Watch your thoughts; they become words.
Watch your words; they become actions.
Watch your actions; they become habits..
Watch your habits; they become character.
Watch your character; it becomes your destiny.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Sunday, December 19, 2010
ARE WE HEADED TOWARD FULLY FUNDING SERVICES WITH FEES AND REVENUE?
Just as in the private sector, the cost to the Town of doing business is continuously rising. State and federal subsidies/revenue sharing is diminishing. Even with Prop 2-1/2 and new growth, the town's resources are not sufficient to sustain the level of services expected by the community.
The water and sewer enterprise funds are supposed to be funded fully by rates and fees. The Harbor is revenue neutral although all the fees it collects go into the general fund - as do the ambulance fees collected by the Fire Department. Neither are credited to these departments as offsets. We should fix that.
The question before us today is in regard to the Transfer Facility (or The Dump as us old-timers will always call it). Right now it costs $642,000 that is partially offset by revenues from recycling and fees of $352,000 leaving a deficit of $290,000. The majority of the revenue (about $300,000) comes from the sale of stickers and blue bags. Do we double the cost of these to make up the deficit? Or do we as tax payers have the reasonable expectation that a portion of our taxes will go to support trash removal? I don't know the answer and am looking to you for input. Please take a minute to participate in the poll.
A bigger question is what should our taxes pay for? Police, fire, schools, town administration, maintenance (building and infrastructure), capital expenditures, library, recreation, athletics, senior services, trash collection? Followed by what of these, if any, should be user fee based? Should, for example, permitting (Conservation, Planning, Board of Health) be paid for solely by application fees? Or do some or all of these provide a benefit to the community at large and deserve some portion of our tax dollars?
The Town/School cost of doing business including health insurance, benefits, pensions, unemployment and contractual obligations is unsustainable. What level of services do we want? What are we willing to pay? It's a conversation I'm not looking forward to having but it's one the Town is going to have to have - and sooner rather than later.
Results of Poll: HOW SHOULD THE TRANSFER FACILITY BE FUNDED?
The water and sewer enterprise funds are supposed to be funded fully by rates and fees. The Harbor is revenue neutral although all the fees it collects go into the general fund - as do the ambulance fees collected by the Fire Department. Neither are credited to these departments as offsets. We should fix that.
The question before us today is in regard to the Transfer Facility (or The Dump as us old-timers will always call it). Right now it costs $642,000 that is partially offset by revenues from recycling and fees of $352,000 leaving a deficit of $290,000. The majority of the revenue (about $300,000) comes from the sale of stickers and blue bags. Do we double the cost of these to make up the deficit? Or do we as tax payers have the reasonable expectation that a portion of our taxes will go to support trash removal? I don't know the answer and am looking to you for input. Please take a minute to participate in the poll.
A bigger question is what should our taxes pay for? Police, fire, schools, town administration, maintenance (building and infrastructure), capital expenditures, library, recreation, athletics, senior services, trash collection? Followed by what of these, if any, should be user fee based? Should, for example, permitting (Conservation, Planning, Board of Health) be paid for solely by application fees? Or do some or all of these provide a benefit to the community at large and deserve some portion of our tax dollars?
The Town/School cost of doing business including health insurance, benefits, pensions, unemployment and contractual obligations is unsustainable. What level of services do we want? What are we willing to pay? It's a conversation I'm not looking forward to having but it's one the Town is going to have to have - and sooner rather than later.
Results of Poll: HOW SHOULD THE TRANSFER FACILITY BE FUNDED?
11 (37%) |
15 (51%) |
3 (10%) |
0 (0%) |
Votes so far: 29
POLITICIANS vs. LEADERS
The last line in my previous blog got me thinking. It's a fine line between (a) listening to the concerns of the public and making a decision based on their input because your research leads you to the same conclusion and (b) blindly advocating for a faction based on expediency and "political blowback". I use quotation marks because that's what a selectman said at the meeting Monday night…"We're a political body and we make decisions based on politics and potential political blowback." A majority of the BoS agreed.
Is that the kind of leadership you want - or deserve? I hope not because if you do that says something basic about this community I don't want to believe.
That's not how I make my decisions. I do my homework, listen to anyone who wants to weigh in on the subject, and consult with objective experts when required…then I make my decision based on facts and what's in the best interest of the town as a whole – not on friendship or votes in the next election.
Just look at my voting record on the tough issues: Treat's Pond, LH/AA sewer betterments (50/50), Cat Dam and the Water Enterprise Fund crisis. Those were difficult decisions that impacted residents. The Bear Hill Easement looms as another.
With each vote someone agrees with me; someone doesn't. I've lost the support of individuals I thought were friends; I've been threatened. I'm sorry my decisions have impacted residents but I wouldn't change a one of them.
On the other hand I am continuously buoyed by unsolicited expressions of support by many in the community (some who disagree with some of my decisions but overall think I'm doing a good job).
We have individual rights but we live in a community because a long time ago man decided banding together provided more safety and benefits than existing independently. So, in my mind, the tradeoff is that when something benefits the common weal (as in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts) then sometimes some of us get impacted.
For example, my neighborhood was negatively impacted for 3 years during the school expansion and the immediate abutters continue to be affected by early morning deliveries, dumpsters and lights; many others were impacted with the return of the railroad; some by staging sites for water and sewer expansion on Main Street and Little Harbor; still others are impacted when vacant lots they consider open space are developed; and others by a proposed wind turbine. All of these are deemed in the best interest of the town as a whole but maybe not for some individuals.
That puts a heavy burden on those making these decisions: if you're not willing to take on the responsibility of leadership then you shouldn't assume the position of a leader. One of my favorite sayings is "Unless you're jello you should never conform to a mold." Thomas Jefferson put it more aptly: In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.
Is that the kind of leadership you want - or deserve? I hope not because if you do that says something basic about this community I don't want to believe.
That's not how I make my decisions. I do my homework, listen to anyone who wants to weigh in on the subject, and consult with objective experts when required…then I make my decision based on facts and what's in the best interest of the town as a whole – not on friendship or votes in the next election.
Just look at my voting record on the tough issues: Treat's Pond, LH/AA sewer betterments (50/50), Cat Dam and the Water Enterprise Fund crisis. Those were difficult decisions that impacted residents. The Bear Hill Easement looms as another.
With each vote someone agrees with me; someone doesn't. I've lost the support of individuals I thought were friends; I've been threatened. I'm sorry my decisions have impacted residents but I wouldn't change a one of them.
On the other hand I am continuously buoyed by unsolicited expressions of support by many in the community (some who disagree with some of my decisions but overall think I'm doing a good job).
We have individual rights but we live in a community because a long time ago man decided banding together provided more safety and benefits than existing independently. So, in my mind, the tradeoff is that when something benefits the common weal (as in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts) then sometimes some of us get impacted.
For example, my neighborhood was negatively impacted for 3 years during the school expansion and the immediate abutters continue to be affected by early morning deliveries, dumpsters and lights; many others were impacted with the return of the railroad; some by staging sites for water and sewer expansion on Main Street and Little Harbor; still others are impacted when vacant lots they consider open space are developed; and others by a proposed wind turbine. All of these are deemed in the best interest of the town as a whole but maybe not for some individuals.
That puts a heavy burden on those making these decisions: if you're not willing to take on the responsibility of leadership then you shouldn't assume the position of a leader. One of my favorite sayings is "Unless you're jello you should never conform to a mold." Thomas Jefferson put it more aptly: In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
TOWN HALL ACCOUNTABILITY in this Fiscal Crisis
This is in response to a comment from Anonymous. While I appreciate any constructive input, it's easy to criticize without attribution. There's no consequences in anonymity. There's no courage either. That having been said...
Yes, the professional management in Town Hall failed. How could our town officials miss it? Simple. We relied on our paid professionals and colleagues to do the right thing. We asked questions but there were always answers. We were too trusting, unwary, and unsuspicious. As for admitting our responsibility. Some of us have. Sam Wakeman, the Advisory Board & I apologized publicly. Silence from others. Just circling the wagons and finger pointing.
It's important to know what happened and who did it. It's more important to fix it and make sure it never happens again. So what's being done? Evaluation of personnel, processes and procedures in the Finance Department were initiated immediately by our Interim Town Manager who hired an independent, qualified, objective accountant to assist him in sorting out what can only be described as a mare's nest.
