(01/30/07)  The Select Board met Monday, January 29th.  All five members were in attendance:  Anne Awad, Hwei-Ling Greeney, Robie Hubley, Rob Kusner and Gerry Weiss.  Town Manager Larry Shaffer was also present.

Ms. Awad opened the meeting at 6:15 with the Question Period and Public Comment.  A man from eastern Massachusetts asked whether the Town would be willing to hang a Baby Safe Haven sign at the Fire Station.  Ms. Awad said that would need to be discussed.  She mentioned that Amherst's State Representative Ellen Story was a co-sponsor of the Baby Safe Haven legislation, and that Ms. Awad didn't think the sign request would be a problem.  The man had brought the sign to the meeting, and Ms. Awad requested that he leave it and his contact information with the Town Manager, so that the Board can let him know the eventual outcome.

Consent Calendar

Approving the minutes of the January 24th meeting was the only Consent Calendar item.  With some discussion of the details, the minutes were unanimously approved as amended.

Visions for Downtown Amherst Memo – Motion of Support

Mr. Weiss referred to last week's meeting and the discussion with the Town Commercial Relations Committee (TCRC) about Planning Director Jonathan Tucker's memo titled “Visions for Downtown Amherst.”  He said that the Board had planned to make a motion of support for the concept of the memo, as requested at that meeting by the TCRC Chair, but hadn't wanted to create the motion during that meeting.  Mr. Weiss drafted a motion, which stated the Select Board's acceptance and support for the memo as a template for future planning for downtown; that the Board would transmit it to TCRC and the Comprehensive Planning Committee to assist with their planning processes; and that it be understood that the Select Board's support was for the memo's general concept, and not an endorsement of its every detail.

Ms. Greeney expressed confusion as to why this was being addressed, in light of the motion they had approved last week and just discussed during the approval of the minutes – that the Select Board ask TCRC to review the progress of the Downtown Action Plan and recommend further action, after consideration of the December 18th 2006 memo from Jonathan Tucker.  She said that she thought that would be the end of the discussion until the TCRC came back to them with comments, at which point the Select Board would circulate the memo to other committees.

Mr. Weiss said that he had thought that TCRC Chair Mark Parent had wanted a motion of support that the Board had declined to give last week, and that the other motion was one of referral but not support.

Ms. Awad said that she didn't recall that they had planned to give it to the other committees only after TCRC saw it, and said that she thought it would be good to have a dialogue about the memo going on among all the relevant committees at the same time.

Mr. Hubley said that it was not necessary to reconstruct last week's actions, but to deal with the matter in front of them now.  He agreed that distributing the memo to all the relevant committees now was a good thing, but expressed a concern that there be no confusion among the committees that the Select Board was endorsing the document as a “finished product,” but rather that it was a good document for discussion. 

Mr. Kusner said that he considered the memo to be a draft or work-in-progress.  He felt the word “accept” in Mr. Weiss' motion was more appropriate for a document in final form, and suggested instead saying “support” and adding the word “draft.'  He agreed with the idea of sending the memo to the Public Works and Public Transportation committees now, and suggested that all the committees might work together on it with the Comprehensive Planning Committee. 

There was more discussion about the precise language.  Ms. Greeney suggested putting it on the agenda for next week so that they could be dealing with a new draft motion with the language in front of them, and Mr. Kusner agreed.  Mr. Hubley suggested that they share the memo with the other committees immediately and craft the wording of their support motion for next week.   That suggestion was accepted:  the memo would be shared with TCRC, the Comprehensive Planning Committee, the Public Works Committee and the Public Transportation Committee now and Mr. Weiss would draft a new motion of support for next week.

