(1/27/08) The Select Board met Monday, January 14th at 6:30 p.m. at Town Hall.  Gerry Weiss, Hwei-Ling Greeney, Anne Awad and Alisa Brewer were present, and Rob Kusner was absent.  Town Manager Larry Shaffer was present and Gail Weston took the minutes for the meeting. 

Announcements and Agenda Review

Mr. Weiss announced that the Four Towns Regional School Committee meeting would be held Saturday, January 26th at 9:30 a.m. in the Amherst Regional Middle School auditorium. 

Ms. Greeney announced that the Select Board would sponsor a discussion about climate change and host a screening of the webcast “The 2% Solution,” on  Wednesday, January 30th from 7:00 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. in the Town Room at Town Hall.  She also announced two events on Saturday, February 9th:  Winterfest, sponsored by the Amherst Area Chamber and LSSE, from 11:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. at Cherry Hill Golf Course.  She said the event will feature winter fun, crafts, chili, ice sculptures and fireworks.  She also announced Soup and Song, an all-you-can-eat fundraiser that evening for Not Bread Alone, featuring soup and cornbread, from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at First Congregational Church.

Public Comment  (6:34)

Vince O’Connor expressed his displeasure with the closing of Town Hall for a snow day that day.  He said that all the downtown businesses were open, and talked about paying Town employees to not work in the midst of a bad budget situation.  He said the cost of paying the Town employees on a snow day was probably more than the cost of opening a Town swimming pool for the season or restoring LSSE subsidies, and he asked the Town Manager to provide him with an accounting of the cost of paying the Town employees for that day.  He said there needs to be “equity” between “providing days off” to employees and providing services to Town residents, and he said currently the Town is being “extremely generous” to employees while being “stingy” with services to residents. 

Ms. Greeney asked about the Town’s policy for snow days, and if the policy is to close when the schools close.  She said that knowing a policy would help residents to know whether or not Town Hall was open.  She referenced Town Hall being closed on December 24th and 25th, and asked if snow days were similarly part of the “benefit structure.”

Mr. Shaffer said closing Town Hall is not done to benefit Town employees, but is meant to keep cars off the roads and out of parking lots during snow emergencies.  He talked about speaking with Department of Public Works Superintendent Guilford Mooring early that morning, consulting forecasts, and the expectation that the School Superintendent would be closing the schools and that UMass would also be closed.  He talked about the gridlock on Route 9 during the last storm, when the Town and UMass both closed mid-day, and about the problems that created for ambulances getting to and from Cooley Dickinson Hospital, and said that situation “weighed heavily” on his decision.  He said that because Town Hall closes, it does not mean that work stops, and he said that he and most department heads were able to and did work from home.  He said that he understands that closing Town Hall is inconvenient for residents, and said he doesn’t intend to make such a decision “frivolously.”

PVTA  (6:43)

Mary MacInnes said she had intended to introduce herself to the Select Boards and City Councils in the PVTA service area when she first started in her position as PVTA Administrator a year ago, but that she had had so many problems to address immediately that she was only just starting to do that, and said that Amherst was her first visit.  She praised Ms. Awad for her service on the PVTA Advisory Board, and praised UMass Transit and its General Manager, Al Byam, for running PVTA’s “fixed routes” in this area.  She said that PVTA’s goal is to increase ridership, and noted Mr. Shaffer’s recent comments that bus stop amenities need to be upgraded.  She said that PVTA has some money to do that, and that he should let her know the location and type of amenity needed, naming shelters, benches, and trash receptacles among the options.

Ms. MacInnes talked about the issue of shoveling and plowing bus stops, and said that PVTA doesn’t have the ability to do that for “thousands” of bus stops across 24 communities.  She said she has sometimes asked bus stop abutters to shovel them out, as a courtesy to the senior citizens and disabled individuals for whom the snow creates particular challenges, and said she has had some success with that, and that it might work in Amherst.  She said she has also sought to use people from local jails and those with community service obligations.  She said that UMass is willing to have some of its people shovel the outlying bus stops within a few days of a storm if the Town might handle the downtown stops. 