Where do we go from here? Once the audit is completed, we deal with the financial consequences. It's not going to be easy but it has to be done. With a new Town Accountant on board we will be able to correct deficiencies and create processes and procedures that meet state and professional standards and result in an efficient and accurate accounting of the Town's business.
To my credit, my goal as a selectman was and is to examine the existing structure of town government and the budget. I built coalitions but town government is cautious, slow to accept change. Did I know the extent of this crisis? No, but my instincts were right, yet again. Some agreed with me, urging me to show leadership but the old saying is true: "you can lead a horse to water...".
I was the first, and only one for a long time, to insist on an independent forensic audit of the water/sewer enterprise funds, and, to date, I am the only one to publicly call for the resignation of the 'old' water commissioners.
Creating a utility superintendent isn't wrong. ( proposed reorganization of water sewer ) What is wrong is not admitting the failures of our existing system, clinging to the status quo, and refusing to make the changes necessary to ensure Cohasset's financial future out of fear and/or misplaced loyalty.
Elected terms end but when the people elect candidates who put friendships and vested interests before the best interests of the town as a whole we all lose for these are not leaders, they're politicians.
ADDENDUM 12/19Boston Globe: Official Aims to Combine Public Works
Yes, the professional management in Town Hall failed. How could our town officials miss it? Simple. We relied on our paid professionals and colleagues to do the right thing. We asked questions but there were always answers. We were too trusting, unwary, and unsuspicious. As for admitting our responsibility. Some of us have. Sam Wakeman, the Advisory Board & I apologized publicly. Silence from others. Just circling the wagons and finger pointing.
It's important to know what happened and who did it. It's more important to fix it and make sure it never happens again. So what's being done? Evaluation of personnel, processes and procedures in the Finance Department were initiated immediately by our Interim Town Manager who hired an independent, qualified, objective accountant to assist him in sorting out what can only be described as a mare's nest.
Where do we go from here? Once the audit is completed, we deal with the financial consequences. It's not going to be easy but it has to be done. With a new Town Accountant on board we will be able to correct deficiencies and create processes and procedures that meet state and professional standards and result in an efficient and accurate accounting of the Town's business.
To my credit, my goal as a selectman was and is to examine the existing structure of town government and the budget. I built coalitions but town government is cautious, slow to accept change. Did I know the extent of this crisis? No, but my instincts were right, yet again. Some agreed with me, urging me to show leadership but the old saying is true: "you can lead a horse to water...".
I was the first, and only one for a long time, to insist on an independent forensic audit of the water/sewer enterprise funds, and, to date, I am the only one to publicly call for the resignation of the 'old' water commissioners.
Creating a utility superintendent isn't wrong. ( proposed reorganization of water sewer ) What is wrong is not admitting the failures of our existing system, clinging to the status quo, and refusing to make the changes necessary to ensure Cohasset's financial future out of fear and/or misplaced loyalty.
Elected terms end but when the people elect candidates who put friendships and vested interests before the best interests of the town as a whole we all lose for these are not leaders, they're politicians.
ADDENDUM 12/19Boston Globe: Official Aims to Combine Public Works
Friday, December 3, 2010
PROPOSED REORGANIZATION OF WATER & SEWER
The Water Planning Group meeting Tuesday night was singularly disconcerting. A governance proposal for the reorganization of water & sewer was previously presented by the former town manager and discussed by the WPG with little opposition. I naively thought the auditor's same plan would receive the same preliminary acceptance. Instead it was met with outrage, indignation and rejection by the Commissioners as well as some, but not all, of the WPG members. What caused this furor?
In addition to performing the forensic audit, the auditor was asked to provide a governance plan based on his review of how the enterprise funds had been managed. His recommendation creates a new position of superintendent reporting directly to the town manager, overseeing the contract operators of the plants as well as the consulting engineers, and suggests combining the commissions into one 5-member appointed and advisory board. This isn't a wild new concept: it's a successful model used by many municipalities and some of our neighboring towns.
It's interesting to note that the 2004 MMA Report made the same recommendation which was soundly rejected by the then chair of the Water Commission. Two reports, 6-years apart, authored by two different independent professionals making basically the same recommendation evinced the identical reaction by our elected commissioners. Objective vs. subjective. You decide.
To me, this structure provides the town with a 9-5 professional; someone with engineering/utility management experience who could evaluate the consulting engineer's recommendations and would have department head budgetary accountability. It is sound business practice and it makes sense to put the onus on a paid professional rather than citizen volunteers.
The auditor also provided a proposal for how this might be paid for by reducing the scope of the plant operation contracts and contract services costs so as not to add additional costs to the Town.
The MMA Report outlines a job description for a Municipal Infrastructure Manager, cites recommended minimum qualifications, describes the essential duties and responsibilities and, in my estimation, is a darn good place to start our discussion.
However, it's hard to talk when you're holding your breath. I hope the naysayers will instead take a deep breath and enter into a conversation. What is needed now is solutions and the best solutions come from dispassionate debate.
In addition to performing the forensic audit, the auditor was asked to provide a governance plan based on his review of how the enterprise funds had been managed. His recommendation creates a new position of superintendent reporting directly to the town manager, overseeing the contract operators of the plants as well as the consulting engineers, and suggests combining the commissions into one 5-member appointed and advisory board. This isn't a wild new concept: it's a successful model used by many municipalities and some of our neighboring towns.
It's interesting to note that the 2004 MMA Report made the same recommendation which was soundly rejected by the then chair of the Water Commission. Two reports, 6-years apart, authored by two different independent professionals making basically the same recommendation evinced the identical reaction by our elected commissioners. Objective vs. subjective. You decide.
To me, this structure provides the town with a 9-5 professional; someone with engineering/utility management experience who could evaluate the consulting engineer's recommendations and would have department head budgetary accountability. It is sound business practice and it makes sense to put the onus on a paid professional rather than citizen volunteers.
The auditor also provided a proposal for how this might be paid for by reducing the scope of the plant operation contracts and contract services costs so as not to add additional costs to the Town.
The MMA Report outlines a job description for a Municipal Infrastructure Manager, cites recommended minimum qualifications, describes the essential duties and responsibilities and, in my estimation, is a darn good place to start our discussion.
However, it's hard to talk when you're holding your breath. I hope the naysayers will instead take a deep breath and enter into a conversation. What is needed now is solutions and the best solutions come from dispassionate debate.
Monday, November 29, 2010
BoS AGENDA: Monday, November 29
TAX CLASSIFICATION HEARING: The Assessors will present their report so the BoS can vote to set the tax rate for submission to the DOR
REVIEW OF EMERGENCY SELECTMEN'S MEETING 11-22: Recap of the discussion of implications of preliminary audit findings on immediate bond issues
SET DATE FOR 2011 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING & ELECTION
CULTURAL COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS
DISCUSSION OF INCREASE OF FACILITY STICKER FEE: proposed $10 increase
CAT DAM NOI DISCUSSION
REVIEW OF EMERGENCY SELECTMEN'S MEETING 11-22: Recap of the discussion of implications of preliminary audit findings on immediate bond issues
SET DATE FOR 2011 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING & ELECTION
CULTURAL COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS
DISCUSSION OF INCREASE OF FACILITY STICKER FEE: proposed $10 increase
CAT DAM NOI DISCUSSION
Friday, November 26, 2010
THE AUDIT: preliminary facts and fallout
Those of us in leadership positions made the decision not to discuss The Audit until it was finalized. However, it's been discussed in open meeting and reported in the local media causing me revise my thinking.
While the reported findings are preliminary, the concerns raised are significant enough to warrant notifying the DOR, and both the Town's bond and financial counsels as well as legal counsel. This was done by the Interim Town Manager and the Auditor and, as chair of the BoS, with my knowledge. The BoS was immediately notified. By doing so, we have been proactive and transparent which is being viewed favorably by the DOR.
While what we have learned so far are irregularities such as misclassifying operational expenses as capital expense and paying for them out of bond funding, they are consequential and have serious ramifications for the Town's finances: i.e., capital funds will have to be replenished.