250th Anniversary Celebration – Pole Banners

Barry Roberts and Stan Ziomek spoke as representatives of the 250th Anniversary Committee.  Mr. Roberts said that they were there to seek the Select Board's support and approval, if it was needed, for the committee's plan to hang banners on light poles in town. He wanted permission to use the Town-owned poles, and support for approaching the utility companies that own the other poles.  He explained that Northampton had sold banners for its 350th celebration, and that it was a very successful way to raise money.  He said that the brackets from those banners remain and were now being sponsored by the Northampton Chamber of Commerce.  He said the committee is working on a logo for the celebration, and that it would be on the banners, and before the planning got too far along, they wanted to make sure it would be acceptable to the Town that the committee pursue this project. 

Mr. Ziomek said that the celebration will cost a lot of money – he suggested the parade alone might cost $100,000 – and that the committee doesn't want to ask Town Meeting for money, but rather intends to raise it all from activities such as this banner sponsorship.

Mr. Hubley said he thought it was a great idea and made a motion to support the plan as described in the memo from the committee.  Mr. Kusner seconded the motion and expressed his support as well.

Mr. Ziomek said that Hadley would be celebrating an anniversary that same year, so there would be some competition.  Mr. Weiss suggested dueling parades, and Ms. Awad asked if we might reenact our secession from that town.

Ms. Greeney said that she is liaison to the committee and praised its work and the banner idea.  She had questions about who would hang them and take them down, and who would be responsible for their maintenance.  She also was concerned about where they would be located and expressed a desire that they be tastefully designed and installed, and that they not create “visual pollution.”

Mr. Shaffer said the Town would take control of the banners, installing and maintaining them, for reasons of liability.  Mr. Kusner said the Design Review Board would probably have concerns similar to Ms. Greeney's.

Mr. Hubley asked whether the committee expected that the Town would take over the banners as Mr. Shaffer had described.  Mr. Roberts said that because they are a town committee, there was expectation that the Town would install and own the banners.  He said committee reps would return in the future once they have a recommendation for how many banners to install and at what locations.  Mr. Ziomek said that he had identified 500 possible poles on the main thoroughfares.  Mr. Kusner suggested that they also consider the outskirts of town, such as on Route 63 where Amherst meets Leverett, and said that he would like to see them all over town. 

The vote to support the banner proposal was unanimous.

Community Development Block Grant Policy Discussion

Ms. Greeney said she was bringing this topic to the Select Board in order to discuss the process of identifying the programs for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) application.  She said her intent was not to criticize the projects the Select Board voted to support last week, or to criticize the projects of Roy Rosenblatt, the Community Services Director.  She said she preferred to have a list of prioritized needs presented to the Board, along with information showing that a “needs assessment” had been conducted, leading to the specific recommendations.  She said that without a needs assessment it was difficult to evaluate the priority of the projects they had supported last week.  She mentioned that the deadline for this CDBG application was February 18th and wondered if it might not be too late to alter the application.  She praised Northampton's CDBG assessment process and action plan and the way the information is presented on that town's web site.  She said that a public hearing process would lead to more informed decision making.

Ms. Greeney said that Northampton uses CDBG money to fund local community service agencies, and referenced the proposed drastic cuts of Amherst's funding to such agencies in the FY08 budget plan.  She said that she would like exploration of the best use of CDBG funds for enhancing the lives of lower- and moderate-income families.  She wondered if it might be possible to support an Economic Development Director position for the Town, if that person were to focus on economic development for low- and moderate-income people, and support of social service programs that are proposed to be cut.

Mr. Kusner said that last year the Board had created the Community Development Committee, to which he thought Ms. Greeney was liaison, and asked if they had held such hearings and engaged in debate about what projects to fund.

Ms. Greeney said that a conflict of interest prevented her from being its liaison, but that she does stay in contact with them in order to understand their process.  She said that she thought that their charge to gather input to identify CDBG activities was not being fulfilled.  She said that her comments were not meant to be critical of the group, which she pointed out is in its first year of existence and is short one member, but said she felt there was room for improvement.

Ms. Awad said that the Town's CDBG status had changed this year and that we were no longer in the mini-entitlement status.  She said that Northampton is different, that they get more money and get it as an automatic entitlement, and 20% has to go to social service funding.  She said she didn't know the specifics of our new competitive model and how much can be allocated to social services and what types of need assessment are necessary.  She also said there are many databanks about poverty and demographics for determining needs assessment and that Mr. Rosenblatt couldn't have written the grant application without them.