Ms. MacInnes talked about past problems with the paratransit services, which she said represented a “deplorable situation” when she first started in her position.  She said that that area has been turned around, and is now headed up by someone experienced with paratransit services.  She said that the transition back to the Hulmes provider on December 15th had been carefully prepared for, and has been quite successful, with fewer complaints in its current early stages than the former provider had in its latest stages.  She said that ridership is still down as compared to before the contract switched a year ago, with ADA ridership down to 13,000 in FY07 from 15,000 in FY06, and senior service down to 18,000 from 22,000 for that same time period, which she attributed to the service quality problems under the previous contractor.  She said that steps will be taken to try to improve in those areas.  She said PVTA has a good relationship with Council on Aging and Senior Center Directors, and said that she had been told that Amherst’s Director (Nancy Pagano) had been “extremely helpful” during the rough times with the previous contractor.  She talked about the plan to hold meetings with riders to hear feedback, and about new software for tracking service complaints.

She said that funding for public transit is the agency’s major challenge, and that PVTA faces a $7 million deficit, and that that is after having cut service by 22%.  She said her goal is to not reduce service further and to work diligently with the State to restore funding to adequate levels.  She praised a bill put forth by State Senator Stan Rosenberg to forward-fund PVTA, rather than doing so in arrears, as is currently the situation.  She said that the State now has a Secretary of Transportation with experience in mass transit, and who supports the program and its proper funding, and she said that was a positive development.  She said that the Secretary has a “compact” with the Regional Transit Authorities (RTAs) to receive quarterly updates from them on budgets and service changes, and said all the RTAs have signed the compact.

She talked about planned regional meetings with riders to talk about transit issues; the hope of having “intelligent transportation systems,” with real-time information at major bus stops and service announcements for those who are visually impaired; and general improvements in community outreach, all as ways of seeking to boost ridership.

Mr. Shaffer praised her work and said that Amherst takes public transit seriously.  He said he and Mr. Byam of UMass transit would be trying to find a mutually agreeable solution to handle trash pick-up and snow issues at bus stops, and wanted the Select Board to know that such issues are being pursued.

Ms. Greeney talked about her desire that bus stops be clean, comfortable and safe, like airport lounges.  She said that Amherst’s public transit ridership for employees commuting to work is 7%, and said that figure is lower than the national average of 12%, and said she hoped that could be taken as a challenge to increase ridership in this era of global warming. 

Ms. MacInnes said Amherst’s figure of 7% that Ms. Greeney cited is actually very good for a town of this size, and said the national number includes big cities like New York and Boston.  She said that the goal is still to do better.

Ms. Awad praised the PVTA’s Marketing Director for doing direct outreach to riders, and said that a presentation had been made at her workplace. 

Mr. O’Connor asked that a figure be provided as to what it would cost to make a direct payment to PVTA such that Amherst could return to fare-free status again, so that there could be discussions around such an amount.  He asked that there be discussions with the Public Works Committee and the Public Transportation and Bicycling Committee about where bus pull-offs should be located for improved safety and traffic flow.  He said that Amherst and surrounding communities would take action to support the legislation Ms. MacInnes talked about, and suggested she let the Select Board and others know about its status.

Ms. Greeney said that a reliable way of dealing with shoveling and plowing of bus stops was needed, and asked if Mr. Shaffer intended to rely on PVTA’s “good will,” or if he planned to address the issue directly.

Mr. Shaffer said such issues require planning and resources, and are not matters of “good will.”  He said that he and Mr. Byam and Mr. Mooring will be talking about the logistics and costs, and said that such efforts and improved amenities were necessary to elevate public transit ridership to a level equal to the support for individual autos, but said that that requires money, effort and planning. 

Ms. Greeney asked about a timeline for a short-term and long-term plan.  Mr. Shaffer said there is no timeline currently, but that he will report back when he has more information.

State of the Climate Document  (7:15)

Ms. Awad said that Amherst is a member of the International Cities for Local Environmental Initiatives, a group addressing global warming and climate change prevention.  She said that the group was seeking all the members’ endorsements of a State of the Climate document that would be released at President Bush’s State of the Union address.  She said it includes a disclaimer that says that signing the document does not imply endorsement of the President’s climate action project.  She said that if there were a motion to support this, then Mr. Weiss needed to e-mail the organization by the next day.  The vote to support endorsement of the State of the Climate document was 4 in favor, 1 absent.