Until the audit is complete we won't know the exact amount but figures presented at Monday's emergency BoS meeting range anywhere from $600,000 to over a million just to resolve a 12/10 bonding deadline. Tinytown Unleashed
Where will the money come from? There are no good solutions. We could borrow from cash reserves but these have already been decimated to balance the water enterprise fund FY11 budget. We could raise water rates. Oops, we already did that. We could hold a Special Town Meeting and ask for an override or debt exclusion. Should the voters say no, cuts would have to made in the Town and School Budgets. Or we could just go ahead and make those cuts. Ultimately how the Town resolves this problem depends greatly on the DOR.
In order to identify available funds in the FY11 budget, the Interim Town Manager has issued a town-wide freeze on all discretionary spending. Mariner
Other implications could be that it might affect the town's bond rating and the rate at which we can borrow money; and existing tax-free municipal bonds may become taxable to the bond holder causing a federal tax issue.
Another unintentional consequence is that it may affect the Town's ability to set the tax rate. The Assessors will present their report to the BoS on Monday night at which time we will vote to set the tax classification for submission to the DOR. However, the DOR may choose not to set the Town's tax rate pending their receipt and review of the final audit. If that happens the Town can issue estimated tax bills based on the previous year's tax rate but new betterments cannot be included. Should this happen it may cause a cash flow problem for the sewer enterprise fund as the FY11 budget is based on the Little Harbor Project betterments being paid.
This sounds dreadful. It is. Fixing this is going to hurt.
While the reported findings are preliminary, the concerns raised are significant enough to warrant notifying the DOR, and both the Town's bond and financial counsels as well as legal counsel. This was done by the Interim Town Manager and the Auditor and, as chair of the BoS, with my knowledge. The BoS was immediately notified. By doing so, we have been proactive and transparent which is being viewed favorably by the DOR.
While what we have learned so far are irregularities such as misclassifying operational expenses as capital expense and paying for them out of bond funding, they are consequential and have serious ramifications for the Town's finances: i.e., capital funds will have to be replenished.
Until the audit is complete we won't know the exact amount but figures presented at Monday's emergency BoS meeting range anywhere from $600,000 to over a million just to resolve a 12/10 bonding deadline. Tinytown Unleashed
Where will the money come from? There are no good solutions. We could borrow from cash reserves but these have already been decimated to balance the water enterprise fund FY11 budget. We could raise water rates. Oops, we already did that. We could hold a Special Town Meeting and ask for an override or debt exclusion. Should the voters say no, cuts would have to made in the Town and School Budgets. Or we could just go ahead and make those cuts. Ultimately how the Town resolves this problem depends greatly on the DOR.
In order to identify available funds in the FY11 budget, the Interim Town Manager has issued a town-wide freeze on all discretionary spending. Mariner
Other implications could be that it might affect the town's bond rating and the rate at which we can borrow money; and existing tax-free municipal bonds may become taxable to the bond holder causing a federal tax issue.
Another unintentional consequence is that it may affect the Town's ability to set the tax rate. The Assessors will present their report to the BoS on Monday night at which time we will vote to set the tax classification for submission to the DOR. However, the DOR may choose not to set the Town's tax rate pending their receipt and review of the final audit. If that happens the Town can issue estimated tax bills based on the previous year's tax rate but new betterments cannot be included. Should this happen it may cause a cash flow problem for the sewer enterprise fund as the FY11 budget is based on the Little Harbor Project betterments being paid.
This sounds dreadful. It is. Fixing this is going to hurt.
Saturday, November 20, 2010
NO LEADERSHIP VACUUM AT TOWNHALL
I've heard concerns that there is a leadership vacuum at Town Hall. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Steve Lombard, as Interim Town Manager, is working diligently and decisively to ensure the business of Cohasset's Town Hall and its governance is proceeding in a professional, effective and efficient manner. He keeps in daily contact with me and we meet as often as is necessary; the BoS is kept fully apprised of all major decisions.
In just 13 days in Town Hall, Steve has promoted morale and communication among department heads and staff; worked closely in liaison with our elected and appointed officials to keep the people's business on track; met with citizens; hired and Assistant Assessor; and began preparing the FY12 budget.
Steve hired an Interim Accountant/Finance Director to make certain the daily functions of the Town's finances are carried out and to assist him in the budget process. He has advertised and is actively seeking to fill this crucial position.
As you know, an extensive audit is being conducted on the water and sewer enterprise funds. Steve meets several times each day with the auditor. Together they are working with the DOR and Bond Counsel.
As chair of the BoS, I am working closely with Sam Wakeman (chair of the Advisory Committee, Budget Planning Group and Audit Oversight Committee) and Steve on the many important issues facing Cohasset.
It's a challenging time at Town Hall but please be assured there is no lack of leadership.
Steve Lombard, as Interim Town Manager, is working diligently and decisively to ensure the business of Cohasset's Town Hall and its governance is proceeding in a professional, effective and efficient manner. He keeps in daily contact with me and we meet as often as is necessary; the BoS is kept fully apprised of all major decisions.
In just 13 days in Town Hall, Steve has promoted morale and communication among department heads and staff; worked closely in liaison with our elected and appointed officials to keep the people's business on track; met with citizens; hired and Assistant Assessor; and began preparing the FY12 budget.
Steve hired an Interim Accountant/Finance Director to make certain the daily functions of the Town's finances are carried out and to assist him in the budget process. He has advertised and is actively seeking to fill this crucial position.
As you know, an extensive audit is being conducted on the water and sewer enterprise funds. Steve meets several times each day with the auditor. Together they are working with the DOR and Bond Counsel.
As chair of the BoS, I am working closely with Sam Wakeman (chair of the Advisory Committee, Budget Planning Group and Audit Oversight Committee) and Steve on the many important issues facing Cohasset.
It's a challenging time at Town Hall but please be assured there is no lack of leadership.
Monday, November 1, 2010
SHUTTING OFF THE FLOW OF MONEY - A Citizen's Petition
140 citizens from all over town - not a NIMBY neighborhood - signed a citizen's petition designed to place control of all spending by the Water Commissioners under the BoS. The BoS voted to recommend indefinite postponement of the article. My vote was based on procedure, practicality and the fact that I am confident recommendations coming out of the audit of the enterprise funds will propose significant changes in the way business is done not only at the Water & Sewer Commissions but in Town Hall.
I don't expect you to have that same confidence. Why should you after last year's events? I understand you're angry and distrustful. So am I.
In my opinion this citizen's petition very appropriately serves to remind Town Hall that we're on probation and we're not out of hot water yet. I'm not sure that's the message Town Hall is getting but I am sure it's the message being sent. I get it.
Please attend Town Meeting, Monday, November 15. Your vote does make a difference.
I don't expect you to have that same confidence. Why should you after last year's events? I understand you're angry and distrustful. So am I.
In my opinion this citizen's petition very appropriately serves to remind Town Hall that we're on probation and we're not out of hot water yet. I'm not sure that's the message Town Hall is getting but I am sure it's the message being sent. I get it.
Please attend Town Meeting, Monday, November 15. Your vote does make a difference.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
DEMOCRACY ISN'T A SPECTATOR SPORT
VOTE TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2 - STATE ELECTIONS
This November is a watershed election and yet our Town Clerk predicts a low turnout. So many men and women have fought and died to protect our right to vote. Why do so many of us take it for granted? Have we grown so complacent we no longer care? Voting gives you an voice. It's an awesome thing. Please vote this Tuesday. If you don't Cohasset's collective voice is muted.
VOTE MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15 - TOWN MEETING
On the local level active participation in town government is a privilege not without burden: you must give up one Saturday and one Monday night each year to vote at Town Meeting. That Monday night is November 15. Please plan to have one member of your household attend. If you don't then you abdicate the responsibility for important financial and policy decisions to others - and you give up the right to complain about their decisions!
This November is a watershed election and yet our Town Clerk predicts a low turnout. So many men and women have fought and died to protect our right to vote. Why do so many of us take it for granted? Have we grown so complacent we no longer care? Voting gives you an voice. It's an awesome thing. Please vote this Tuesday. If you don't Cohasset's collective voice is muted.
VOTE MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15 - TOWN MEETING
On the local level active participation in town government is a privilege not without burden: you must give up one Saturday and one Monday night each year to vote at Town Meeting. That Monday night is November 15. Please plan to have one member of your household attend. If you don't then you abdicate the responsibility for important financial and policy decisions to others - and you give up the right to complain about their decisions!