Mr. Shaffer said he would research Ms. Greeney's questions of funding social services and the economic development position with this year's CDBG application and he would report back at the next meeting, but said he wasn't optimistic.   

Mr. Weiss said that he had asked a similar question during the recent CDBG discussion about funding social service agencies, and that Mr. Rosenblatt had explained that CDBG funds couldn't supplant money the Town was already paying to an agency; if they weren't being funded, they could be eligible.  He said that to be eligible, the agencies would have to go without Town funding for a year and could then receive CDBG funds.  Mr. Kusner agreed with Mr. Weiss' explanation and said that Northampton had probably been funding their agencies with CDBG money for many years.  Mr. Weiss said this might be the transition year for Amherst. 

Ms. Greeney said that the competitive process requires citizen participation, needs assessment and a review of program performance, all of which weigh heavily in CDBG scoring.  She said that Thursday's scheduled public meeting met the technical requirement and would help raise the scores, but would not meet the spirit of the requirement.  She suggested that if it is too late to change the process for this year, then to plan to address it next year.  She said that this is the second year she has raised the issue that citizen participation was inadequate and needs assessment was not being done in a satisfactory way, and that there is room for improvement.  Ms. Greeney said that the Town took CDBG money to fund the grant administration but hasn't put a person in place to do that work.  She said that Northampton has a CDBG administrator, and suggested that to be competitive Amherst needs to put resources behind this effort, noting that the grant money totals $600,000.

Ms. Awad strongly objected to the characterization that the Town took the money and wasn't being accountable for it.  She said that Mr. Rosenblatt's job description had been changed to reflect the percentage of his time devoted to CDBG administration, and that she believes the requirements are being fulfilled.  She said that because Mr. Rosenblatt wasn't at the meeting, he couldn't say how many public hearings had been held or describe the many ways that he was soliciting public input.

Mr. Shaffer said that the Town is regularly audited for CDBG expenditures and that there has never been a finding of lax administration.  He said that they will continue to watch it and that grant administration is very important because there is liability for non-compliance. 

Mr. Hubley asked if Mr. Rosenblatt was aware this would be discussed at the meeting and wondered if it was fair to do so without him there.  Mr. Shaffer said it was acceptable for the Select Board to discuss policy issues such as how to solicit public input, but said that for issues of past or future performance he preferred to have Mr. Rosenblatt be present. 

Ms. Greeney said that she didn't want to focus on the administrator but on getting meaningful public participation in the process.  She suggested that perhaps a plan outlining the process nine months in advance of the application deadline would allow people to read relevant documents, and consider the needs and the proposal.  She said she had e-mailed Mr. Rosenblatt and requested that he attend, but he declined. 

Town/UMass Police Mutual Aid Agreement

Mr. Hubley said that the documents the Select Board had in their packets represented the culmination of a process that had been going on for years.  He said that the Town and UMass had already had a Mutual Aid Agreement and that this new document revises and strengthens that agreement, broadening the purview of both departments to work together wherever needed throughout the town.  It specifies streets near the University that are traversed by large numbers of students and need additional policing.  He said that the new document meets the needs of both Amherst and the University, and he offered congratulations and praise to Amherst Police Chief Charles Scherpa and UMass Police Chief Barbara O'Connor, to Mr. Shaffer and Mr. Weiss.  He said the Memorandum of Understanding had already been signed by the police chiefs, and the Mutual Aid Agreement had been signed by UMass Chancellor John Lombardi.

Mr. Shaffer said that in regard to concerns raised by the Select Board at their last meeting concerning the possibility of UMass police cooperation with the FBI anti-terrorism task force targeting Amherst residents: that neither police department would undertake independent police activities in the other's jurisdiction without the knowledge and approval of that department.  He said that the Mutual Aid Agreement and the Memorandum of Understanding had been revised slightly from the versions they received at the last meeting.  He said that section 2.4 of the Mutual Aid Agreement strips out the specific references to contiguous streets and affirms the ascendancy of that document over the Memorandum of Understanding.  In section 5.1 of the Memorandum of Understanding, the term “significant” was added to differentiate significant activities from ordinary activities; only significant activities need to be reported. 