DPW Issues:  Traffic Calming  (7:19)

Mr. Mooring said that the data collected from the traffic calming experiment on Lincoln Avenue and Sunset Avenue is being analyzed, and that a report will be given to the Town Manager at the end of the month.  He said that the intersection of Strong Street and East Pleasant Street would get traffic counters in the spring, because they can’t be used in the winter.  He said he wasn’t aware of issues at Canterbury Lane and Appplewood.  He said that it needs to be determined if there will be a policy for how to deal with traffic calming in general or if each situation will be dealt with individually.  He said that when the data is presented, the recommendation will be to create a policy.  He said that fire routes should be identified and determinations should be made about which traffic tools can be used in which areas, and said that that should set parameters for use in future decision making.

Mr. Weiss agreed that a policy was needed.  He said “given the number of accidents” at Strong and East Pleasant Streets, he questioned whether a traffic study was needed before action could be taken.  Mr. Mooring said a study is needed, and that when one was done six or seven years ago, it showed that a traffic light was not warranted.  Mr. Weiss asked if there were other measures that might be taken if a study still suggests a light is not needed.  Mr. Mooring said that efforts could be made to improve the visibility of traffic control devices, that police enforcement could be increased, and that there could be a public education campaign aimed at reminding people that the intersection is particularly busy during the morning and evening commute times. 

There was discussion about why part-time traffic lights are not advisable, and how people get confused not knowing if the light will be working or flashing, and how that makes the situation more dangerous. 

There was discussion about a street light needed by Canterbury and Applewood, and what the costs of the fixture and its electricity would be.  Once Mr. Mooring has that information, Mr. Shaffer said that he expects the recommendation to the Select Board will be to approve the light.

Ms. Greeney asked what sort of policy recommendation might come from the Lincoln Ave. traffic calming experiment.

Mr. Mooring praised Town Engineer Jason Skeels and students in the UMass Traffic and Transportation studies program for their hard work on the project.  Mr. Shaffer said he would be meeting on the issue that week, and said that reaching agreement on public safety needs with the Fire Chief was necessary. 

DPW Issues:  Fearing Street Light

Mr. Mooring recommended that the light at Fearing Street and North Pleasant Street be removed, and replaced with a stop sign on Fearing.  He said that a PVTA study had confirmed that a light was not needed there, and said a lightning strike broke the controller a couple of years ago and that it has been a flashing light ever since. 

Ms. Greeney asked why the light was installed originally and if the traffic situation had changed.  Mr. Mooring said he didn’t know when it was installed, and that there does not appear to have been a traffic study conducted first.  Mr. O’Connor said he thought it was installed in the late 1970s or early 1980s, and was intended to help those on Fearing turn left on North Pleasant, but that most turn right there, and that there was no way to keep those turning right from unnecessarily tripping the light. 

Ms. Awad moved that the light be removed and replaced with a stop sign on Fearing.  The vote to support the motion was 4 in favor, 1 absent. 

DPW Issues:  Atkins Corner

Mr. Mooring said that the Atkins Corner project is at the 25% project stage, and is awaiting an official public hearing with Mass Highway.  He said there has been an informal public hearing and two design charettes already, and much public and neighborhood involvement.  He said that this would be a helpful time to have the Select Board send a letter to Mass Highway about the Select Board’s support for the project, and its desire to have construction occur in a timely fashion and to not stretch out too long, so as not to unduly inconvenience the business community. 

Ms. Awad suggested that Mr. Shaffer help draft that letter.  She said she has been attending meetings about this project for eight years and wanted to see it move forward, and for the Select Board to do whatever it needed to do in order to assist with that.  

Mr. O’Connor talked about issues he had raised with the Public Works Committee regarding his concerns about how bike lanes and crosswalks interact with the proposed roundabouts.  He said he had recommended that there be an agreement with Atkins to not allow customer parking across the street, such that people will be crossing the busy road with grocery bags.  He said he had also recommended that Town, State and Federal entities work together – through land acquisition or conservation restrictions – to prevent curb cuts for additional residential or business activity between the roundabouts, which he said was a safety issue.

Mr. Mooring said that Mr. O’Connor’s suggestions would be part of the hearing with Mass Highway.  He said that negotiations with business owners are ongoing and have been positive, and said that some financial compensation to those businesses might be necessary.