TO NOI OR NOT TO NOI Cat Dam Revisited
The Cat Dam NOI* is in a legal permitting process with the Conservation Committee. One group of abutters has retained an attorney who has filed a brief that is under review by Town Counsel. At last Monday night's BoS meeting a majority of the selectmen voted to pull the NOI at the request of these abutters.
In my opinion, the majority intervened in a legal permitting process - before Town Counsel issued an opinion - and subverted the authority of another governing body. To me, this sets bad precedent.
The majority's justification is that these abutters have requested the BoS review the NOI submitted some months ago. It seems the majority never read the NOI. Why not? I did - as well as all the backup data and reports.
The majority want to give the public an opportunity to provide comment and input. Wasn't this talked about for years before the BoS and now during ConCom's permitting process? No one's voice has been silenced.
The majority want to discuss the NOI to determine if it could be 'made better'. On what basis will they do that? None of us is qualified to judge environmental engineering. ConCom is.
The majority propose to accept a plan prepared by an engineer hired by abutters who do not agree with the conclusions of the existing NOI. Does anyone really think the conclusions in this NOI will differ from those of the abutters ?
There is another group of abutters who urged the BoS to allow the process to proceed. Once the BoS has reviewed and possibly submitted the other group's NOI will this group then urge the BoS to pull this NOI? Round and round we'll go.
ConCom is the only town entity having regulatory jurisdiction in this matter. I trust the process and have respect for and confidence in ConCom. In my opinion the BoS should have allowed the permitting process to proceed to conclusion at which point the aggrieved abutters could appeal the decision to DEP and/or the courts.
The majority's action has taken this issue out of the realm of science and law and put it back in the political arena.
*Notice of Intent
In my opinion, the majority intervened in a legal permitting process - before Town Counsel issued an opinion - and subverted the authority of another governing body. To me, this sets bad precedent.
The majority's justification is that these abutters have requested the BoS review the NOI submitted some months ago. It seems the majority never read the NOI. Why not? I did - as well as all the backup data and reports.
The majority want to give the public an opportunity to provide comment and input. Wasn't this talked about for years before the BoS and now during ConCom's permitting process? No one's voice has been silenced.
The majority want to discuss the NOI to determine if it could be 'made better'. On what basis will they do that? None of us is qualified to judge environmental engineering. ConCom is.
The majority propose to accept a plan prepared by an engineer hired by abutters who do not agree with the conclusions of the existing NOI. Does anyone really think the conclusions in this NOI will differ from those of the abutters ?
There is another group of abutters who urged the BoS to allow the process to proceed. Once the BoS has reviewed and possibly submitted the other group's NOI will this group then urge the BoS to pull this NOI? Round and round we'll go.
ConCom is the only town entity having regulatory jurisdiction in this matter. I trust the process and have respect for and confidence in ConCom. In my opinion the BoS should have allowed the permitting process to proceed to conclusion at which point the aggrieved abutters could appeal the decision to DEP and/or the courts.
The majority's action has taken this issue out of the realm of science and law and put it back in the political arena.
*Notice of Intent
BoS AGNDA - Monday, November 8
OPEN MEETING LAW SEMINAR - Recent revisions to the OML will be reviewed by Town Counsel; town boards, committees, commissions are encouraged to attend; the public is invited
POLE HEARING - 19 Atlantic Avenue
SPECIAL TOWN MEETING ARTICLE REVIEW - Zoning Bylaw revision
POLE HEARING - 19 Atlantic Avenue
SPECIAL TOWN MEETING ARTICLE REVIEW - Zoning Bylaw revision
BoS AGENDA - Monday, November 1
Introduction of Interim Town Manager, STEVE LOMBARD
CHIEF ROBERT SILVIA - Proposed Plymouth County Mutual Aid Agreement for jJoint fire, rescue and/or ambulance service & acceptance of General laws, Chapter 48, Section 59A
AVA CUCINA - Pledge of Liquor License
2011 BoS LICENSE FEES - Discussion of increasing certain license fees to bring them into line with area towns; fees have not been increased since 1995
2011 FACILITY STICKER FEES - Discussion of increasing both regular and senior citizen facility sticker fees by $10 each
CHIEF ROBERT SILVIA - Proposed Plymouth County Mutual Aid Agreement for jJoint fire, rescue and/or ambulance service & acceptance of General laws, Chapter 48, Section 59A
AVA CUCINA - Pledge of Liquor License
2011 BoS LICENSE FEES - Discussion of increasing certain license fees to bring them into line with area towns; fees have not been increased since 1995
2011 FACILITY STICKER FEES - Discussion of increasing both regular and senior citizen facility sticker fees by $10 each
Sunday, October 24, 2010
NIMBY OR NOT? Part 2
The Mariner did a good job in accounting the meeting so I won't rehash it here.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cohasset/topstories/x2048882663/Bear-Hill-forum-draws-a-crowd
This is one of those issues that has so many layers we may never be able to fully resolve them. I did find answers to a couple of questions posed in my original blog. I'm reporting, you decide.
ATT pulled out of negotiations with St. Stephen's due to site restrictions and ATT rejected the Scituate Hill water tank because of conflicts with existing towers in the area.
I finally talked to the chair of the ZBA who said that federal law trumps local law and that the cell industry can pretty much put a tower or antennas anywhere they like.
Although it's a commercial installation in a residential zoned area, the ZBA and the Building Inspector decided it doesn't trip anything that would call for a hearing.
The Traffic Study showed that Reservoir Road is heavily traveled with about 600 vehicles per day. Their conclusion is that a little more traffic won't negatively impact safety.
The meeting went until 11pm with much discussion back and forth between the public and the commissioners but questions await answers. On the bright side, I think I saw a very small shift in the dynamics. Tune in for the next installment.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cohasset/topstories/x2048882663/Bear-Hill-forum-draws-a-crowd
This is one of those issues that has so many layers we may never be able to fully resolve them. I did find answers to a couple of questions posed in my original blog. I'm reporting, you decide.
ATT pulled out of negotiations with St. Stephen's due to site restrictions and ATT rejected the Scituate Hill water tank because of conflicts with existing towers in the area.
I finally talked to the chair of the ZBA who said that federal law trumps local law and that the cell industry can pretty much put a tower or antennas anywhere they like.
Although it's a commercial installation in a residential zoned area, the ZBA and the Building Inspector decided it doesn't trip anything that would call for a hearing.
The Traffic Study showed that Reservoir Road is heavily traveled with about 600 vehicles per day. Their conclusion is that a little more traffic won't negatively impact safety.
The meeting went until 11pm with much discussion back and forth between the public and the commissioners but questions await answers. On the bright side, I think I saw a very small shift in the dynamics. Tune in for the next installment.
BOS AGENDA - Monday, October 25
PROPOSED SENIOR CENTER UPDATE: members of the CEA, Friends and Building Ad Hoc Committee will present a status report on the project
DPW REVIEW and UPDATE: including an overview of the scope of responsibilities and duties of the DPW
TOWN MEETING ARTICLE REVIEW
Amendments to FY2011 operating budget
Local option meals excise tax
Local option room occupancy excise tax
Unpaid bills from previous fiscal years
Citizens' Petition - Water Department Expenses
SHERBROOK EASEMENT for Rain Garden
CAT DAM Notice of Intent (NOI)
DPW REVIEW and UPDATE: including an overview of the scope of responsibilities and duties of the DPW
TOWN MEETING ARTICLE REVIEW
Amendments to FY2011 operating budget
Local option meals excise tax
Local option room occupancy excise tax
Unpaid bills from previous fiscal years
Citizens' Petition - Water Department Expenses
SHERBROOK EASEMENT for Rain Garden
CAT DAM Notice of Intent (NOI)
WHOSE SIDE ARE YOU ON, ANYWAY?
Lately, I get asked that question by both sides of an issue and from some in town government. Some ask nicely, some don't.
Ultimately, any decision I make has to be in the best interest of the town which sometimes is not in the best interest of all of the townspeople. Herein lies the conundrum: how to justify negatively impacting some to the greater good of the whole. I've never resolved that within myself but I focus on the facts, filter out the politics and make the best decision I can. It's never easy.
