|
Town Government & |
Departments: Town Clerk
210 Central Street Important Links : Town By-Laws (PDF, 408k) viewable with Adobe Acrobat Reader? software. Available free from the Adobe? website. Annual Town Meeting Articles - April 25, 26 2011 Download 2011 Town Warrant - PDF COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ARTICLE 1. To choose all necessary Town Officers, other than those to be elected by ballot, including the following: COMMENT: The Hannah Lincoln Whiting Fund was established in 1915 pursuant to the will of Ada B.W. Bacon in memory of her mother, “...to be expended in relieving the necessities of the deserving poor or unfortunate of South Hingham..." Grants from the income of the fund are made at the discretion of a committee of three members, one of whom is elected each year by the Town. As of December 31, 2010, the fund assets totaled $ 15,618.89 of which $618.89 was available for distribution. The principal of $15,000 is held in trust and is not available for distribution. RECOMMENDED: That Tereza Prime, 703 Main Street, be elected a member of the Committee to have charge of the income of the Hannah Lincoln Whiting Fund for a term of three years. ARTICLE 2. Will the Town confirm appointment of a Director for the Plymouth County Cooperative Extension Service in accordance with the provisions of the General Laws of Massachusetts, Chapter 128, Sections 41 and 42, or act on anything relating thereto? ARTICLE 3. To hear the reports of the following: Affordable Housing Trust; Animal Shelter Site Study Committee; Audit Committee; Capital Outlay Committee; Commission on Disability Issues; Community Preservation Committee; 2010 Committee to Review the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Town Government; Conservation Commission; Country Club Management Committee; Council on Aging; Energy Action Committee; GAR Hall Trustees; Harbor Development Committee; Hingham Historic Districts Commission; the Historian; Historical Commission; Board of Managers of Lincoln Apartments LLC; Long-Range Waste Disposal and Recycling Committee; Memorial Bell Tower Committee; Open Space Acquisition Committee; Public Works Building Committee; Regional Refuse Disposal Planning Committee; Scholarship Fund Committee; 2006 School Building Committee; Wastewater Master Planning Committee; and Water Supply Committee, or act on anything relating thereto. COMMENT: These are the existing posts, committees, councils, and commissions which were established by acts of Town Meeting. The Town is indeed fortunate to have many public-spirited citizens willing to work in these capacities. We thank them for their excellent service and recommend that all these posts and committees be continued, except that the Animal Shelter Site Study Committee be discharged with thanks. RECOMMENDED: That the reports, if any, of the Affordable Housing Trust; Animal Shelter Site Study Committee; Audit Committee; Capital Outlay Committee; Commission on Disability Issues; Community Preservation Committee; 2010 Committee to Review the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Town Government; Conservation Commission; Country Club Management Committee; Council on Aging; Energy Action Committee; GAR Hall Trustees; Harbor Development Committee; Hingham Historic Districts Commission; the Historian; Historical Commission; Board of Managers of Lincoln Apartments LLC; Long-Range Waste Disposal and Recycling Committee; Memorial Bell Tower Committee; Open Space Acquisition Committee; Public Works Building Committee; Regional Refuse Disposal Planning Committee; Scholarship Fund Committee; 2006 School Building Committee; Wastewater Master Planning Committee; and Water Supply Committee be received; and that all of said Committees, Commissions, the Council and the Historian be continued, except that the Animal Shelter Site Study Committee be discharged with thanks. ARTICLE 4. To hear the report of the Personnel Board appointed under the Classification and Salary Plan, or act on anything relating thereto. COMMENT: This article provides funds to pay for as yet undetermined financial obligations of the Town relating to salary increases, fringe benefit changes, and job reclassifications for non-School Department employees who either are not in a collective bargaining unit or who are covered by a collective bargaining agreement not yet concluded. RECOMMENDED: That the report of the Personnel Board, a copy of which is on file in the Town Clerk's Office, be accepted; that the amendments of the Personnel By-Law, including the Classification and Salary Plan, and any agreements reached by the Personnel Board in collective bargaining, which may be embodied or referred to in said report, be approved and adopted in their entirety, such approval and adoption to become effective July 1, 2011 or as otherwise specified in said report or agreements; that the Town raise and appropriate the sum of ARTICLE 5. Will the Town fix the salaries of the following Town Officers, viz: RECOMMENDED: That, subject to the proviso below, the salary from July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012 for each of the following officers shall be at the rates below stated or provided after the name of the office. Town Clerk1 and Treasurer/Collector in accordance with the compensation rates established in Grade 15 and Grade 17, respectively, of the Town of Hingham Classification and Salary