Schools’ security upgrade is too
Published in the October 17, 2018 edition
By DAN TOMASELLO
LYNNFIELD — Better late than never.
After a 30-minute delay, October Town Meeting was able to reach the 175-voter quorum requirement on Monday and voters were able to take action on the 12-article warrant in an hour-and-a-half.
The majority of the debate centered on four articles that sought to amend the town’s General Bylaws that were designed to streamline Town Meeting.
Town Meeting approved Article 5, which will limit formal presentations to 10 minutes, 151-14.
Voters had a brief debate about Article 6, which sought to limit the number of minutes a person can speak on the floor.
In response to a question from Fernway resident Bob Miller, Town Counsel Tom Mullen said “what this means is if you speak once, you can’t speak longer than three minutes.”
“And if you want to speak a second time on the same question, you cannot do it so long as anybody else has their hand in the air who hasn’t spoken once,” Mullen continued. “And if other people want to speak but they have spoken once already, then it is up to the moderator to choose who among those wants to speak gets chosen and in what order.”
Evelina Emery, 10 Archer Ln., said she opposed Article 6.
“This bothers me a lot,” said Emery. “I think it’s too stifling. I find it undemocratic.”
After the discussion, Town Meeting approved Article 6 110-58.
Article 7 generated the most debate of the proposed Town Meeting changes. Article 7 sought to set a Town Meeting start time of 7 p.m. and end time of 10:30 p.m. unless the legislative body voted otherwise.
Patrice Lane resident Pat Campbell said she opposed Article 7.
“This article leaves us open to hurrying the meeting, especially the budget meeting,” said Campbell. “Let’s not make this meeting a rubber stamp. We need to finish Town Meeting’s business without being rushed.”
Town Meeting Study Committee Chairman Jack Adelson said the committee “was following a mandate” in order to make it more efficient.
“The reason why this came about is we conducted a survey, which was sent to 4,500 households with the Census,” said Adelson. “We got 1,300 surveys returned to us, and over two-thirds of the people who returned the survey were strongly in favor of finding ways to end the meeting sooner.”
Adelson said similar towns have implemented start times and end times for their town meetings.
“This is being done in a lot of towns without any issue,” said Adelson. “But if it’s not right for us, then it’s not. We do have the ability to extend the meeting. It’s up to the people in the room.”
Phillips Road resident Lyrel Gillette inquired why the Finance Committee opposed Article 7.
“It wasn’t a financial decision,” said Finance Committee Vice Chairman Tom Kayola. “We want Town Meeting to be more efficient to respect people’s time, and we think that Articles 5 and 6 get us there. We didn’t feel putting an artificial end time on the meeting when we have more town business to execute would be a wise decision.”
In response to a question from Durham Drive resident Ellen Crawford, Town Administrator Rob Dolan said it costs around $7,000 to put on a Town Meeting.
After the discussion, Town Meeting voted down Article 7 by a 109-57 margin.
Article 8, which sought to eliminate the opportunity to reconsider articles that Town Meeting previously voted on later in the meeting, also generated a great deal of debate.
In response to a question from Debston Lane resident Wally McKenzie, Mullen said Article 8 stipulated that “there could not be a motion for reconsideration voted on by Town Meeting” unless the town moderator determines specific “criteria is met.”
“It means there would no longer be that purely procedural kind of gamesmanship motion that we frequently see when somebody gets up and says ‘as a member of the majority of the last question, I move for reconsideration with the hope that my motion will fail,’” said Mullen.
“I don’t see how this is a dramatic improvement over what already exists,” said McKenzie.
While Campbell said she supported “controlling reconsideration,” she made a motion to amend Article 8 by removing the language “in the discretion of the moderator.”
James Quinn, 4 Wymon Way, said Article 8 “seems nothing more than a power grab by the moderator.”
“This article should be voted down,” said Quinn.
Town Moderator Arthur Bourque said Quinn’s claims were inaccurate.
“This is the work of the committee,” said Bourque. “It’s not my work. I wasn’t in the room when these were discussed. The committee went to a number of towns and chose to make this article. I fully expect I will not be the moderator forever and may not be the moderator next year. You never know.”
Adelson defended Bourque after Quinn made the accusation.
“When we put these articles together, the moderator insisted that we allow Town Meeting to vote on things such as extensions for speaking time and presentation time,” said Adelson.
After the discussion, Town Meeting rejected Campbell’s motion 120-41.
Trickett Road resident Wayne Perry urged residents to approve Article 8 as it was originally proposed.