Since I've been elected there have been a few of these: Treat's Pond, Cat's Dam, police chief, stormwater flooding, sewer betterments. These have been very difficult to say the least as they affected people I know, like and respect and many more who are unknown to me.
Every decision results in a portion of the community fuming at me and another thanking me and I'd never make any decision if I only took into account the political aspect or worried about being re-elected.
Some say leave it to town meeting to decide. Well, if we leave it to town meeting to decide the 'hard ones' why did you elect us? To make the easy ones? I became a selectman to do more than issue liquor licenses and preside over pole hearings. Having standing socially or politically never mattered to me.
In campaigning I said I wouldn't be afraid to make the tough decisions. I haven't. Most people like that until it affects them. Others like it no matter what.
I've never advocated for a vested interest or let personal connections influence me. Whatever decision I make, it's mine and I don't run away from it.
I admire Margaret Thatcher for her strength and determination and her sense of humor. Here's a couple of quotes that hit home to me these days: "Standing in the middle of the road is very dangerous; you get knocked down by traffic from both sides." and "I seem to smell the stench of appeasement in the air."
Ultimately, any decision I make has to be in the best interest of the town which sometimes is not in the best interest of all of the townspeople. Herein lies the conundrum: how to justify negatively impacting some to the greater good of the whole. I've never resolved that within myself but I focus on the facts, filter out the politics and make the best decision I can. It's never easy.
Since I've been elected there have been a few of these: Treat's Pond, Cat's Dam, police chief, stormwater flooding, sewer betterments. These have been very difficult to say the least as they affected people I know, like and respect and many more who are unknown to me.
Every decision results in a portion of the community fuming at me and another thanking me and I'd never make any decision if I only took into account the political aspect or worried about being re-elected.
Some say leave it to town meeting to decide. Well, if we leave it to town meeting to decide the 'hard ones' why did you elect us? To make the easy ones? I became a selectman to do more than issue liquor licenses and preside over pole hearings. Having standing socially or politically never mattered to me.
In campaigning I said I wouldn't be afraid to make the tough decisions. I haven't. Most people like that until it affects them. Others like it no matter what.
I've never advocated for a vested interest or let personal connections influence me. Whatever decision I make, it's mine and I don't run away from it.
I admire Margaret Thatcher for her strength and determination and her sense of humor. Here's a couple of quotes that hit home to me these days: "Standing in the middle of the road is very dangerous; you get knocked down by traffic from both sides." and "I seem to smell the stench of appeasement in the air."
Saturday, October 16, 2010
BOS AGENDA - Wednesday, October 20
INTERIM TOWN MANAGER:
Interviews of three finalist candidates
Discussion
Selection of Interim Town Manager
Interviews of three finalist candidates
Discussion
Selection of Interim Town Manager
BOS AGENDA - Monday, October 18
COHASSET SAILING CLUB - Tim O'Brien will present their plans for the new clubhouse and shed
SPECIAL TOWN MEETING ARTICLE REVIEW
Capital Improvements Budget: presentation of their proposed project funding
Capital Budget Committee Bylaw Amendments: the proposed revisions (a) propose an associate member and (b) expand the scope of the CBC
Water Treatment Plant Upgrade: the Water Commissioners are seeking funding for a capital improvement mandated by the DEP to prevent the accidental overload of chemicals into the system. This was triggered by an incident in western MA
Beach Street Easement: the BoS will reconsider approval of this easement due to a misinterpretation by the chair of the maintenance responsibility
APPROVAL OF THE SPECIAL TOWN MEETING WARRANT
INTERIM FINANCE DIRECTOR: discussion of whether to consider proposal
EXECUTIVE SESSION: for the purposes of discussing a strategy for contract negotiation with non-union personnel
SPECIAL TOWN MEETING ARTICLE REVIEW
Capital Improvements Budget: presentation of their proposed project funding
Capital Budget Committee Bylaw Amendments: the proposed revisions (a) propose an associate member and (b) expand the scope of the CBC
Water Treatment Plant Upgrade: the Water Commissioners are seeking funding for a capital improvement mandated by the DEP to prevent the accidental overload of chemicals into the system. This was triggered by an incident in western MA
Beach Street Easement: the BoS will reconsider approval of this easement due to a misinterpretation by the chair of the maintenance responsibility
APPROVAL OF THE SPECIAL TOWN MEETING WARRANT
INTERIM FINANCE DIRECTOR: discussion of whether to consider proposal
EXECUTIVE SESSION: for the purposes of discussing a strategy for contract negotiation with non-union personnel
WATER UPDATE: GOOD NEWS!
At last week's Water Planning Group meeting there was some very good news: the $5-6 million plant upgrade is being tabled. Our new commissioners have been initiating efficiencies in the operation of the plant with increased oversight and monitoring of the level of chemicals introduced to the water. It seems that whichever standard is used, existing and 2012, the plant will be in compliance.
Further good news is that the quality may be able to be improved with some low-tech, less expensive improvements to the plant and new procedures that will increase the percentage below the compliance figure.
Kudos!
I repeat myself in pointing out that our new commissioners, Chris Seebeck and Peter DeCaprio, have brought sound business and financial practices and procedures to the operation of our water department that have resulted in immediate improvements and savings. An excellent example for the rest of town government.
Further good news is that the quality may be able to be improved with some low-tech, less expensive improvements to the plant and new procedures that will increase the percentage below the compliance figure.
Kudos!
I repeat myself in pointing out that our new commissioners, Chris Seebeck and Peter DeCaprio, have brought sound business and financial practices and procedures to the operation of our water department that have resulted in immediate improvements and savings. An excellent example for the rest of town government.
IS THE GLASS HALF EMPTY OR HALF FULL?
Attitude. It makes all the difference. Admittedly, it's a challenge to have the two top executives at town hall resign at the same time. I choose to focus on the opportunity this presents.
We now have the possibility to benefit from the objective perspective of experienced professionals to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of our operational, management, and financial processes. Like the credit card ad says: priceless.
The purpose is not to criticize nor to initiate change for change sake. It's to improve to a greater degree and extent the way we run town hall. I'm sure we'll find we do some things just fine, others we could do better, and still others we need to revamp.
The end goal is always to better position Cohasset for success.
We now have the possibility to benefit from the objective perspective of experienced professionals to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of our operational, management, and financial processes. Like the credit card ad says: priceless.
The purpose is not to criticize nor to initiate change for change sake. It's to improve to a greater degree and extent the way we run town hall. I'm sure we'll find we do some things just fine, others we could do better, and still others we need to revamp.
The end goal is always to better position Cohasset for success.
WHO DOES KAREN THINK SHE IS.
I thought it an appropriate time to remind those who know me and inform those that don't why I participate in town government and how that affects my decision making process.
As a member of the Open Space Committee I became involved with a group of neighbors who had concerns about the town-sponsored project to develop the Cook Estate. We were dismissed by Town Hall as Nimbys and as bored & disgruntled housewives with nothing better to do with their time. After all, we were just unknown citizens. How could we have valid positions? How could we be taken seriously? We weren't. The result: the town spent upwards of $800,000 pursuing an ill-fated project.
My point is to illustrate how important it is for those of us in Town Hall to have open minds and listen to the concerns and opinions of the citizens we were elected/appointed to represent.
Yes, we are the leaders and we have to show leadership. Yes, we are privy to information they are not. No, we are not smarter or better.
We do The People's Business. It should be incumbent on each of us to listen, seriously consider the input and objectively determine if and how it should impact our final decision. It's humbling but sometimes The People really do have a point. Sometimes they don't. It's our duty to determine the difference.
My first night as selectman I vowed never to forget how it felt to be on the other side of the desk. I haven't. If I ever do, please smack me upside the head.
As a member of the Open Space Committee I became involved with a group of neighbors who had concerns about the town-sponsored project to develop the Cook Estate. We were dismissed by Town Hall as Nimbys and as bored & disgruntled housewives with nothing better to do with their time. After all, we were just unknown citizens. How could we have valid positions? How could we be taken seriously? We weren't. The result: the town spent upwards of $800,000 pursuing an ill-fated project.
My point is to illustrate how important it is for those of us in Town Hall to have open minds and listen to the concerns and opinions of the citizens we were elected/appointed to represent.
Yes, we are the leaders and we have to show leadership. Yes, we are privy to information they are not. No, we are not smarter or better.