Mr. Shaffer said the two police chiefs had executed the Memorandum of Understanding and the Chancellor had executed the Mutual Aid Agreement.  He praised all involved.

Mr. Weis said that people have been asking him what the difference is between the new agreement and the former one.  He asked if Mr. Shaffer might read from it or make it available on-line for people.  Mr. Shaffer said he could do both.  He explained that sections 2.3 and 2.4 of the Mutual Aid Agreement are additions to the new document, and they give each department authority in the other's jurisdiction.  The Memorandum of Understanding is the plan detailing the implementation of the Mutual Aid Agreement and it is an entirely new document.

Mr. Kusner said that the addition of the word “significant” was significant, and predicted that it would save the police chief much paperwork.  He referenced last week's discussions about Town Meeting acts regarding compelled participation in FBI anti-terrorism task force work, and said those acts were resolutions, not bylaws, and hence would not have the force of laws.  He suggested that there might be language added to this and other Mutual Aid Agreements saying something to the effect that “nothing in this Mutual Aid Agreement shall be construed to authorize or permit police in one municipality enforcing or assisting with the federal police functions in the other municipality.”

Mr. Weiss asked Town Counsel James Masteralexis about the Select Board's desire to include such language, and wondered if that was something that could be worked out with the police in the Memorandum of Understanding. Mr. Kusner said that it might be helpful not just for this situation, but for other analogous situations with other towns around the state. 

Mr. Masteralexis said that he watched last week's meeting with the discussion of this issue, and had e-mailed with Mr. Shaffer to ask if this should be dealt with tonight.  He said he hadn't read the Town Meeting resolutions and hadn't been asked to do that.  He said the Memorandum of Understanding describes the implementation of better cooperation between the two police forces, and that if there were FBI investigation, the two chiefs would discuss it.  He said that the FBI has jurisdiction throughout the United States and that the wording of the resolution would have to be looked at, but that he felt the Select Board's concern was an issue of implementation between the two police chiefs.

Mr. Kusner said he understood that, and that there were issues of when police participation was obligated versus encouraged.  He reiterated the point about the Town Meeting resolutions not having the force of law, and suggested that some sort of codicil might be worth looking at for at least two of the Town's other Mutual Aid Agreements.

Ms. Awad said that there had been concern with a Mutual Aid Agreement that came before Town Meeting having to do with emergency preparedness, and that it had had language to the effect that it abrogated all other Mutual Aid Agreements.  There was concern for implications to the routine Mutual Aid Agreements having to do with things like ambulance and public safety calls.  She said that that previous document had made them cautious, so they were trying to be cautious now, but didn't want to undermine the document. 

Mr. Masteralexis said he would be happy to review the other agreements and make sure there is clarity among them.  He said the current one will take some time to iron out all the issues because it represents a combination and cooperation of different efforts.

Mr. Hubley asked if the issues might be handled with more generalized language, suggesting that any Mutual Aid Agreement would not abrogate the provisions of our Town bylaws.  Mr. Masteralexis said that could be added, and that any agreement the Select Board enters into cannot supersede the vote of Town Meeting.  He said that such language could be added if it would increase their comfort level.

Mr. Hubley asked whether such a language change would need to go back to Town Meeting, because it would supersede and apply to previous agreements.  Mr. Masteralexis said that it would.

Mr. Weiss said that despite some concerns with the language, he would prefer to sign the documents, shake hands, blow trumpets and let the Town Attorney handle these details.  Ms. Awad said she had the Chancellor's signature, and Chief Scherpa was present and ready to sign. 