Plan of the Personnel By-Law. ARTICLE 6. Will the Town raise and appropriate, or transfer from available funds, sums of money to defray the expenses of the Town for the twelve-month period beginning July 1, 2011, or act on anything relating thereto? See Full Budget in 2011 Warrant PDF File RECOMMENDED: That there be raised and appropriated for each of the following purposes for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2011, the sum of money stated therefor, provided that where a transfer appropriation is stated, the amount so indicated shall be transferred or specifically appropriated as stated; also that the authority is hereby given to turn in vehicles and equipment in part payment for vehicles and equipment purchased in those cases where a turn-in is stated; and provided that any amount or a portion thereof appropriated to a sub-account under and included in a numbered account as set forth below may be transferred to another sub-account under the same numbered account with the approval of the Board of Selectmen and the Advisory Committee. ARTICLE 7. Will the Town appropriate, from the receipts of the Hingham Municipal Lighting Plant, money for the maintenance and operation of the Plant for the 12-month period commencing July 1, 2011, pursuant to Sections 57 and 57A of Chapter 164 of the General Laws, and provide for the disposition of any surplus receipts, or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: The Hingham Municipal Lighting Plant is self-funding. Funds collected by billing customers are used to pay all expenses incurred by the Plant. RECOMMENDED: That, with the exception of $450,000, which is hereby transferred to the General Fund to reduce the tax rate, all funds received by the Municipal Lighting Plant during the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2011, be appropriated to said Municipal Lighting Plant, the same to be expended by the Manager of Municipal Lighting under the control and direction of the Municipal Light Board for the expenses of the Plant for said fiscal year, as defined in Sections 57 and 57A of Chapter 164 of the Massachusetts General Laws and, if there should be any unexpended balance thereof at the end of said fiscal year, such amount as is deemed necessary shall be transferred to the Construction Fund of said plant and appropriated and used for such additions thereto as may be authorized by the Municipal Light Board during the next fiscal year. ARTICLE 8. Will the Town assume liability in the manner provided by General Laws, Chapter 91, Section 29, as amended, for all damages that may be incurred by work to be performed by the Department of Conservation and Recreation of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for the improvement, development, maintenance and protection of tidal and non-tidal rivers and streams, harbors, tide waters, foreshores and shores along a public beach, and authorize the Selectmen to execute and deliver a bond of indemnity therefor to the Commonwealth, or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: The Department of Conservation and Recreation (“DCR”), as a matter of policy, requires the Town to assume liability if it is to perform any of this type of work within the Town. In accordance with the statute, the Town would assume liability for all damages to property sustained by any person as a result of such work performed by the DCR. RECOMMENDED: That the Town, in accordance with, and to the extent only permitted by, General Laws, Chapter 91, Section 29, as amended, assume liability for all damages that may be incurred by work to be performed by the Department of Conservation and Recreation of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for the improvement, development, maintenance and protection of tidal and non-tidal rivers and streams, harbors, tide waters, foreshores and shores along a public beach within the Town, in accordance with Section 11 of said Chapter 91, and that the Board of Selectmen is hereby authorized to execute and deliver a bond of indemnity to the Commonwealth assuming such liability. ARTICLE 9. Will the Town accept the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 44, Section 53E 1/2, so as to establish and define the terms of a departmental revolving fund for the Building Department, or act on anything thereto? COMMENT: The purpose of this article is to continue the “Building Department Revolving Fund”, which provides payments to the Assistant Building Inspectors for performing electrical, gas, and plumbing inspections. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, the fund had $ 199,943.50 in revenues and $155,653.12 in expenditures. For the six-month period ended December 31, 2010, the fund had $ 101,725.00 in revenues and $ 84,373.83 in expenditures. RECOMMENDED: That, in accordance with the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 44, Section 53E 1/2, which allows the Town to establish departmental revolving funds, the Town authorizes the continuation of such a fund in the Building Department. Departmental receipts for building inspections performed by the Assistant Building Inspectors shall be credited to the fund. Moneys shall be spent primarily to compensate such inspectors for their services. The Building Commissioner, or functional equivalent, shall be authorized to spend moneys from the fund. The amount that may be spent from the fund shall be limited