We do The People's Business. It should be incumbent on each of us to listen, seriously consider the input and objectively determine if and how it should impact our final decision. It's humbling but sometimes The People really do have a point. Sometimes they don't. It's our duty to determine the difference.
My first night as selectman I vowed never to forget how it felt to be on the other side of the desk. I haven't. If I ever do, please smack me upside the head.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
BOS AGENDA - Wednesday, October 13
REVIEW OF INTERIM TOWN MANAGER APPLICATIONS – the selectmen have received 14 applications; we will attempt to come to a consensus on our top 3 choices to be invited for interviews on October 20
SPECIAL TOWN MEETING REVIEW
Tax Collector's Demand Fee - request for $15 to be added to tax
Water Treatment Plant Upgrade - this is a request for funding for a capital improvement
Citizen's Petition regarding Water Department's Expenses - seeks to put control of all spending under the BoS
Amendment to Harbor Bylaw - seeks to include LIttle Harbor under the jurisdiction of the Harbor Master
SPECIAL TOWN MEETING REVIEW
Tax Collector's Demand Fee - request for $15 to be added to tax
Water Treatment Plant Upgrade - this is a request for funding for a capital improvement
Citizen's Petition regarding Water Department's Expenses - seeks to put control of all spending under the BoS
Amendment to Harbor Bylaw - seeks to include LIttle Harbor under the jurisdiction of the Harbor Master
TRI, TRY AGAIN
To some 'The Tri' is sacrosanct and the selectmen's efforts to lessen it's impact on the community unreasonable. Is it? No one is talking about not permitting the Triathlon but what if we didn't. Would Cohasset suffer? No. Presumably such a desirable event could be held in another local town and Cohasset's athlete's would compete there. But we did permit it - with some provisos.
According to USA Triathlon, this is an issue nationally and they stress that the event and the athletes must have a respect for the host community. Locally, Cohasset's concerns are not unique: the Scituate selectmen debated at five meetings before permitting the duathlon for its second year.
Let's stipulate it's a great athletic event, raises money for a very good cause and that Bill Burnett does an excellent job. At the same time, let's acknowledge that Streamline Events is a for profit organization. I don't have a problem with that. I wish I could find a way to make money doing what I love and also contribute to charity. Don't you?
Now, consider that some may have a point that the Tri prevents them from getting where they need/want to go. Big deal you say. Well, yeah, it's not an hour or so, it's the better part of the day. Some view attending their Sunday morning church service with the same fervor as the triathletes view the competition. Some need to get to work, the beach, the dump, visit sick relatives, whatever. Competing priorities need equal respect.
So what can be done? The size of the event does make a difference: in 2007 Bill agreed to cap the entries at 700 but the 2010 website listed 950. Bill has agreed to cap the 2011 Tri at 850. Less people (athletes & spectators) = less impact.
In 2011 the novice and older competitors will be in the first waves. With those who take longer to finish going first the overall length of the event will be less. Shorter = less impact.
Chief Deluca is putting together a plan to increase police presence in problem areas and an increased effort will be made to educate the public of road closings. When one lane remains open to the public, athletes need to respect it and police need to enforce it. Planning/education = less impact.
Everything always comes down to the bottom line and USA Tri emphasizes the need for a direct benefit to the community. Streamline Events pays for police, fire, safety and makes a contribution to the Sandy Beach Assn. and in 2011 they will pay for DPW. That's overhead.
What's the benefit? The Tri says it's the people who come to town. Hmmm. Neither the Chamber nor merchants have given me any concrete evidence or even hinted at any increase in business. Best case, "Maybe they come back." No national sponsors have opened businesses in town, and, despite Bill's assertion, Cohasset was "on the map" long before he and the Tri came along.
Is it good PR for the town? Sure it is but I'm not that altruistic. To his credit, with just a little prodding, BB is in the process of putting together an arm of the Tri that would award money to a local non-profit or town organization. Okay, that's a direct benefit.
See, we can play nicely together - athletes and couch potatoes and everyone in-between!
According to USA Triathlon, this is an issue nationally and they stress that the event and the athletes must have a respect for the host community. Locally, Cohasset's concerns are not unique: the Scituate selectmen debated at five meetings before permitting the duathlon for its second year.
Let's stipulate it's a great athletic event, raises money for a very good cause and that Bill Burnett does an excellent job. At the same time, let's acknowledge that Streamline Events is a for profit organization. I don't have a problem with that. I wish I could find a way to make money doing what I love and also contribute to charity. Don't you?
Now, consider that some may have a point that the Tri prevents them from getting where they need/want to go. Big deal you say. Well, yeah, it's not an hour or so, it's the better part of the day. Some view attending their Sunday morning church service with the same fervor as the triathletes view the competition. Some need to get to work, the beach, the dump, visit sick relatives, whatever. Competing priorities need equal respect.
So what can be done? The size of the event does make a difference: in 2007 Bill agreed to cap the entries at 700 but the 2010 website listed 950. Bill has agreed to cap the 2011 Tri at 850. Less people (athletes & spectators) = less impact.
In 2011 the novice and older competitors will be in the first waves. With those who take longer to finish going first the overall length of the event will be less. Shorter = less impact.
Chief Deluca is putting together a plan to increase police presence in problem areas and an increased effort will be made to educate the public of road closings. When one lane remains open to the public, athletes need to respect it and police need to enforce it. Planning/education = less impact.
Everything always comes down to the bottom line and USA Tri emphasizes the need for a direct benefit to the community. Streamline Events pays for police, fire, safety and makes a contribution to the Sandy Beach Assn. and in 2011 they will pay for DPW. That's overhead.
What's the benefit? The Tri says it's the people who come to town. Hmmm. Neither the Chamber nor merchants have given me any concrete evidence or even hinted at any increase in business. Best case, "Maybe they come back." No national sponsors have opened businesses in town, and, despite Bill's assertion, Cohasset was "on the map" long before he and the Tri came along.
Is it good PR for the town? Sure it is but I'm not that altruistic. To his credit, with just a little prodding, BB is in the process of putting together an arm of the Tri that would award money to a local non-profit or town organization. Okay, that's a direct benefit.
See, we can play nicely together - athletes and couch potatoes and everyone in-between!
SCITUATE HAS SAME CONCERNS AS COHASSET RE AT&T CELL TOWER IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD
Seems we're not unique – yet again! Check this out in today's (Sunday 10/10) Boston Globe South: AT&T proposed cell tower in residential area, Scituate
Saturday, October 2, 2010
APPLYING BUSINESS METHODOLOGY IS EASY & EFFECTIVE
At last week's Budget Planning Group meeting the Water Commission submitted a statement of revenue, expenditures and changes in the fund balance, FY 2011, August 31, 2010.
Mostly due to the dry summer, the numbers look good but more importantly our new commissioners, Chris Seebeck and Peter DeCaprio, have been using their financial experience and acumen to establish a consistent methodology and reporting format along with a normal management process and reporting from the Commission consistent with the Town's financial office.
The Commissioners plan to establish a more corporate reporting format and to produce financial reports to Town Hall on at least a monthly basis with a goal of weekly reporting.
In the past there's been a lot of bleeding between capital and operating expenditures but no longer. While the revenue side is easy, sorting though the expenses has been challenging.
Previously up to 50% of the processed water was not billed. Through increased efforts the Commission has identified 5 illegal connections. Imagine citizens in our community deliberately bypassing their water meters. Shame, shame. Efforts to detect and fix leaks have also made a difference. Now almost 85% of the processed water is billed!
They're aggressively examining the contract with American Water and visiting neighboring water plants talking with their counterparts. Expect recommendations soon as to the future operations of the water plant.
Once Chris and Peter are done with water, I want to shift them over to sewer!
On a related note, the audit is progressing nicely with both the water and sewer commissions as well as the finance department cooperating fully with the auditors. Everything looks to be on track for a report to the November Town Meeting.
Mostly due to the dry summer, the numbers look good but more importantly our new commissioners, Chris Seebeck and Peter DeCaprio, have been using their financial experience and acumen to establish a consistent methodology and reporting format along with a normal management process and reporting from the Commission consistent with the Town's financial office.
The Commissioners plan to establish a more corporate reporting format and to produce financial reports to Town Hall on at least a monthly basis with a goal of weekly reporting.