Mr. Shaffer said he will draft a letter, and would have done so already but wanted to hear the Select Board’s comments first.

DPW Issues:  University Drive

Mr. Mooring said that a change to the stretch of University Drive between Amity Street and Route 9 has been discussed for about four years.  He said that after much study, two proposals had been put forth: one envisioned a “boulevard” featuring a treed center island, with one or two lanes on either side; the other featured making the road three lanes wide with a center turn lane.  He said that the first was not well-received by the public or the business community, and that the three-lane scenario was the preferred option.

Mr. Mooring said that that stretch of road divides into three separate parts as far as use and redesign are concerned:  the Big Y section, the Amity Street intersection, and the middle span connecting the two.  He said that no satisfying proposal exists yet for the middle section, and said that the other two parts can be dealt with such that the options for the middle remain open.

He said that the proposal for the Big Y part is to do away with the “double intersection” created by the service road that parallels that section of University Drive.  He said that would be done by blocking the service road and making the Big Y entrance a regular “T” intersection, with a traffic light, which he said would need to be coordinated with the Route 9 light, operated by Mass Highway. 

At the Amity Street intersection, Mr. Mooring said the options were to install a roundabout or to widen the intersection and add left-turn lanes.

He said the proposals have been brought to all the relevant committees.  He had intended to show the Select Board a map projection of the options, but technical difficulties prevented that.  A motion of support from the Select Board was deferred until maps of the plans were available. 

There were questions about bus stop changes and whether traffic would back up into the parking lot of the medical facilities across from Big Y, both of which were issues Mr. Mooring said still need more study. 

Rob Crowner, Chair of the Public Works Committee, said he was speaking as an individual and not on behalf of that committee.  He said that what happens on University Drive also impacts Lincoln Avenue, and said University requires a free-flow of traffic so that Lincoln is not being used as an alternative.  He also said that the Public Works Committee had recommended the Amity and University proposal, but that he was in the minority objecting to it because he felt that a decision there would reduce the future options for the middle section and should wait until there is a plan for that part too. 

Mr. Mooring said that either the roundabout option or the wider intersection option could join with a new option for the middle section, and said that the wider intersection used the most space and did not preclude other possibilities.

DPW Issues:  Downtown Sidewalk Update

Mr. Mooring said that plans were completed for downtown sidewalk work.  He said that the section in front of the post office was finished, and that work to the north would proceed after the snow ends.  He said that a survey has been conducted on the west side, by the fire station, and that the goal is to have that whole area done before the parade for the 250th anniversary celebration in 2009. 

There were questions about different sidewalk elements in front of CVS and SouperBowl.  Mr. Mooring said the Town is talking with the property owners in those areas in order to incorporate their interests as well, and said he would be back to the Select Board in the future with plans for that area.

DPW Issues:  Sidewalk Snowplowing (8:03)

Ms. Greeney said she had asked Mr. Mooring how much it would cost to plow all the sidewalks in town.  She said she was told that currently about half are plowed at a cost of about $2500 per storm, and that if all 61 miles of town sidewalks were plowed, that cost would approximately double. 

Ms. Greeney talked about it being difficult for some people to shovel, and the safety issues that result for pedestrians.  She said that a neighbor of hers had fallen on an icy sidewalk recently and said that the associated medical expenses are well in excess of what plowing would have cost.  She asked that the Select Board make it a policy to plow all sidewalks, and to ask that that be accounted for in the budget. 

There was discussion about what sidewalks are currently plowed, how that has changed over time, and how long it would take to do all of them.  Mr. Mooring said that two additional pieces of equipment would be necessary to plow all the sidewalks, and said that those pieces cost $90,000 each, and that an additional piece is already needed to replace current equipment.  Mr. Mooring said he would also need more employees, at least during the snow season, to accomplish this. 

Mr. Weiss noted that it is not just a matter of deciding to plow all the sidewalks – there are capital and staffing needs associated with such a decision.  Ms. Greeney said that she understands the other expenses, but said that it is the Select Board’s role to determine policy.  She said that the policy should be to ensure safe travel for pedestrians on sidewalks just as safe travel is ensured for vehicles on roads, and that it is a matter of safety and equity. 

Mr. Mooring said he is still looking into ways this might be done in a less expensive though slower manner, and will determine a cost for that if it the approach seems feasible. 

