the past few years, none of them felt good about the funding in social services for the elderly and mentally ill.
Senator Brown noted that Beacon Hill had a rainy day fund of $2.3 Billion and a lot of emergency funds were still pretty high. The goal was to bring back as much as possible. Sometimes the suburbs were fitting for the crumbs against the city. If there were going to 9C cuts, he didn’t want the suburbs hurt in favor of the city. Right now he was hearing 10% cuts across-the-board. His goal was to find out the plan, what the 10% was, and collectively protect what was already earned for this community. It will be tough but Natick had four people fighting for it which was a huge benefit.
Mr. Ciccariello inquired about the lottery aid, and Representative Linsky responded that two years ago the lottery was uncapped. Some people were harping on letting the cities’ and towns’ aid rise or fall on the lottery. The lottery was down. Last year the legislature backfilled it, but he didn’t know if that could be done again.
Mr. Ciccariello then asked about the MWRA assessment, noting that it went up and up. Senator Brown reminded the Board that every year the legislature took relief action. It was just a question of what would be out there to backfill and that wasn’t known as of yet. He vowed to try to get rid of a lot of these silly mandates and added that he had never supported an unfunded mandate.
If there were any unfunded mandates that were important to the Town, Senator Spilka suggested that a list be compiled and sent to the legislators. That may be part of a municipal relief package whereby maybe a few could be put off until we got out of these tough times.
Mr. Ostroff commented that he thought the four legislators had been consistent in looking for a solution on the Mass Turnpike tolls. Representative Linsky said he couldn’t speak to what the Turnpike Board would do, but the Speaker of the House was very serious about putting forth a bill that dealt with transportation funding across the state within 30 days. Both Representative Peisch and he were on that committee and they were doing everything in their power to stop the toll increase.
Senator Spilka thought that folks should realize that both the House and Senate were on the same page and working together. The hearing that took place has never happened before. The House had to originate any money bill and the Senate was working on a reorganization plan. It won’t take months. There was clearly a sense of urgency. The Senate President’s mantra was reform before revenue and to her (Senator Spilka) increasing the tolls was new revenue. She felt there was a need to look at alternative revenues that were fair and statewide.
Senator Brown noted that it was very complicated because of the debt associated with it. The state gets calls from Wall Street saying if you do this they will call in the debt. The Town’s four legislators have been in rallies against the tolls, but the complication was the intertwining of the debt and they may not be able to do anything.
Mr. Meyler stated that he read several articles that raising the tolls may only drive people into the local roads. Traffic already was heavy and puts wear and tear on the city. He was glad to hear the Town’s legislators were opposed to an increase.
Ms. Gloff inquired as to Route 27/9 and Oak/9 funding. Mr. Ciccariello noted that there was a meeting this morning about the MORE grant and the Community Development Director was in the process of filing a second application for more funds particularly for Route 9/27. Additional funds would be needed to get final design done. Representative Linsky noted that the big ear marks in the bond would require some federal funds. When the MORE grant application was finished, he encouraged the Town to get it to the legislators. Senator Spilka suggested talking about facilitating a meeting in Boston to move that to the top.
When asked by Ms. Gloff if there was anything beyond the MORE grant, Senator Spilka advised there were some other bond bills coming up that were looking at some design not just construction. That was a potential second opportunity.
Ms. Gloff thought there was enough money for the design of 9/Oak. She was looking at getting it rebuilt. Senator Spilka advised that was another possibility for the list. It may be a stretch but it was worth a try.
With respect to the MetroWest Regional Transit Authority, Mr. Ciccariello asked if it was stabilized or if they were in jeopardy of losing funds. Senator Spilka responded that the RTAs had received about 90% of their funding. They survived the first round of 9C cuts, but she didn’t know what would happen. If the MetroWest RTA was cut, all RTAs would be cut. So often the RTAs run at a deficit and just carry the deficit. If she had to guess the next 10% may not get distributed but that wouldn’t negatively impact the RTA as the deficit would just be carried. With some of the financing being discussed and ways to resolve transportation financial needs, there was a push for the RTA so if money was being divvied up the RTAs would be fully funded.