In the past there's been a lot of bleeding between capital and operating expenditures but no longer. While the revenue side is easy, sorting though the expenses has been challenging.
Previously up to 50% of the processed water was not billed. Through increased efforts the Commission has identified 5 illegal connections. Imagine citizens in our community deliberately bypassing their water meters. Shame, shame. Efforts to detect and fix leaks have also made a difference. Now almost 85% of the processed water is billed!
They're aggressively examining the contract with American Water and visiting neighboring water plants talking with their counterparts. Expect recommendations soon as to the future operations of the water plant.
Once Chris and Peter are done with water, I want to shift them over to sewer!
On a related note, the audit is progressing nicely with both the water and sewer commissions as well as the finance department cooperating fully with the auditors. Everything looks to be on track for a report to the November Town Meeting.
BoS AGENDA Monday October 4
REPRESENTATIVE GARRETT BRADLEY will give the Board a legislative update from Beacon Hill.
PILGRIM BANK - Frank Campbell will give a presentation on the building project
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - Tim Chamberlain will review the 2010 Cohasset Day celebration, ask that Lydia Everett and David Greaney be appointed to the committee and update their efforts in marketing Cohasset to business.
SPECIAL TOWN MEETING ARTICLE REVIEW -
Defferal of Water & Sewer Use Charges - Deputy Assesssor Mary Quill
Beach Street Easement - Town Manager
Community Septic Management Program - Board of Health
TRIATHLON - Bill Burnett will revisit the concerns previously expressed by the Board
POLICIES - the Board will consider adopting policies for town government
TOWN MANAGER SEARCH - the Board will review a proposed ad
PILGRIM BANK - Frank Campbell will give a presentation on the building project
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - Tim Chamberlain will review the 2010 Cohasset Day celebration, ask that Lydia Everett and David Greaney be appointed to the committee and update their efforts in marketing Cohasset to business.
SPECIAL TOWN MEETING ARTICLE REVIEW -
Defferal of Water & Sewer Use Charges - Deputy Assesssor Mary Quill
Beach Street Easement - Town Manager
Community Septic Management Program - Board of Health
TRIATHLON - Bill Burnett will revisit the concerns previously expressed by the Board
POLICIES - the Board will consider adopting policies for town government
TOWN MANAGER SEARCH - the Board will review a proposed ad
NIMBY OR NOT?
The objection to the reduction of the water department's easement at 100 Pleasant Street, their desire to relocate that easement to town-owned land off Reservoir Road, and the proposed cell antennas on the Bear Hill water tank may appear unreasonable. Let's take it step by step and see if this is simply another NIMBY issue.
1. Everyone agrees the Water Commissioners and the property owner had the right to relocate the original easement. What is in question is whether they had the right to reduce the easement from 30' to 12'. Some legal opinions differ with Town Counsel and view this is as an abandonment which cannot be done without the approval of a 2/3 vote of town meeting and is therefore an illegal contract. Since no one wants to negatively impact the property owners what the legal remedy would be presents a Gordian Knot.
2. The Water Commissioners stated the reduced width was sufficient for their use and would not negatively impact the use of the easement. This is disingenuous at best: they knew they needed to get large trucks up the easement periodically to clean out the water tanks and they were already in negotiations with ATT & Verizon which require a construction access greater than 12'.
3. The law allowing for the relocation prohibits it from (a) significantly lessening the utility of the easement, (b) increasing the the burdens on the town in its use and enjoyment of the easement, or (c) frustrating the purpose for which the easement was created. I think it does all three but you decide for yourself.
4. Did the WC use the need for a wider access for the cell carriers and dangle the carrot of $20,000 per carrier (as of now only ATT has a contract) as an incentive to have the BoS approve the new easement location? Proponents of #1 think the WC should live with their decision and its consequences. Certainly the reduction benefited only the developer.
5. We need better cell reception in Cohasset but at what impact to a neighborhood? It's not simply a matter of a few antennas on the water tank. It's accessory compounds (40' x 25' per carrier since they refuse to share) with transformers, propane gas tanks, high voltage electricity, HVAC systems and generators all surrounded by a 7'6" wire fence topped off by 1' of barbed wire and signs warning not to proceed closer as radio frequency fields may exceed FCC regulations. (see photo of compounds at TOD cell tower or better yet visit the site and listen to the constant hum of electricity and the recycling of the HVAC units) Just what we'd like next to our homes, right?
7. Why does this differ from the cell installation at the 1st parish? Everything is concealed within the building and has no visible impact on our Common or abutters. BTW I'm told that before ATT contracted with the WC they were in negotiations with St. Stephen's. Wonder why that deal fell apart.
6. ATT went before the ZBA in an informal hearing and convinced them it was okay to put this commercial installation smack dab in the middle of a residential area. In all fairness I haven't talked to the ZBA yet.
7. Some legal opinions again differ from TC and state the WC does not have the legal right to enter into a contract with ATT or Verizon as their authority is linked directly to the conveyance of water. They do have the right to manage structures as they deem in the best interest of the town but does that extend past maintaining and operating the structures? I believe the authority to enter into such a contract lies with the town.
8. The new WCs are working and succeeding at straightening out the water enterprise fund. It looks like the dry summer will result in a surplus. Is $20,000 a year worth so negatively impacting a neighborhood? The Scituate water tower is available. St. Stephens is still available. Options exist.
This is really a test of what we value more: the character of our community or cell phones.
ENVIRONMENT VS. ABUTTERS YET AGAIN
Last week the Conservation Commission held its first hearing on the permitting of the Cat Dam NOI including an O&M (operating and management) plan for the tidal gate. Frankly, I was disappointed in the quality of the town's engineering consultant's presentation. Fortunately, representatives from some of the environmental regulatory entities were in the audience and filled in the gap at the time and with a subsequent email addressing questions posed by ConCom. More disappointing is that politics are still playing a role in this important decision.
I successfully lobbied the BoS to have this issue moved to ConCom quite specifically to place it with a permitting board whose decisions would not be influenced by politics but based solely on federal, state and local regulatory laws.
Inner Little Harbor does not meet the water quality standards for SA classified waters and the many professional reports to date attribute this to the lack of tidal flushing due to the limited opening of the tide gate/dam.
ConCom's first and only priority is to uphold the environmental regulatory laws: politics have no place in their deliberations. Their decision must be based on data, fact and law and it must hold the environment above the vested interests of abutters.
Now that's not to say that whatever decision is made should be punitive to the abutters; nobody is suggesting that. Nor can it be punitive to the environment.
So, realistically, some compromise must be achieved that satisfies the law, achieves a higher water quality for ILH (which both sides profess to desire), allows for future improvement in water quality and yet does not unreasonably affect the abutters.
Herein lies the problem. Abutters who champion the environment are willing to agree to an adaptive management plan that has oversight by representatives of environmental regulatory entities and abutters. Others argue for the status quo (a recurring theme in Cohasset) and have retained an attorney to represent their interest and promise a law suit if the decision is not to their liking.
I have great respect and admiration for our Conservation Commission and have every confidence they will make the right decision despite this unacceptable intimidation. If they don't, most likely the EPA will step in and impose an O&M independent of local considerations.
I successfully lobbied the BoS to have this issue moved to ConCom quite specifically to place it with a permitting board whose decisions would not be influenced by politics but based solely on federal, state and local regulatory laws.
Inner Little Harbor does not meet the water quality standards for SA classified waters and the many professional reports to date attribute this to the lack of tidal flushing due to the limited opening of the tide gate/dam.
ConCom's first and only priority is to uphold the environmental regulatory laws: politics have no place in their deliberations. Their decision must be based on data, fact and law and it must hold the environment above the vested interests of abutters.
Now that's not to say that whatever decision is made should be punitive to the abutters; nobody is suggesting that. Nor can it be punitive to the environment.
So, realistically, some compromise must be achieved that satisfies the law, achieves a higher water quality for ILH (which both sides profess to desire), allows for future improvement in water quality and yet does not unreasonably affect the abutters.
Herein lies the problem. Abutters who champion the environment are willing to agree to an adaptive management plan that has oversight by representatives of environmental regulatory entities and abutters. Others argue for the status quo (a recurring theme in Cohasset) and have retained an attorney to represent their interest and promise a law suit if the decision is not to their liking.