to $250,000 during Fiscal Year 2012. ARTICLE 10. Will the Town accept the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 44, Section 53E1/2, so as to establish and define the terms of a departmental revolving fund for the Council on Aging, or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: The purpose of this article is to establish a revolving fund that will be credited with all fees and charges received from Senior Center programs and to authorize the expenditure of such funds to be expended under the direction of the Director of Elder Services for senior center programs. This would be the first year of a departmental revolving fund for the Department of Elder Services. The Council on Aging is the board which oversees the Department of Elder Services. RECOMMENDED: That, in accordance with the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 44, Section 53E1/2, which allows the Town to establish departmental revolving funds, the Town authorizes the establishment of such a fund for the Department of Elder Services. Departmental receipts for all fees and charges received from Senior Center programs shall be credited to the fund. Moneys shall be spent for Senior Center programs and related expenses. The Director of Elder Services, or functional equivalent, shall be authorized to spend moneys from the fund. The amount that may be spent from the fund shall be limited to $50,000 during Fiscal Year 2012. ARTICLE 11. Will the Town raise and appropriate, or transfer from available funds, a sum of money to the Town’s Reserve Fund for use during the fiscal year 2011, or act on anything relating thereto? RECOMMENDED: The Advisory Committee will make its recommendation at Town Meeting. ARTICLE 12. Will the Town raise and appropriate, or transfer from available funds, a sum of money for transfer into the Stabilization Fund to offset future property tax increases, or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: Periodically, the Town issues bonds to finance long-term indebtedness of the Town. In the fall of 2009, the Town refinanced $42,265,991 in General Obligation Bonds. Of this amount, $23,388,524 was related to the financing and refinancing of various school projects which were the subject of multiple school-related debt exclusion votes. As part of that bond issue, the Town received $1,172,576 in bond premiums associated with the school issuance. As of June 30, 2010, this premium amount resided in the fund balance. Since the cost of debt service for the school projects will be borne by the taxpayers in accordance with the vote under Article 1 at the Special Town Meeting The sum of $1,172,576 will be transferred from available reserves to the Stabilization Fund, where a portion will be withdrawn annually to offset the interest payments on these bonds, which will lessen the annual cost to the taxpayers. RECOMMENDED: That the Town transfer from available reserves the sum of $1,172,576 into the Stabilization Fund. ARTICLE 13. Will the Town appropriate a sum or sums of money from the Stabilization Fund and/or from available reserves for the purpose of reducing the tax rate, or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: Pursuant to a prior Town Meeting vote, the proceeds from the sale of the former school administration building, municipal light plant building and the former police station were deposited in the Stabilization Fund for future tax reduction. A previous article transferred additional moneys from the bond premium associated with excluded debt in the October 2009 debt refinancing into the Stabilization Fund. This article would transfer a portion of the augmented Stabilization Fund for the purpose of reducing the fiscal 2012 tax rate. RECOMMENDED: That the Town appropriate the sum of $176,629 from the Stabilization Fund for the purpose of reducing the fiscal year 2012 tax rate. ARTICLE 14. Will the Town (1) establish a stabilization fund pursuant to Massachusetts General laws Chapter 40, Section 5B, for the purpose of defraying the cost of financing capital programs which require a capital or debt exclusion from the levy limit, and (2) appropriate a sum of money from available funds to said stabilization fund, or act on anything related thereto? COMMENT: In 2009, the Legislature approved a new local-option meals tax to provide a measure of relief for towns facing budget shortfalls, in part due to cuts in State aid. The 2010 Annual Town Meeting voted to levy a tax of 0.75% on meals provided at restaurants in Town. At the time, the Department of Revenue estimated that annual revenue to Hingham would be approximately $225,000, but the actual collection rate is running higher than that projection. The Article passed by the 2010 Annual Town Meeting required that the tax proceeds be deposited into a stabilization fund (as defined by Chapter 40, Section 5B of the Massachusetts General Laws) which would be established by the 2011 Annual Town Meeting. Depositing money into a stabilization fund must be authorized each year by a two-thirds vote of Town Meeting. Both the Board of Selectmen and the Advisory Committee urge that these revenues be used to ameliorate the impact of extraordinary expenses, and not for foreseeable operating expenses. A two-thirds vote of Town Meeting on a separate article would be required to appropriate money from the fund. If such a vote is taken and approved by the 2011 Annual Town