Senator Brown noted that people had to be encouraged to ride these to the maximum.
School Superintendent Peter Sanchioni thought the biggest hindrance to the GIC was the unions and he had heard talk about removing it.
Representative Peisch advised there were two possibilities being discussed to change insurance: 1) make it easy for communities to opt in; 2) Increasing flexibility of municipalities to change the terms. There was a special commission on municipal relief and that was in the top 4 or 5 things being discussed along with closing telecommunications loopholes and hotels and meals taxes. She would be surprised if something didn’t come out of it.
Mr. Connolly inquired as to what was being done with the stimulus information and Representative Linsky’s response was that everyone had to nag together. It was his (Representative Linsky’s understanding that the money would go to the state which meant the executive branch and they would make the decision about which projects go and which don’t. Before that gets done Natick should prioritize and rank the projects in some fashion and get
the list to the four of them so they could be banging on the Governor’s door.
Senator Spilka added that it was left to the Governor to make sure the distribution of money was fair and equitable across the state so that we all benefit.
Referring to Senator Brown’s mention that it was a shame the meeting was tonight because quite a bit of information would be coming out, Ms. Gloff inquired if it made any sense to schedule another meeting.
Representative Peisch felt they would be more than happy to meet with the Board, but they would be getting the information in different stages and would be getting it to the Town as soon as possible. She recognized that finding a time to get the Board, the four of them, and the School Committee together was not an easy task.
Mr. Ciccariello thanked each of the legislators and School Committee for coming.
A recess was called at 8:25 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:30 p.m.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR: REVIEW/APPROVAL FAIR HOUSING PLAN
Appearing before the Board was Housing Planner Joseph Merkel.
Mr. Merkel told the Board that he was there to present the fair housing plan and analysis of impediments recently completed and ask the Board to approve.
He explained that Natick was a member of HOME and received funding. To receive funding the Town had prepared an agreement to requirements which includes the identification of impediments and includes recommended actions for submission to the WestMetro HOME Consortium.
Mr. Merkel noted that in June 2008 a housing consultant was hired to complete the fair housing plan. His (consultant) scope of work included a public hearing that was held on August 11, 2008 to hear from the community on fair housing. The next task was to review the relevant data have consultations with government officials, officers and staff of non-profit organizations providing housing for certain client groups, real estate professionals, developers and others. A draft plan was then issued. Hiring an independent, they came up with independent conclusions. The plan was reviewed by the staff and members of the Community Development Advisory Committee and then presented to the Town Administrator.
Mr. Merkel reviewed the findings/impediments:
- Currently, there was no formalized or institutional approach to fair housing in Natick
- Anecdotal evidence suggests absence of fair housing requirements in local real estate broker offices in Natick
- Information on fair housing was not reaching wide distribution in the community
- Information was not reaching the small investor/owner
- Lead paint may be a significant impediment to fair housing based on the amount of pre 1979 house construction
- For the 10 year period reviewed, fourteen formal “Fair Housing” complaints relevant to Natick had been registered with MCAD.
- There is a lack of diversity on decision making boards including the Board of Appeals, Planning Board, and the Board of Assessors.
To address the impediments the following actions were recommended:
- The Board of Selectmen should establish the Community Development Advisory Committee or another existing committee to maintain the responsibilities of a Fair Housing Committee
- The Town should designate a Fair Housing Officer and provide resources to support Fair Housing Committee issues and the Fair Housing Plan
- Natick Community Development Department should provide an outreach program for landlords/real estate professionals and tenants that insure compliance and an understanding of the penalties for violations.
- The Community Development Department should participate more actively with the WestMetro HOME Consortium on activities that promote the education and advancement of Fair Housing
- The Town should implement an on-going Fair Housing Information Program
- The Community Development Department should provide education on other agencies and non-profits efforts for lead paint hazard reduction and home improvement programs as well as housing counseling.