Charles Moran said that he walks around Amherst, and cautioned that plowing does not ensure safe sidewalks.  He said that sidewalks need to be tended and salted, because they quickly become icy.  Ms. Greeney said that that should be the responsibility of abutters. 

Mr. Weiss reiterated his point that such a decision has budget implications that would need to be worked out, and Ms. Greeney reiterated her belief that the Select Board should be expressing itself on a policy preference, and said that the budgeting should then be prioritized for FY09.  Ms. Awad said it is an issue that many feel strongly about, and that she doesn’t think there are sufficient resources available to plow all the sidewalks currently, and suggested stepping up enforcement of fining property owners who fail to clear their sidewalks.  Ms. Greeney said that people don’t want to report their neighbors for non-compliance, and that even when they do, the process of reporting, warning, and following-up takes too much time. 

Ms. Brewer agreed that it was a nice goal, but didn’t think the resources were available and asked Mr. Shaffer for his recommendation on how to proceed.  Mr. Shaffer said that sidewalk plowing is an important thing for the Town to do, but that it can’t do so without the necessary resources. 

Mr. Mooring said that the plowing equipment is part of the DPW’s capital request.  The discussion wrapped up without any decisions or motions. 

Proposed Bylaw Change for False Alarms (8:26)

Mr. Weiss said that the resident seeking to make this proposal was ill, and it would be taken up in February instead.

Mr. Weiss said that a joint meeting with the Finance Committee to hear the school budget presentations was likely for January 28^th.  Ms. Greeney suggested that February 4th would be a better date, because it would follow the Select Board’s February 2nd budget discussion. 

Special Municipal Employee Status for the Agricultural Commission

Agricultural Commission Chair Bob Saul said that Town Counsel had advised that the Commission seek Special Municipal Employee (SME) status due to potential inherent conflict of interest in having its member farmers and agricultural professionals make recommendations on agricultural issues.  Ms. Brewer noted for the public that SME provides some valuable protections and allows a committee member to go before another Town body on a related issue, but does not give blanket protection against conflict of interest, and said that disclosures and other precautions are still necessary.

The vote to approve granting SME status to the Agricultural Commission was 4 in favor, 1 absent. 

Ms. Brewer noted that, once granted, the status remains until it is revoked and does not require reapplication each year.  Ms. Awad noted that committee members appointed subsequent to the granting of the status are still required to read and sign off on the on-line conflict of interest document.

Town Manager’s Report  (8:29)

Mr. Shaffer said that an individual had contacted the Select Board and Town staff regarding the problem of where residents who live in apartments without parking spaces should park when on-street parking is not allowed due to snow.  Mr. Shaffer said that after consideration with Town staff, it was decided that there are so few instances of renters not having associated parking spaces that it was best to address this individual’s situation directly without creating a broader policy.  He said that this person was advised to park in the basement of the parking garage at night and to remove the vehicle before parking enforcement begins in the morning. 

Mr. Weiss said the situation made him wonder if the situation suggests a violation of the Zoning Bylaw, because he said that all apartments in town have special permits with parking regulations.  He said he was not averse to solving this individual’s problem, but said the situation raised a concern.

Mr. Shaffer said that he had not completed his research on this situation, and that sometimes it is best to not do so.  He said he was not aware of any violation with the rental situation, and said he would like to resolve this individual’s parking issue and “just move on.”

Ms. Greeney said that the downtown district has different parking requirements for businesses than other districts have.  She cited various apartment locations downtown which she said did not include parking and said that many renters there face this situation.

Possible Special Town Meeting for Budget and Override Discussions  (8:34)

Mr. Weiss said that the Budget Coordinating Group (BCG) sought to have a public forum to discuss the FY09 budget.  He said that a Special Town Meeting was considered the best way to bring the most people together for a discussion, and said that having warrant articles would be expected to bring out even more people.  He said that having forums at Bangs Center or the Library have typically brought out 20 to 30 people, and that they were the same people who regularly attend such meetings, and said that a Special Town Meeting would expand the discussion.  He said the topic would have been discussed earlier that day, but that the BCG meeting had been cancelled due to the snow, and was now re-scheduled for later in the week.  He said that if the Select Board agrees with the BCG’s suggestion, a warrant could be ready to be signed at the January 28th Select Board meeting.  Mr. Weiss then distributed draft warrant language to the Select Board members.