Meeting, it cannot bind future Town Meetings; so any unspent balance in the fund can be re-directed for other purposes in the future. The amount stated below in the Recommended motion reflects quarterly distributions from the Commonwealth through 12/31/10. RECOMMENDED: That the Town (1) establish a Meals Tax Stabilization Fund pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40, Section 5B, for the purpose of defraying the cost of non-operating expenses, and (2) appropriate $162,060.13 to this Stabilization Fund from available reserves. ARTICLE 15. Will the Town raise and appropriate, borrow or transfer from available funds, a sum of money to be expended under direction of the 2006 School Building Committee for a feasibility study for the Hingham Middle School, 1103 Main Street, Hingham, MA 02043, for which feasibility study the Town may be eligible for a grant from the Massachusetts School Building Authority. The MSBA’s grant program is a non-entitlement, discretionary program based on need, as determined by the MSBA, and any costs the Town incurs in connection with the feasibility study in excess of any grant approved by and received from the MSBA shall be the sole responsibility of the Town. Or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: A feasibility study is the first step in the process of working with the MSBA to build a new Hingham Middle School (“HMS”) under the guidelines of their “Model School Program”. The Town has been concerned for several years about the condition of the physical plant at HMS as well as the overcrowding caused by increasing enrollment. The 2005 Annual Town Meeting established a School Facility Study Committee to develop a ten-year facilities plan (the “Facility Master Plan”) for the School Department. The 2006 and 2007 Annual Town Meetings approved funds to develop schematic designs for renovation and expansion of HMS as recommended in the Facility Master Plan. In 2010, the School Committee convened the School Master Plan Review Committee which reaffirmed the concerns about the existing HMS building. As recommended in prior Town Meeting votes, the Town has continued to work with MSBA in an effort to gain State support, and ultimately reimbursement, for any HMS project. The extreme weather this past winter revealed structural issues at the HMS and increased the urgency of addressing the shortcomings of the present facility which was constructed more than 50 years ago. The building has been evaluated by engineers and representatives of the MSBA, and studied by the School Committee, the School Administration, and the Board of Selectmen. As a result of this recent assessment and subsequent conversations with the MSBA and Town officials, Hingham was invited in early February to participate in the MSBA’s Model Middle School Program. Because of the new structural issues, a renovation/addition alternative seems no longer to be a practical or cost-effective option. Therefore, the scope of the planned Feasibility Study will now be narrowed to consideration of a new school built under the guidelines of the Model School Program. Approval of this article to fund the feasibility study would demonstrate to the MSBA our support for building a new middle school. Therefore, the Advisory Committee believes that the substantial expenditure this article authorizes would only make sense if the Town is ready to support the construction of a new HMS. The Model School Program sponsored by the MSBA “seeks to effectively adapt and re-use the design of successful, recently constructed schools. Model Schools are efficient in design and easy to maintain, contain optimal classroom and science lab space, can easily be modified to accommodate higher or lower enrollments, incorporate sustainable, “green” design elements when possible and are flexible in educational programming spaces while encouraging community use.” The Model School Program produces cost savings by reducing design costs and shortening the construction phase of the project. This program also enables the Town to move quickly and take advantage of a favorable interest rate and construction-bidding climate. A vote for the feasibility study is the first step in constructing a new HMS; so it is important to consider the potential costs of the project in its entirety. As has been discussed many times in the past, increasing enrollment, along with the shortcomings of the existing school building, are driving the need for this project. Even though enrollment is projected to peak at nearly 1100 students in 2016-17, the MSBA has recommended that the new HMS be sized to accommodate 1020 students (the current classroom capacity with modulars is 870, while the core spaces were built to support a maximum population of 770). Based upon space requirements for classrooms and core spaces (library, cafeteria, gymnasium, etc.), MSBA calculations prescribe a building of 164,000 square feet. For budgeting purposes, the MSBA recommends using an estimated construction cost of $275/square foot although recent similar projects have bid out at $235/square foot. Multiplying the size prescribed by the construction cost per square foot, and adding in non-construction “soft costs” plus a 10% contingency, the expenditure for the new HMS built under the MSBA Model School Program can be estimated to cost between $50,000,000 and $57,000,000. The feasibility study will culminate in the