- The Town should implement the means to facilitate complaints to the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination
- The Town should improve public outreach to encourage community diversity through appointments to boards
Mr. Merkel advised that the staff had prepared action items to respond to the list of impediments:
- Charge the Community Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) with the responsibilities of a Fair Housing Committee
- Designation of a Fair Housing Officer
- Provide an outreach program for landlords/real estate professionals and tenants, to insure compliance with fair housing requirements and an understanding of the penalties for violations
- Participate more actively with the City of Newton and other HOME Consortium members on Fair Housing programs
- Implement an on-going Fair Housing Information Program
- Provide education on non-profit programs in home improvement and housing counseling
- Facilitate complaints to the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD)
- Improve public outreach to encourage community diversity through appointments to boards
In conclusion Mr. Merkel stated that Natick scored pretty well and this plan identified the impediments and set out to establish some actions.
Referring to Mr. Merkel’s mention of a hearing on August 11, Mr. Connolly inquired as to the attendance at the hearing. Mr. Merkel didn’t know as he just started with the Town in September. The Community Development Director
and consultant were there. Ms. Gloff advised that she attended and the attendance was limited – probably 10-15 people.
Mr. Connolly inquired as to the involvement of the Natick Housing Authority, but Ms. Gloff didn’t know if the consultant had interviewed them or not. Mr. Merkel added that the consultant had said he did extensive interviews with the staff and the Housing Authority.
Regarding the recommendation for a housing officer, Mr. Connolly questioned if that was somebody already employed or if it would be a new hire. Mr. Merkel advised that the suggestion was for an existing staff to hold that office and that would probably be him (Mr. Merkel).
Ms. Van Amsterdam was curious as to how an analysis moving forward of the date on page 29-34 translated into the role of the person responsible for fair housing enforcement in Natick. Would the individual continue to look at data?
Mr. Merkel noted that the document was scheduled to be reviewed every five years, but could be revised anytime before that. It seemed logical that the Fair Housing Officer would review it on a yearly basis.
In follow-up Ms. Van Amsterdam asked if the Fair Housing Officer would be visiting the financial institutions. Mr. Merkel said some first time home buyers classes were being planned and he was talking to a number of different lenders with regard to attending those as well.
A motion was made by Ms. Van Amsterdam to accept the Fair Housing Plan as presented. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and unanimously voted.
On a motion by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to charge the Community Development Advisory Committee with the responsibilities of a Fair Housing Committee.
On a motion by Ms. Gloff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to appoint Joseph Merkel as the Fair Housing Officer for the Town of Natick.
A motion was made by Ms. Gloff to improve public outreach to encourage community diversity through appointments to boards. Seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam and unanimously voted.
Speaking to the motion, Mr. Ostroff inquired if the specific implications of this was to recruit people of a specific racial background. Mr. Merkel explained that it was just to make an effort to advertise that positions were available.
Ms. Gloff added that during the review that was the pathway the CDAC took. People couldn’t be forced to apply. To improve outreach to make sure it was hitting all segments of the population would be a worthwhile goal.
As a member of the Commission on Disability, Mr. Connolly thought the Commission would like to be involved.
CITIZENS CONCERNS
- Budget Deficit – Hiring Freeze
Bruce Whitney expressed concern with the administration’s history of continuing to recommend increases. In December 2008 the Board voted a part-time dispatcher and at the last meeting there was an interview for a Comptroller, but the administration still claims there was a hiring freeze. The hiring freeze was not a true hiring freeze. At that same meeting the Town Administrator announced there would be a budget deficit of $1/2 million. The Town continues to spend beyond its means and residents were forced to pay more and more each year.
Mr. Whitney asked the Board to have the guts to stand up and put a stop to any and all increases from the top to the bottom. Some assistant positions may have to be cut along with positions not absolutely required and present employees will have to be asked to pitch in and help with the work load. An increased workload was better than no job. Employees will also have to be asked to voluntarily cut hours. He also thought there was a need to look at a buy out for long-time employees and replace them with new lower paid employees or don’t replace them at all.