Ms. Awad said she found the concept of holding a Special Town Meeting for this purpose “interesting and innovative,” but said she was also “taken aback” by it, because she said that the checks and balances of budget development and approval make it confusing to have Town Meeting’s participation at this stage.  She acknowledged the low turnout at other kinds of public budget meetings, and said that she was uncomfortable asking Town Meeting to take a position on issues of override possibilities and budget allocations among the three budget sectors (Town, Schools and Libraries) which she said were matters with which the Select Board ought to be struggling. She said that Town Meeting plays a “crucial” role in approving the budget, and said that that was different from the Select Board’s budget role, and said that both should “perform those responsibly,” and not “put them off on to others.” 

Mr. Weiss said he did not see it as putting off the Select Board’s responsibility, but rather, that he saw it as an opportunity to hear from more people about what they want.  He said that it could help to improve the budget discussions in the spring, and would allow budget discussions to happen in a different way – more generally, and not about specific budget numbers.  He said he wouldn’t feel that there was strong Town Meeting support if the vote for an override was 89 to 88, but said that a result more like 130 to 50 would be significant.

Ms. Awad said that under Amherst’s model of government, the Town Manager struggles with and develops the Town’s budget, and said that the Superintendent of Schools does the same with the Schools’ budget.  She said that that needs to happen, and to then bring the budget to Town Meeting for final action.  She said that if a Special Town Meeting were to indicate the desire for significant budget changes, that would alter the sequence of budget creation and she said it would fundamentally change how the different entities work together in the budget process.  She said that for the system’s checks and balances to work, the Select Board needs to be careful to protect the Town Manager’s role in the process, and to then fulfill its own role with his proposed budget.  She said that the proposed Special Town Meeting would be confusing to many Town Meeting members, and said it is important to remember the Town Government Act and to “honor those intricate balancing relationships.”

Ms. Greeney praised the BCG for being innovative in seeking public input.  She asked if the intent was to have such input occur every year, and to do so before the Select Board has a chance to comment on the Town Manager’s proposed budget.  She said that if it is intended to be a permanent change to the process and to occur annually, then she wanted a discussion of what is wrong with the current process that requires such a change.  She asked if such a change would seek to have Town Meeting members represent the views of citizens instead, she said, of having the Select Board members do so.

Mr. Weiss said that the concerns he was hearing were primarily around the second proposed warrant article, and said he was concerned about that one also.  (The draft warrant language was not available to spectators.)  He asked the Select Board if the BCG were to request this Special Town Meeting, and the Select Board did not vote to approve that, should the BCG collect signatures to force the calling of a Special Town Meeting?  He said that would not be a “friendly” way for Town officials to work together.

Ms. Brewer agreed that the second draft article seemed to be the concern, and said that a discussion on that topic would probably require multiple Town Meeting sessions.  She said the first draft article addresses how big to cut the different slices of the budget pie, and the third draft article talks about how big that pie should be.  She said the current system of discussing such issues isn’t working, and that public meetings and comment gathering are not sufficient.  She said the proposal is seeking to gather more input and in more creative ways, and was not setting a precedent for the future.  She said that the BCG had been formed in order to better coordinate and communicate budget information, and that the group’s request for a Special Town Meeting seemed like a reasonable way to proceed.  She said that the voters did not elect Select Board members in order to have department heads providing them with budget priorities different than those provided by the Town Manager, and called that practice “broken.”  She said that the Select Board would be responding to the Town Manager’s proposed budget in early February, prior to any potential Special Town Meeting, and said that for the Select Board to not offer its thoughts on that budget until May, as she said was the case last year, meant that it was not doing its job, and said that that was not serving to “protect” the Town Manager’s budget. 

Ms. Greeney said that a survey done last fall of Town Meeting members and the public contains the information that the BCG is seeking, and said that that group should have access to the survey results.  She asked what the budget makers would do if Town Meeting were to seek large changes such as doubling spending or deeply cutting the Police Department, and if such results would be considered “advisory.”

Mr. Weiss said Ms. Greeney’s comments referenced draft article number two, and said he would request that BCG eliminate that one.  He said he agreed that the survey had addressed those issues, but did not address larger-scale reallocation or the concept of an override. 