development of a schematic design that will enable a more precise estimate for the cost of the completed school. However, as would be the case with any public construction project, we will not have a firm construction cost until the project is formally put out to bid. While the feasibility study is eligible for reimbursement (at a confirmed rate of 35.42%), it must be noted that the MSBA does not reimburse for either site acquisition or demolition costs. The Town obviously already owns the site, but it will be necessary to demolish some part or all of the existing building once the new HMS is completed. Although it is difficult to predict demolition costs at this time, we believe it is reasonable to estimate something on the order of $1,000,000 based upon our experience with demolition of the original East School. In addition to the unreimbursed costs of demolition, increasing enrollment coupled with newly available classroom space will require some additional staff. Because the new HMS is replacing an existing school, only incremental additions to administrative and support staff are anticipated. Teacher and specialist positions will be necessary over time as the enrollment increases and the building’s spaces are fully utilized. Of course, all future appropriations will be subject to approval by Town Meeting votes, and it will be up to Town Meeting to determine the appropriate level of services and funding to be provided. An additional potential cost should also be mentioned. The reimbursement provided by the State for the science wing added to HMS in 1996 is amortized over a 20-year period. Should the final design of the new HMS involve demolishing the science wing, there is a “clawback” provision that would allow the MSBA to ask for a return of moneys previously provided. This “clawback” provision was created to prevent towns from using school reimbursement moneys for buildings that were then re-purposed for other municipal uses. Hingham has clearly not pursued such a strategy, and the MSBA board can waive the provision by approving the written recommendation of the Executive Director. We are in active discussions with the MSBA to minimize the cost of any “clawback”. The contemplated timeline for the project is as follows: Additional information about MSBA guidelines and the Model School Program can be found on the MSBA website. Click on the “Building With Us” link. RECOMMENDED: That the Town appropriate up to Six Hundred Thousand dollars ($600,000) to be expended under the direction of the 2006 School Building Committee for a feasibility study (including certain architectural and engineering costs) for the Hingham Middle School, 1103 Main Street, Hingham, MA 02043, (the “Feasibility Study”). To meet said appropriation the Treasurer, with the approval of the Board of Selectmen, is authorized to borrow said sum under M.G.L. Chapter 44, or any other enabling authority. The Town may be eligible for a grant for the Feasibility Study from the Massachusetts School Building Authority (the “MSBA”). The Town acknowledges that the MSBA’s grant program is a non-entitlement, discretionary program based on need, as determined by the MSBA, and any costs the Town incurs in connection with the Feasibility Study in excess of any grant approved by and received from the MSBA shall be the sole responsibility of the Town. The amount of borrowing authorized pursuant to this vote shall be reduced by any grant amount set forth in the Feasibility Study Agreement that may be executed between the Town and the MSBA. ARTICLE 16. Will the Town rescind all or a portion of the debt authorized by a vote under Article 15 of the Warrant for the 2007 Annual Town Meeting, or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: The 2007 Annual Town Meeting authorized funds to be expended for design of a renovated and enlarged Hingham Middle School (“HMS”) as part of the School Facilities Master Plan. Some moneys were spent from that authorization, but all design work ceased once the MSBA notified us that only a single building would be considered for reimbursement under the Statement of Interest we filed asking for both a new elementary school and an expanded HMS to reduce overcrowding. This article will rescind the remaining $236,000 of the previous debt authorization so as to make accounting more straightforward for the project to build a new HMS under the guidelines of the MSBA Model School Program. As a result, the $600,000 being requested by the HMS Feasibility Study under Article 15 above amounts to an additional $364,000. RECOMMENDED: That the Town rescind the authorization to issue debt of $236,000 voted under Article 15 of the Warrant for the 2007 Annual Town Meeting ARTICLE 17. Will the Town appropriate $50,000 from the Community Preservation Open Space Reserve for deposit to the Town’s Conservation Fund established pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40, Section 8C, for use by the Conservation Commission for the purchase of land, capital improvements to such land and expenses directly related to such acquisitions (surveys, engineering studies and other expenses), to make deposits or down payments toward acquisition or creation of such interests in open space and to otherwise preserve open space, or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: The Community Preservation Act ("CPA") is a local option statute enacted by the Legislature