Mr. Whitney suggested a 10% reduction in all department budgets beginning immediately, especially the School budget. The Town cannot wait any longer. The longer we wait the worse things will get. He was certain that everyone wanted to do what was best for the Town of Natick but he needed to hear support for these cuts.
Ms. White responded that many of Mr. Whitney’s ideas were under consideration. She acknowledged that the hiring freeze had created some confusion because there has been a move to fill some vacancies that in her opinion and the majority of the Board needed to be filled. She didn’t think there was any dispute that a Comptroller was needed. Perhaps the hiring freeze should be renamed as a hiring chill.
Town Meeting member Mary Brown thought it was nice to see the legislators here, but thought someone should have asked if they were going to take their pay raise. If they didn’t that would be a nice gesture. It would also be a nice gesture for Town employees not to take a pay raise as well.
Ms. Brown continued that the Financial Planning Committee was meeting at 7:00 a.m. That was very difficult to attend and she felt it would be nice to have some evening meetings. As a Town Meeting member Ms. Brown said she would like to see every budget and the amount of free cash. She recalled that years ago Town Meeting had a jelly bean jar and every time there was a vote, you could see how much was being spent and perhaps that would be helpful.
Ms. Brown noted that Town Meeting should know what every department was bringing in and for Town Meeting to work properly, they needed the information ahead of time. In looking at cuts, she suggested cutting the cars people were taking home. She also suggested taking a hard look at the golf course. If everyone worked together and came up with some suggestions, the Town would be better off.
In conclusion Ms. Brown stated that the Town had become big spenders and it had to stop. People had to know what the Town officials were doing and nothing should be done back door.
COMPTROLLER’S POSITION
Ms. White recommend that the Board not take any action tonight as she would like to bring the candidate in again to review some of the operation in the department and make sure he has a clear understanding of the job. There were also some further questions she would like to pose of him.
Mr. Ostroff inquired if it was agreeable with the current Comptroller to stay on the job for whatever additional period of time may be required.
Ms. White’s response was, “yes”.
Asked if there was any intent to open the search again, Ms. White replied not at this time.
Mr. Ostroff commented that the hiring of a Comptroller was not discretionary. It was part of the Charter and the Board was duty bound.
TOWN CLERK’S POSITION
Ms. White informed the Board that on January 7 the current Town Clerk submitted a letter of resignation effective February 3, 2009. That raised a number of questions and Town Counsel has provided some guidance. In his opinion Mr. Flynn advised the following:
- It was the position of the Elections Division of the Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth that a resignation was effective when it was properly filed and that the resignation once properly filed cannot be revoked or rescinded. In the present situation the Town Clerk’s notice of resignation was properly filed and her resignation became effective when it was filed.
- Pursuant to the Charter the Board of Selectmen should appoint a person to fill that vacancy until the next Town election.
- The person appointed by the Board of Selectmen will be a Temporary Clerk. The Temporary Clerk shall be sworn in and shall, in the performance of the duties of the position, have the same powers and be subject to the same requirements and penalties as the Town Clerk
- The Massachusetts General Laws do not require the Temporary Clerk to be a resident of the Town of Natick or a registered voter of the Town of Natick. The Natick Home Rule Charter and the Natick By Laws do not address this issue, and in particular do not require that a person appointed to fill a vacancy in the Office of the Town Clerk be a resident of the Town of Natick or a registered voter of the Town of Natick.
- There is no authority under current Massachusetts law to fill the vacancy in the position of Natick Town Clerk in the March 2009 Annual Town Election. The deadline to submit nomination papers is January 13, 2009. In order for the Office of Natick Town Clerk to be on the ballot for the March 2009 Annual Town Election, the Board of Selectmen would have been required to file with the Natick Town Clerk notice of that election no later than 15 days prior to January 13, 2009 (December 29, 2008)
- The Board of Selectmen may, but were not required to, call a special election to fill the vacancy in the office of Natick Town Clerk.
- The person appointed by the Board of Selectmen to serve as Temporary Town Clerk shall serve until the next Town election at which the Office of Town Clerk can appear on the ballot. At present the next
Town election at which the office of Natick Town Clerk can appear on the ballot is the 2010 Annual Town Election.