Chief Scherpa said he was comfortable that the Select Board could move forward and sign the documents.  He said that section 5.4 of the Memorandum of Understanding addresses the concern because it says that if officers were involved in anything major, the other chief would have to be notified.  He said that he and Chief O'Connor agreed that neither wanted to be doing investigations in the other's jurisdiction.  He said that he and Deputy Chief Archibald had already signed the Memorandum of Understanding.

Ms. Greeney thanked Mr. Weiss and Mr. Hubley for their work on the agreement.  She then pointed out a section of the Memorandum of Understanding that was confusing because it lacked a punctuation mark.  Ms. Awad said that that document is signed by the chiefs, not the Select Board.  Mr. Masteralexis said that the chiefs have agreed to look at it every six months, suggesting the concern be fixed then.   Mr. Shaffer said he would be happy to take care of it.

Mr. Kusner thanked all for their participation and said it was an issue he had been concerned with since he was a candidate for the Select Board, and hopes it works well.  He said he was happy to sign at the meeting, but wanted an additional motion to deal with the issues of adding the language he had suggested to apply to past and future Mutual Aid Agreements.  He didn't think it had to go through Town Meeting, calling that cumbersome.  He didn't want such a motion to jeopardize the signing of the current document, and wondered if a separate motion would be better.

Ms. Awad said they were two separate actions and recommended having Mr. Shaffer manage the language concern because he retains Town Counsel.  Mr. Weiss agreed.

The motion to recommend adoption of the Mutual Aid Agreement passed unanimously.

Chief Scherpa praised Mr. Hubley's explanation of the process and Mr. Hubley said it had been a pleasure working with the Chief.  Mr. Weiss said that it was big moment for the Town.  The Chief and Mr. Masteralexis then shook hands with all the Select Board members.

Mr. Kusner then suggested that they support a motion to adopt a codicil to reflect the situation of local police being enlisted for Federal investigations.  Mr. Weiss suggested a friendly amendment that all Mutual Aid Agreements would have a codicil regarding respecting the resolutions of Town Meeting. 

The vote to approve the motion about the codicils was unanimous.

Announcements

Ms. Awad announced that the Select Board would be addressing the question of a property tax override at their February 5th meeting and welcomed the community's input.  She said they would decide at the February 12th meeting whether or not to put an override question on the March 27th ballot for the annual election.  She said that the deadline for that decision is February 20th.  She talked about the Finance Committee's Override Report, which is available on the Town web site and gives explanations of Proposition 2 ½ and different override scenarios.  She said that the Select Board has a key role in that process and will listen carefully to the community in carrying out that role, and she encouraged active participation.  She also promoted the January 30th Budget Forum and urged people to attend or watch it on ACTV.

Committee Appointments

There were no committee appointments.

Town Manager's Report

Mr. Kusner mentioned discussion of longer durations for the parking meters near the Amherst Cinema and said that Town bylaws require public hearings to do that.  He said he didn't know if that would be part of the Town Manager's report.

Mr. Shaffer said that he was going to ask for such a public hearing to be held at the next Select Board Meeting, in order to extend the time for parking in the Amity Street lot.  He said some people going to the movies are coming out and finding their cars ticketed and that has the lot functioning at cross-purposes with its location.  He said they have been trying to handle people in that situation favorably through the appeals process.  He said a proposal is circulating on the Internet suggesting that “no tickets” is a good idea.  He said he hoped to make the change by administrative fiat but forgot that his role was not policy but advice, and that he hoped to make the change as quickly as possible.

Mr. Hubley said that extending the time would let people have a cup of coffee and explore other shops after a movie.

Mr. Kusner said the bylaw requires such a hearing to be advertised with two-weeks notice.  Mr. Shaffer said he would be happy to hold the hearing in accordance with the bylaw and will make sure the appropriate committees, such as TCRC's parking sub-committee, were advised.  He thanked Mr. Kusner for pointing out the bylaw details.

Mr. Weiss moved to hold a public hearing on the issue of extending meter times in the Amity Street lot at the earliest possible Select Board meeting.  The vote to support was unanimous.

The meeting adjourned at about 7:50.

-- Stephanie O'Keeffe