in 2000 and adopted by Town Meeting in 2001, which enables towns to collect and expend funds (including matching funds provided by the State) to maintain the character of the town by supporting open space, affordable housing and historic preservation initiatives specifically defined by the CPA. Under the CPA, at least 10% of annual revenues (including the State match), must be spent or set aside for open space initiatives. As in a prior 2009 grant to the Conservation Commission, this Article authorizes the transfer of a $50,000 "block grant" to the Town's Conservation Fund to be spent on Conservation Commission established priorities consistent with the requirements of the CPA. At present, the Commission is working on the acceptance of a proposed gift of land (an 11.5 acre parcel on Tugmanug Lane and a 1.86 acre parcel on Fort Hill Street) being donated to the Town for open space and watershed protection. The Commission is performing the necessary diligence consistent with any land acquisition including verification of the boundaries, 21E hazardous waste determinations, and review of any additional legal issues by Town Counsel. In addition, a portion of the appropriation will be used to grant stewardship endowments to a land conservation organization selected by the Town to monitor the status of seven parcels of Town conservation land purchased with Community Preservation funds appropriated by prior Town Meeting votes as required by the CPA. The Conservation Fund is administered by the Town Treasurer. This Article received the unanimous support of the Conservation Commission, the Community Preservation Committee, the Board of Selectmen and the Advisory Committee. RECOMMENDED: That the Town appropriate $50,000 from the Community Preservation Open Space Reserve for deposit to the Town’s Conservation Fund established pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40, Section 8C, for use by the Conservation Commission for the purchase of land, capital improvements to such land and expenses directly related to such acquisitions (surveys, engineering studies and other expenses), to make deposits or down payments toward acquisition or creation of such interests in open space and to otherwise preserve open space. ARTICLE 18. Will the Town appropriate a sum of money from the Community Preservation Historic Resources Reserve to be used by the Recreation Commission to prepare a feasibility/design study and cost estimates for restoration of the Hingham Cordage Factory building, or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: The historic Hingham Cordage Factory "Head House," otherwise known as the “barn," is located on Town land between the Central Fire Station on Main Street and the Town Hall on Central Street. The Hingham Cordage Factory, built in the early 1800's (and owned and operated by the Fearing and Whiton families) was destroyed by fire. The Head House is the last remaining vestige of Hingham's historically significant rope manufacturing industry, and was part of a massive building which had a 1000 foot rope walk and a large attached brick building that housed the factory’s engine rooms and machinery. As time passed, this two-story, 4,000 square foot mansard-roofed building was used for recreational activities. In the mid-1900's it became the location of one of the many summer camps spread throughout the Town's neighborhoods, and the Recreation Department has maintained it since. The "barn,” which is now over 150 years old and is presently used for storage by the Hingham Recreation Department, still appears to be in excellent condition. It is the intent of the Recreation Department to find a better purpose for this building, because it believes that the building is underutilized. The feasibility/design study would include: preparation of as-built floor plans and elevations; a report regarding the integrity of the structure; an assessment of space needs and requirements; conceptual design proposals; a site design for expanded parking, utilities and septic as required; renderings of the future design; conceptual cost estimates; and meetings to prepare all required documents. Notably, the Recreation Department feels that this proposal is worthwhile whether the building's final use is ultimately to be by the Recreation Department or some other Town department. The Recreation Department’s intention is to preserve a Town-owned historic structure while providing new opportunities for the residents of Hingham. RECOMMENDED: That the Town appropriate a sum of not more than $25,000 from the Community Preservation Historic Resources Reserve to be used by the Recreation Commission to prepare a feasibility/design study and cost estimates for restoration of the Hingham Cordage Factory building. ARTICLE 19. Will the Town appropriate a sum of money from the Community Preservation Historic Resources Reserve to restore and conserve selected photographs, art, and memorabilia from the G.A.R. Hall collection, or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: The Grand Army of the Republic (G.A.R.) Memorial Hall, located at 358 Main Street, was built by the citizens of Hingham in1888 as a gathering place for Union veterans of the Civil War. The G.A.R., founded on the principles of Fraternity, Charity and Loyalty, carried out its activities on that site until 1944, when the descendants of Civil War veterans gave the building to the