- The person appointed to fill the vacancy in the office of the Natick Town Clerk would serve during the remainder of the current term of the Natick Town Clerk. The office of Natick Town Clerk would be on the ballot for the March 2010 Annual Town Election for a three year term.
Ms. Gloff noted that the appointed person was not required to be a resident but if an individual were appointed and he/she continued not to be a resident, that individual would not be eligible to run for election.
Mr. Connolly disclosed his intention to run for this position or apply for the appointment.
If the Board decided to post the vacancy and Mr. Connolly decided to apply, Mr. Ciccariello suggested that he (Mr. Connolly) talk to the Town Administrator and legal counsel.
Mr. Connolly inquired as to pay for the position and the cost of a special Town election. Mr. Ciccariello advised that special election would cost between $10,000 and $15,000. As far as the pay scale that was set by Town Meeting every year.
Mr. Connolly then questioned if the Personnel Board would try to remove the position from being elected, noting that it had been voted down twice. Mr. Ciccariello responded that at this point he didn’t know of any consideration being given.
Given that the Board can go outside of Natick, Ms. Van Amsterdam asked if there could be a list of qualifications. In posting the vacancy she would like to see it be more than just these are the responsibilities. She would like to include the qualifications being looked for. Ms. White noted that she didn’t pose that to counsel but if the Board were making the appointment she couldn’t see anything to prohibit that. Ms. Van Amsterdam asked Ms. White to check with Town Counsel.
Ms. Van Amsterdam stated that she was going to raise sponsoring the exact same warrant article in the Spring in regard to turning the Town Clerk’s position into an appointed position as opposed to elected.
As it was unlikely the Board would have a Temporary Town Clerk in place by February 3, Mr. Ostroff requested Ms. White to elaborate on the process of filling the vacancy. Ms. White explained that when Ms. Kuhn was out, the Deputy Town Administrator served as the Town Clerk in the official capacity as a stand in. She would also be reaching out to retired Town Clerks.
Not knowing the interval of time for how soon the Board would be prepared to make an appointment and that it may be a week or two, Mr. Ostroff didn’t think it was good for the Deputy Town Administrator to invest a lot of time. Ms. White agreed that neither the Deputy nor she had the time to run, manage, and oversee the office and if there needed to be some interim measure her suggestion would be to have someone with Town Clerk skills come in on a part-time basis. She was trying to tap into retired Town Clerks.
Mr. Ciccariello stated that he felt comfortable that the individuals in the Town Clerk’s office have been involved in elections and knew the procedures. There was some level of confidence that the staff had enough experience.
The Board needed to decide how it wanted to proceed. If an appointment was going to be made, it should be posted as soon as possible and then the question was the deadline for receiving applications and interviewing applicants.
Mr. Ostroff was of the opinion that if the issue of qualification could be resolved sooner than January 26 and the schedule permits, he would prefer to have a brief meeting as soon as possible in order to get it posted. He noted that he would be happy to work with the Town Clerk’s office but he was a candidate in the next election.
As a candidate, Mr. Ciccariello suggested that Mr. Ostroff not get involved in the Town Clerk’s office.
Mr. Ciccariello asked if the consensus of the Board was to make an appointment vs a special election. Without formal vote, the members of the Board expressed their agreement to make the appointment.
Ms. Gloff suggested the establishment of a one or two member subcommittee to work on writing up the desirable experience and to have that ready for the meeting on January 26. Mr. Ciccariello pointed out that the Board first had to find out if desirable qualifications could be listed. Ms. Gloff agreed but felt that assuming the answer was yes, people should be designated so as not to delay getting it posted.
Ms. Van Amsterdam noted that the Personnel Board had already identified the duties and the Board could look at that to see if all of it was wanted.