I have great respect and admiration for our Conservation Commission and have every confidence they will make the right decision despite this unacceptable intimidation. If they don't, most likely the EPA will step in and impose an O&M independent of local considerations.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
I'M FROM VENUS; THEY'RE FROM MARS
Frankly, I think some of the other selectmen and I are talking about different issues or someone has given me a different set of facts. Really. Most nights I return home shaking my head. I must be talking in a foreign language because they look at me as if what I'm saying is incomprehensible. If I weren't so confident in my intellect this might be daunting.
For example, having previously received an opinion from town counsel that the town has no legal responsibility for stormwater flooding on private property*, last night I was trying to resolve the issue of just what the town is obligated to do under the Bigelow Easement to preserve the privately owned Treat's Pond in it's "natural state" which includes keeping its natural outfall open to Sandy Cove. (See Tinytown Unleashed for details of the discussion http://www.tinytowngazette.com/blog/)
Town Counsel opined that the BE allows the town to do certain things but doesn't obligate us. The property owners don't want us there. We don't have the obligation to be there. Why do we keep spending our limited resources (translated as our tax dollars) where we're not appreciated?
I think we should go to land court and find out what our legal rights are under the BE. If it turns out that we don't have any then I think the town should be relieved of it's obligation. It's not like it can be developed or filled in if the town isn't in charge. It's protected by the Wetlands Protection Act and local wetlands bylaws. We wouldn't be abandoning the environment; the Conservation Commission would exercise jurisdiction over it.
If we do have rights let's exercise them. One way or the other, let's do something other than continue to spend good money after bad.
My opinion is we should seek relief from the easement. It's a poorly written document that burdens the town without any benefit. What were the selectmen thinking when they accepted such a one-sided contract? It probably was clearer then as there was one property owner. No one foresaw the sale of the land and how the vested interests of new and multiple property owners would muddle the waters (sorry, pun not intended).
I'd like to resolve the issue even if it means making a hard decision. Others on the BoS don't seem to. I guess that's the difference between us. I'm from Venus; they're from Mars.
*Unless the town has a direct causal participation in creating it.
For example, having previously received an opinion from town counsel that the town has no legal responsibility for stormwater flooding on private property*, last night I was trying to resolve the issue of just what the town is obligated to do under the Bigelow Easement to preserve the privately owned Treat's Pond in it's "natural state" which includes keeping its natural outfall open to Sandy Cove. (See Tinytown Unleashed for details of the discussion http://www.tinytowngazette.com/blog/)
Town Counsel opined that the BE allows the town to do certain things but doesn't obligate us. The property owners don't want us there. We don't have the obligation to be there. Why do we keep spending our limited resources (translated as our tax dollars) where we're not appreciated?
I think we should go to land court and find out what our legal rights are under the BE. If it turns out that we don't have any then I think the town should be relieved of it's obligation. It's not like it can be developed or filled in if the town isn't in charge. It's protected by the Wetlands Protection Act and local wetlands bylaws. We wouldn't be abandoning the environment; the Conservation Commission would exercise jurisdiction over it.
If we do have rights let's exercise them. One way or the other, let's do something other than continue to spend good money after bad.
My opinion is we should seek relief from the easement. It's a poorly written document that burdens the town without any benefit. What were the selectmen thinking when they accepted such a one-sided contract? It probably was clearer then as there was one property owner. No one foresaw the sale of the land and how the vested interests of new and multiple property owners would muddle the waters (sorry, pun not intended).
I'd like to resolve the issue even if it means making a hard decision. Others on the BoS don't seem to. I guess that's the difference between us. I'm from Venus; they're from Mars.
*Unless the town has a direct causal participation in creating it.
Friday, September 24, 2010
COHASSET, INC. – TOWN MANAGER AS COO/CFO
Cohasset has a very strong Town Managers Act. The TM is the chief administrative officer responsible to the BoS for the effective management of the Town including the budget, personnel, collective bargaining, and litigation.
A pretty important person. So what skill sets and qualities should we be looking for in a our new town manager?
I suggest it's at least as important to have some business acumen as a knowedge of municipal law. Someone, maybe, who is a hands-on manager (different from micromanager) with expertise in turnaround situations. I say this because I am convinced we need to get over the 'municipal government' mindset and reevaluate how our 'corporation' is structured, budgeted and managed.
I don't have the business argot but there are a lot of you out there who do. I'd appreciate your input.
I know in my mind, heart and gut that this is without a doubt what needs to happen. What do you think?
A pretty important person. So what skill sets and qualities should we be looking for in a our new town manager?
I suggest it's at least as important to have some business acumen as a knowedge of municipal law. Someone, maybe, who is a hands-on manager (different from micromanager) with expertise in turnaround situations. I say this because I am convinced we need to get over the 'municipal government' mindset and reevaluate how our 'corporation' is structured, budgeted and managed.
I don't have the business argot but there are a lot of you out there who do. I'd appreciate your input.
I know in my mind, heart and gut that this is without a doubt what needs to happen. What do you think?
Thursday, September 23, 2010
BoS AGENDA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 28 (Revised from Monday, 9/27)
TREAT'S POND REDUX
The BoS will discuss the 1964 Bigelow Easement on Treat's Pond on Atlantic Avenue. Although Treat's Pond is privately owned, it requires the town to maintain the 'marsh pond' in it's natural state. The discussion will focus on what is the town's legal obligation, and what legal rights does the town possess.
100 PLEASANT STREET WATER EASEMENT
Attorney Virginia Brophy will explain her legal opposition to Town Counsel's ruling that the Water Commission had the right to reduce the easement from 30' to 12' without a 2/3 vote at Town Meeting. Town Counsel Lou Ross will be present to defend his ruling.
BoS meetings are held at 7pm in the Town Manager's office at Town Hall. Plan to attend or watch on Comcast, Channel 10 (Not available on Verizon)
TREAT'S POND REDUX
The BoS will discuss the 1964 Bigelow Easement on Treat's Pond on Atlantic Avenue. Although Treat's Pond is privately owned, it requires the town to maintain the 'marsh pond' in it's natural state. The discussion will focus on what is the town's legal obligation, and what legal rights does the town possess.
100 PLEASANT STREET WATER EASEMENT
Attorney Virginia Brophy will explain her legal opposition to Town Counsel's ruling that the Water Commission had the right to reduce the easement from 30' to 12' without a 2/3 vote at Town Meeting. Town Counsel Lou Ross will be present to defend his ruling.
BoS meetings are held at 7pm in the Town Manager's office at Town Hall. Plan to attend or watch on Comcast, Channel 10 (Not available on Verizon)
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
COHASSET, INC.
We need to get over thinking of Cohasset as 'municipal government': Cohasset is a 35 million dollar corporation.
Sure, we have municipal law but how is that any different that the laws that affect the banking/securities industry? Controlling legislature does not exist exclusive of good business modeling.
I've been advocating that we must look at how our town business and budget is structured. The first positive step was the creation of the Budget Planning Group but change in Town Hall is slow, very slow. I'm not very patient.
The selection of a new Town Manager presents us with a wonderful opportunity to take an objective assessment of how town hall operates and to initiate the changes necessary to best position Cohasset to succeed in a very challenging economic environment.
What we make of this opportunity is entirely up to us. We can continue to operate within our comfort zone or we can be bold and ensure Cohasset's future rests on solid management and financial practices.
Cohasset is at a crossroads. Change for change sake is of no value. Adapting to changing circumstances is essential to success.
Sure, we have municipal law but how is that any different that the laws that affect the banking/securities industry? Controlling legislature does not exist exclusive of good business modeling.
I've been advocating that we must look at how our town business and budget is structured. The first positive step was the creation of the Budget Planning Group but change in Town Hall is slow, very slow. I'm not very patient.
The selection of a new Town Manager presents us with a wonderful opportunity to take an objective assessment of how town hall operates and to initiate the changes necessary to best position Cohasset to succeed in a very challenging economic environment.
What we make of this opportunity is entirely up to us. We can continue to operate within our comfort zone or we can be bold and ensure Cohasset's future rests on solid management and financial practices.
Cohasset is at a crossroads. Change for change sake is of no value. Adapting to changing circumstances is essential to success.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)