Ms. Awad suggested that Town Meeting members might respond to an “urgent invitation” for a discussion, without calling them together officially for a Special Town Meeting.  Mr. Weiss said that discussion of how people would respond was addressed at the BCG meetings, and that calling a Special Town Meeting was considered to be the best option, because the body is larger than that which would gather for a public forum.  He said that the idea was to have a large public discussion; not for Town Meeting to come together to make new laws.  Ms. Greeney said that to call Town Meeting together for a discussion made her uncomfortable and said it might cause the Select Board to lose the credibility and trust of Town Meeting members.

Mr. O’Connor said that for Town officials to pursue new revenue sources is as important as determining how to divide the current resources.  He talked about various timing issues that he said made the Special Town Meeting idea problematic, including not knowing State budget and aid numbers, and not having completed the departmental budget hearings with the Finance Committee and the Select Board.  He said that another concern is “using the Town Meeting, more than one-third of whose members will be replaced at the annual election,” to give advice on a budget that will be acted on by “the new Town Meeting” in April.  He said that there would be anger and frustration at the Annual Town Meeting if budget priorities were inconsistent with those expressed at a February Special Town Meeting. 

Mr. Weiss said that the main point is to have a discussion, and that a warrant article is needed in order to call a Special Town Meeting to have such a discussion.  He said that the discussion was the purpose, and that it was not intended to specifically direct the Select Board’s actions.

Ms. Awad reiterated her concerns about using Town Meeting in the proposed capacity being inconsistent with the Town Government Act.  She suggested instead having a big community potluck supper with a meeting afterwards, and actively targeting Town Meeting members and many others to attend.  Mr. Weiss said he would bring that suggestion to the BCG, and asked if she wants the BCG to collect signatures if it still wants a Special Town Meeting.  Ms. Awad said that she did not have to answer that question.  Mr. Weiss pursued the point again.  Ms. Awad said that BCG exists within the structure of Town government and doesn’t have the power to call a Town Meeting on its own.  She said that if the Select Board won’t call the Special Town Meeting and the BCG wants that and pursues it by gathering signatures, she said that would be “unfortunate.”  She said that instead, all should seek to put together “the liveliest budget forum we’ve ever had.”

Ms. Greeney said that the Select Board has sponsored four successful budget forums with strong turnout, but that she didn’t know what became of the feedback and recommendations received at them.  She said that if the BCG were to gather signatures for a Special Town Meeting, it would cause a tail-wagging-the-dog scenario, and she too called that “unfortunate.”

Ms. Brewer said that it is important to have the facts be straight.  She said that the Select Board does not hold departmental budget hearings every year, and may or may not do so this year.  She said that a third of Town Meeting members have likely never been replaced in one election because most members run for re-election.  She said that the success of a budget forum is not measured by filling the room, and said that a budget forum where feedback and input are not utilized can’t be considered a success.  She said that Town Meeting has had articles advisory to the Select Board before, and that it is the Select Board’s choice whether or not to act on them, and said that the proposed meeting would not “short-circuit” the Town Government Act.  She said that there are three other boards represented on the BCG, and that if those boards feel strongly about this, then the Select Board’s opinion should not outweigh theirs.  She said that for the BCG to have to collect signatures to call a Special Town Meeting would be “horrible.”

Ms. Awad said that the “elephant in the room” is an override.  She said that she disagrees that recent budget processes had not been successful, and said the current tensions are being caused by the bad financial situation.  She said that last year’s budget process had gone particularly well, and praised the Town Manager for having been able to meet the Finance Committee’s guidelines with his budget when he had been so new to the job.

Mr. Weiss read the two relevant draft warrant articles for the benefit of the public:  the first was to see if the Town would recommend that the same budget revenue percentage allocations be used for FY09 as were used in FY08 and prior years.  The second outlined four different override options:  1) to have an override question in spring of 2008 to address the budget needs of the next three fiscal years, while the BCG and others continue to develop a long-term plan;   2) to have an override question to support FY09 only; 3) to do nothing now but to consider an override question for November; 4) to pursue no override for FY09.  Mr. Weiss said he would bring the Select Board’s comments back to the BCG for consideration.

Ms. Awad said she did not want to get into a confrontation and have the BCG seeking signatures for a Special Town Meeting.  She said that if that group opts for a community forum, she believes the Select Board and others should give it strong support, and said she would be enthusiastic about it and would work to try to get many people to attend. 