If that was the route the Board wished to go, Mr. Ciccariello proposed Ms. Van Amsterdam and Ms. Gloff be the subcommittee. Ms. Gloff responded that she would be happy to do it but would be on vacation. Ms. Van Amsterdam agreed to do it, and Mr. Ciccariello suggested that she work with the Town Administrator. He then asked if the Board would like to have this wrapped up for the meeting on the 26th so the vacancy could be posted at that time or did the Board wish to call a special meeting.
Ms. Gloff raised the possibility of posting the vacancy now and have it state that the desired experience would be provided by such and such a date so people were aware this position was available. Mr. Ciccariello thought it might confuse the issue and suggested Ms. Van Amsterdam work on the desirable experience and the Board get the posting wrapped up for the meeting of the 26th.
If the Board wanted to go with the job description in the Town Meeting warrant article, Mr. Ostroff noted that information was only a few feet away in the office. The Board could get a copy now, vote it tonight, and move things forward contingent on Town Counsel’s approval. Ms. White offered to get a copy of the description developed for Town Meeting.
MINUTES
On a motion by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Gloff, the Board unanimously voted to approve the minutes of the June 16, 2008 meeting.
KENNEDY MIDDLE SCHOOL ROAD RACE
On a motion by Ms. Van Amsterdam, seconded by Mr. Ostroff, the Board unanimously voted to approve the Kennedy Middle School’s request to hold the annual family road race on April 5, 2009 from 11:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m. in the Kennedy Middle School area as outlined in the memo of December 19, 2008.
SURPLUS EQUIPMENT
On a motion by Mr. Ostroff, seconded by Ms. Van Amsterdam, the Board unanimously voted to surplus various outdated pieces of computer equipment as requested by the IT Department. The total value of the equipment was approximately $350.
2009 LICENSE UPDATE
Ms. Challis informed the Board there were a few licenseholders that had not as yet renewed their license for 2009.
Common Victualer’s – Gourmet India, Natick Sports Club, Natick Subway, Quiznos, Wendy’s West Central Street. After School Workshop had renewed their common victualer’s license but not their daily entertainment license.
A motion was made by Mr. Connolly to have a notice hand delivered by the Police Department advising them that if they didn’t get everything submitted within five days, they would be closed. Seconded by Ms. Gloff and unanimously voted.
TOWN CLERK’S POSITION
Ms. White returned with examples of duties for the Town Clerk put together by the Personnel Board in anticipation of the position becoming appointed vs elected.
In looking at the list Ms. Gloff felt many of the items were desirable, but it had to be remembered that the Board was looking to make an appointment for 14 months. If everything were required, the Board may not get many candidates and a Town Clerk was needed.
Mr. Ostroff suggested advertising for an Interim Town Clerk and stating preference would be given to “x” – desirable but not required. It could be posted through the Association of Town Clerks MMA web site with a deadline of January 24 and by that time the Board would know if there would be a sufficient candidate pool.
Some of the language in the example of duties needed to be changed, i.e. references to “must or required”. A recess was called at 9:40 p.m. to give Ms. Van Amsterdam, Ms. Gloff, and Ms. White an opportunity to work on a posting and revise the examples of duties and requirements.
At 9:50 p.m. the meeting resumed. Ms. Van Amsterdam reviewed the changes.
Mr. Ciccariello felt the add should stress the appointment was only to March 10 and should also make people understand this was an election position.
If this was being posted as a temporary appointment, Ms. White thought it was important for the Board to decide if consideration would be given to something other than full-time. She would suggest that be considered as she
could envision a scenario where somebody would be available three days a week with a strong background.
Mr. Ciccariello felt the appointment could be full-time or part-time.
Noting there was a pay range, Ms. White suggested the ad say ‘compensation to be determined based on experience’. Mr. Ostroff pointed out that Town Meeting fixed the salary for the Town Clerk. Ms. White explained that was for the election position, but it was something should be put on her list of questions for Town Counsel.
The Board agreed on the wording of the posting and discussion turned to the timing.
Ms. Gloff suggested giving people until January 29 to apply and then schedule a special meeting for February 2. Ms. White thought that was a tight timeframe for a vetting process and Mr. Ciccariello thought it may be pushing it too quickly.