“Reconsideration is used to game the system,” said Perry.
Town Meeting voted to approve Article 8 112-43.
Article 12 withdrawn
Lynnbrook Road resident Tina Floramo challenged the quorum for Town Meeting before voters had an opportunity to vote on Article 12. The article sought to rezone a parcel of land off Red Twig Lane from Residential A (RA) to Limited Business (LB) for the purpose of constructing a two-story building.
Bourque informed Floramo that, “if the meeting ends, we will have to come back Thursday night to address Article 12.” He noted Red Twig Lane resident Heidi Tourkistas was going to request Town Meeting to refer Article 12 to the Planning Board for further study. Subsequently, Floramo decided against challenging the quorum.
Melissa Sorrentino, 41 Fairview Road, blasted the proposed rezoning change.
“We wanted to stop the vote because we found out last week that they wanted to rezone all of the property next to our houses,” said Sorrentino. “They have been our neighbor for 35 years and told as few people as possible. And when in Lynnfield have they ever rezoned property before even coming up with a proposal. I don’t even want this referred to the Planning Board because if they were neighborly, they would have done that in the first place. They didn’t tell anyone.”
Atty. Jason Panos, who represents the Tourkistases, said the Planning Board held a public hearing on Article 12 on Thursday, Oct. 11.
“We heard the comments and concerns from the neighbors, and we would like to address them at a later time,” said Panos.
Town Meeting voted 124-38 to refer Article 12 to the Planning Board.
Additional articles
Voters approved Article 1 by a 174-1 margin, which transferred $456 from Free Cash in order to pay for legal advertisements in a newspaper.
Town Meeting passed Article 2 174-3. Selectman Chris Barrett explained that Article 2 would “raise and appropriate $44,995, transfer $180,000 from Free Cash, transfer $67,000 from EMS Retained Earnings and transfer $33,109.72 from existing fiscal year 2019 appropriation accounts.”
Dolan noted that Article 2 would allocate an additional $175,000 for patrolmen overtime that was needed due to a new patrolman in the academy and two patrolmen who were out on long-term leave. He said an additional $25,000 was needed in order to implement a new school security system. He said the new security system costs $75,000 and $50,000 had already been appropriated for the project.
“The new system is creating a card identification system for all the doors on Lynnfield Public Schools,” said Dolan. “It will provide enhanced security at all of our schools.”
Town Meeting approved Article 3, which will appropriate $400,000 from Free Cash for the purpose of constructing a new septic system that will be shared by the Lynnfield Public Library, Meeting House and Historic System. Dolan noted the Meeting House’s septic system failed recently, and Porta Potties have been used on the Town Common for public events.
“We have very serious issues with the septic system,” said Dolan. “I would rank the septic system at the library a D at best and the Meeting House is an F. It’s a serious issue. A combined septic system would address the issue for both buildings. We hope to start this project after the first thaw in April.”
In response to a question from Pillings Pond Road resident Dick Shafner, Town Engineer Charlie Richter said the library’s septic system dates back to the early 1960s. Dolan said the new system will be located near the Historic Center.
Town Meeting voted to take Article 10 out of order and voters approved it after Article 3. Mullen recalled when voters approved the re-codified Zoning Bylaw during the October 2017 Town Meeting, he said, “some things were inadvertently left out of the re-codification.”
“Most of them are fairly trivial, but one of them is the building height limit,” said Mullen. “Unless Town Meeting acts tonight, someone can build a skyscraper in Lynnfield. Since we are always in danger of losing our quorum, the selectmen believe it is worthwhile to take this article out of order and dispose of it.”
Subsequently, Town Meeting approved Article 10 163-10.
Town Meeting voted to indefinitely postpone Article 4, which would have accepted the Parsons Avenue Extension as a new public way. Selectman Phil Crawford noted residents aired concerns about the roadway’s condition during a public hearing held by the Board of Selectmen last week.
“There was insufficient time to meet the statutory requirement that a signed Order of Laying Out be available for examination at the Town Clerk’s Office prior to Town Meeting,” said Crawford. “As a result, this matter must be indefinitely postponed and will be taken up at a subsequent Town Meeting.”
Town Meeting approved Article 9, which amended the General Bylaws by requiring the October Town Meeting warrant to be posted in “at least six public places” for seven days before Town Meeting. The practice is currently undertaken for April Town Meeting.
Article 11 was also approved by Town Meeting. Mullen explained the new bylaw will give town committees, boards and departments the power to expend funds posted by developers and others in connection with projects without Town Meeting appropriation.