Mr. O’Connor expressed several concerns:  that BCG meets during the day when people are at work; that most of the boards represented are elected, while the Finance Committee is appointed; that he is unsure about how seriously the group will take the recommendations it receives; that the Finance Committee’s recommendations tend to be unanimous votes, and so forth.  Mr. Weiss said that Mr. O’Connor had strayed from the topic.  

Possible Special Town Meeting for Increasing the CPA Surcharge  (9:17)

Mr. Weiss said that he doesn’t feel the timing is right to seek an increase to the Community Preservation Act (CPA) surcharge on the April 1st ballot.  He said that if the topic is on the Annual Town Meeting warrant and it is approved, the question could be put to voters on the November ballot.  He said that Mr. Kusner had supported pursuing it for the spring, but now agreed that that timing is not good. 

Ms. Greeney said that she supports the idea of increasing the available match in State funds, but said she is unsure if voters would support a CPA increase so soon after the last one.  She said she is also concerned that the request has not come through the CPA Committee (CPAC,) and said she would want to hear that group’s recommendation.  She said she also feels that the current distribution of CPA funds is not the “most efficient,” and said that before talking about an increase in the surcharge, she would want to have a discussion about allocating more of the money for affordable housing.

Ms. Awad said she supports a 3% surcharge, but feels it should be pursued “in a measured way,” and said she supports a warrant on the Annual Town Meeting Warrant for a November ballot question.  She said she would like to have CPAC’s opinion and to have that committee look in to how other communities handle allotments of larger percentages, such as for affordable housing, and said she is interested in putting more resources toward that.

Mr. Weiss asked if anyone wanted to make a motion for a Special Town Meeting about a CPA surcharge increase, and no one did.

Carol Gray suggested that the Select Board ask the Town Manager and the Historical Commission, the Finance Committee, the Housing Partnership/Fair Housing Committee and others to consider their capital plans for the next five years to see what might be eligible for CPA funds, so that more is known about the potential uses of increased CPA money.  She talked about the ability to save the money for several years until a large amount is amassed, thus saving on borrowing costs.  She said that she has done some Internet research and found many creative uses for the CPA funds, including hiring consultants to initiate housing projects, set up housing trust funds and pursue grants. 

Mr. Weiss said those ideas were good, and that he favors the increase but that the Select Board is not inclined to put it in on the April ballot.  Ms. Gray said the CPA topic could be appropriate if the Select Board were going to hold a Special Town Meeting for another purpose.

Select Board Goals for the Town Manager  (9:25)

Mr. Weiss said it was too late in the evening to discuss goals for the Town Manager, and said that three Select Board members had submitted theirs on time, one was late, and one did not submit any goals.  He said that he would send the lists to Mr. Shaffer, and that a public discussion about the goals was still planned.

Ms. Brewer said that the Select Board ought to determine its goals for the Town Manager as a body rather than as individuals, and that it might allow for more community input.  Mr. Weiss agreed with the point about community participation, and suggested that the candidates seeking election to the Select Board might offer their goals for the Town Manager as well.

Special Liquor and Common Victualler Licenses  (9:30)

A special liquor license was approved for a casino night at Amherst College on March 1st in a vote of 3 in favor, 1 abstention and 1 absent.  Prior to the vote, Ms. Greeney said that she would not vote because she would be helping to organize the event, and some of its proceeds would benefit the program she works for, Not Bread Alone.

A Common Victualler license was approved for the Dunkin Donuts on University Drive in a vote of 4 in favor, 1 absent. 

Closing Discussion  (9:34)

Ms. Brewer said there were no committee appointments.

Ms. Greeney said that at the Massachusetts Municipal Association convention, she had cast Amherst’s vote with the majority in support of a resolution requesting that 40% of the State tax levy be distributed as aid to cities and towns.  She said that the proposal has been sent to the State legislature. 

Ms. Brewer said that she and Ms. Greeney would create a report about their experience at the convention, noting that they had attended separate workshops.

The meeting adjourned at 9:36 p.m.  The next regular meeting of the Select Board was scheduled for Monday, January 28th at 6:30 p.m. at Town Hall.

-- Stephanie O’Keeffe