Mr. Ostroff suggested a deadline of January 29 and the Board meet on February 2nd to review the applications. A subcommittee could be appointed at that time and the Board could interview people on February 9.
Ms. Gloff noted that if applications were requested on or before January 26 the Board would know how many applicants there were. If there were three applicants the Board could decide a subcommittee wasn’t needed but if there were 15 applicants the Board would probably want a subcommittee to review.
Mr. Ciccariello wanted to give people ample opportunity to respond.
Mr. Connolly noted that the Town Administrator had mentioned that in certain situations the Deputy Town Administrator watched over the duties of the Town Clerk. The current clerk was leaving February 3, but he didn’t know if the Board had to get that hung up on that date. Mr. Ciccariello felt the same way and would rather give it some time.
The Board agreed that January 26 was very aggressive.
Mr. Ciccariello proposed receiving responses by January 29. The Board could get the packet that weekend and meet on February 2 to discuss what was received and decide how to move forward. In response to a concern of Ms. Gloff’s about discussing candidates in a public forum when not interviewing them, Mr. Ciccariello noted that the candidates would not have to be named. The Board would just decide if they wanted to form a subcommittee.
Mr. Ostroff didn’t think the Board would be surprised by the number on January 29 and if there were relatively few, it could be in the Chair’s discretion to schedule interviews for February 2. Mr. Ciccariello preferred to let the Board decide on the 2nd and do interviews on February 9. Ms. Van Amsterdam and Ms. White could develop a series of questions to ask the candidates.
Ms. Gloff suggested saying proactively that if there were more than “x” candidates that a subcommittee of two members would go through them and weed out a few. Again Mr. Ciccariello stated his preference to let the Board decide on the 2nd.
Ms. White noted that was her area of discomfort that on February 2 the Board would be in a very public process. She suggested backing up the deadline to
January 27, have the subcommittee meeting between then and February 2 and whittle it down if necessary.
Mr. Ostroff suggested Ms. Van Amsterdam and Ms. Gloff for the Town Clerk subcommittee.
Ms. Gloff proposed giving candidates until January 30 to apply. The subcommittee could go through the applications and hand packets to other Board members on the 2nd with a recommendation and the Board could interview on February 9. Everyone was comfortable with that proposal.
Mr. Connolly stated that he would recuse himself.
BUDGET FY09 AND FY10
Ms. White reported there was nothing to update. It was an ongoing effort.
Ms. Van Amsterdam advised that at the water & sewer meeting she had requested any material prepared for the Finance Committee be e-mailed to the Board as well and the same thing with the Financial Planning committee meetings.
Mr. Connolly requested the material in a print format and he would stop by to pick it up.
Mr. Ciccariello inquired as to any sense for when Ms. White thought she would come to the Board with thoughts and ideas on cuts. Ms. White responded that she expected to be unveiling ideas early February.
CAPITAL PLANNING COMMITTEE
Ms. White noted that the Town didn’t have a Capital Planning Committee. Most communities do. This was an area where there seemed to be a wide variety of approaches and she would suggest that while the Town was still in a mode where capital couldn’t be adequately funded that it really warranted additional attention. A standing committee would meet on a regular basis throughout the year. A charter change would not be required. The committee would make a recommendation to the Town Administrator and it would still be the Town Administrator recommending a capital plan and budget. This was the first stab at a Capital Planning By-law and not as yet finalized.
Mr. Ostroff inquired if this was something the Charter and By-Law Review Committee had taken up. Ms. Gloff, a member of the Charter and By-Law Review advised that it had been mentioned and there were some very preliminary discussions but the committee had not seen this draft.
Mr. Ostroff commented that he thought it was a constructive approach to a problem. Ms. Van echoed Mr. Ostroff’s comments adding that it was fantastic and she looked forward to the final version.
With respect to the composition, Mr. Ciccariello thought some consideration had to be given to the qualification of the individuals. People with experience were needed.
CAPITAL PLANNING COMMITTEE (contd)
Ms. Gloff agreed with Mr. Ciccariello but pointed out that the Finance Committee did not have any requirements and she wanted to be certain not to get too restrictive. Ms. Van Amsterdam suggested that qualifications could be listed as desirable.
TOWN MEETING WARRANT ARTICLES
Ms. White noted this item would be on the agenda from now until the warrant was finished, but nothing new has emerged.
Ms. Van Amsterdam noted that earlier she had raised the possibility of an article for Town Clerk and asked if the Board would be OK with the Town Administrator asking the Personnel Board if they had any interest.
Mr. Ostroff thought the question could be asked, but would probably meet the same fate at Town Meeting. His sense was that Town Meeting would resent having it brought back so quickly.
Mr. Ciccariello had no objection to an inquiry being made, but his guess was that the Personnel Board would say no.
Mr. Ostroff asked if the Charter & By-Law Review Committee would be bringing anything forward. Ms. Gloff advised that it was possible, but it was difficult to answer. Certainly the Committee’s work wouldn’t be done and her guess was that the Committee would be asking for an extension.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Mr. Ostroff noted that the Revenue Enhancement Task Force had suggested to the Board of Selectmen that one way to ensure the well being of the Town would be to promote economic development. To further the discussion the Community Development Director and Task Force came up with the draft for a committee that was now before the Board and would ask the Board’s consideration. The purpose of the committee would be:
- Attract business development to Natick that will maximize tax revenue and generate employment opportunities
- Promote utilization of existing infrastructure and facilities to fullest extent possible
- Recognize neighborhood and community issues, concerns, and character
- Identify and plan for changing trends and opportunities
- Market Natick for economic development and strategic partnerships
The proposed membership was:
The Community Development Director
Town Administrator (ex officio)
2 members of local business community
3 citizens-at-large
One member of the Board of Selectmen
Mr. Ostroff noted that this was not looked at as a short-term revenue opportunity but he thought an Economic Development Committee would be in the Town’s interest for long-term opportunities.
Mr. Ostroff stated that he would love to hear from members of the Board on whether this was a good idea. He would take those ideas to the Task Force and would ask that this be on a future agenda.
TAX CLASSIFICATION STUDY COMMITTEE
Mr. Ciccariello noted the proposed Tax Classification Study Committee was in follow-up to the conversations when the Board voted the tax classification.
Before the Board was a proposed committee charge and the recommendation that the committee be comprised of four residents and the Town’s Assessor. The basic charge of the committee would be to undertake a study and analysis
regarding the impacts, benefits and detriments associated with a single tax rate as compared to a split tax rate in Natick and to report to the Board of Selectmen by November 1, 2009.
A motion was made by Ms. Gloff to establish a Tax Classification Study Committee. Seconded by Mr. Ostroff and unanimously voted.
Mr. Ciccariello suggested that letters of interest be back by early February.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR NOTES
Ms. White announced that the Human Services and Council on Aging Director and she had organized a Home Energy Expo for January 15 from 4:00-7:00 p.m. at the Senior Center.
Mr. Connolly acknowledged the Town Administrator’s efforts and hoped a lot of people showed up and got a lot of good information.
SELECTMEN’S CONCERNS
Asked if there was an update on the Eliot School, Ms. White reported that she had met with the self appointed group on Eliot School on Friday and expected to have something regarding the committee make up for the next meeting.
- Electrical Inspector Retirement
Mr. Connolly read a letter from the Electrical Inspector Larry Forshner announcing his retirement. Mr. Connolly requested a letter of appreciation be sent to Mr. Forshner.
Mr. Ostroff inquired if Mr. Forshner’s position would be replaced. Ms. White advised there were backup electrical inspectors in place and they would be utilized in different levels to fill the gap.
Mr. Ostroff advised that the MBTA was making some improvements to the station. The rickety stairs have been replaced with metal.
- MetroWest Medical Center CEO
Mr. Ostroff requested that the Board invite the MetroWest CEO to come in and address some concerns. Ms. Gloff seconded Mr. Ostroff’s suggestion.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m.
_______________________________
Kristine Van Amsterdam, Clerk
| 