Town. Over the years, the Hall has been used by the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion. Today, users include American Legion Post 120, VFW Post 6053, the Hingham Veterans’ Council, the Hingham Militia, and the Boy Scouts. The Trustees of the G.A.R. Memorial Hall, a volunteer group appointed by the Board of Selectmen, maintains the building and coordinates its use. In addition to its use as a meeting place, the G.A.R. Hall is also the repository for photographs, memorabilia, art and artifacts of historic significance from the Civil War through World War II. The Trustees of the G.A.R. Memorial Hall continue to regularly receive donations of military memorabilia of historic interest. The Trustees have identified 41 donated artifacts worthy of restoration and long-term conservation. These items were professionally evaluated to determine the treatment required and the cost of the proposed treatment. The Trustees are requesting $23,750 in Community Preservation funds to restore and conserve the 41 selected objects, which include photographs, paintings, engravings and currency from the Civil War, World War I and World War II. RECOMMENDED: That the Town appropriate $23,750 from the Community Preservation Historic Resources Reserve to restore and conserve selected photographs, art, and memorabilia from the G.A.R. Hall collection. ARTICLE 20. Will the Town appropriate a sum of money from the Community Preservation Historic Resources Reserve to be used by the Hingham Historical Commission to fund Phase One of the Hingham Memorial Bell Tower Restoration, or act on anything related thereto? COMMENT: The Hingham Memorial Bell Tower, owned by the Town and managed by the Hingham Historical Commission, is located at 68R Main Street next to the Old Ship Meeting House. The Bell Tower was built in 1912 to commemorate Hingham’s 275th anniversary. The Bell Tower is one of only eleven freestanding, “change ringing” towers in North America, and, as such, it contributes to the history, beauty and uniqueness of Hingham. Given the complexities of this project, the Hingham Historical Commission recommended—and Town Meeting appropriated—funding in fiscal 2010 for an ‘historic structures report’ to be prepared by an architect and structural engineer. The Hingham Historical Commission engaged David Odeh Engineers, Inc. to prepare a complete structural report, Wiss, Janney Architects Inc. to prepare an analysis and specification for the masonry repairs, White Chapel Bell Foundry to prepare plans and specifications for restoration of the bells and bell-carriage, and Consigli Construction to prepare a cost estimate. As a result of these analyses and estimates, the Hingham Historical Commission is recommending that the Bell Tower restoration be undertaken in three phases. Phase One, Tower masonry repair and stabilization, involves placement of two new floors in the Tower, each with a center opening to facilitate future bell and bell-carriage removal and reinstallation. Phase Two consists of removing the existing bells and bell-carriage, shipping them to the White Chapel Bell Foundry in London, England (the original 1912 manufacturer), which will perform the refurbishment and restoration and then ship the restored bells and bell-carriage back to Hingham. Phase Three involves reinstallation of the bells and bell-carriage in the Tower and completion of the exterior and interior masonry repairs. The Hingham Historical Commission anticipates that the cost to complete all three phases will be approximately $720,000 apportioned as follows: Phase One at $175,000; Phase Two at $375,000; and, Phase Three at $170,000. It is expected that the Hingham Historical Commission will be requesting additional moneys from the CPC to complete the remaining phases in the years ahead. RECOMMENDED: That the Town appropriate $175,000 from the Community Preservation Historic Resources Reserve to be used by the Hingham Historical Commission to fund Phase One of the Hingham Memorial Bell Tower Restoration. ARTICLE 21. Will the Town (1) authorize, but not require, the Board of Selectmen to acquire or obtain by eminent domain or other means an interest in real property for purposes of developing a wastewater treatment facility to serve the Industrial Park Area Sewer District (created by vote under Article 32 at the 2010 Annual Town Meeting) including dispersal area, utility corridor, access easements or roadways and (2) raise and appropriate, borrow or transfer from available funds a sum of money for said acquisition(s), or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: Sine the 2010 Annual Town Meeting, the Town has continued to evaluate the most cost-effective approach for sewering the Industrial Park Area Sewer District and has concluded that a decentralized, on-site wastewater treatment option is the preferred approach. An on-site system is less expensive than connecting to the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority sewer system, provides opportunities for water re-use, requires fewer State permits, and its implementation can be phased to address the higher priority area south of Route 3 first. The construction of an on-site wastewater treatment plant is contingent upon the acquisition of a parcel of land and various access easements. The Town has identified a parcel which meets initial tests of suitability for operation of such a plant. Negotiation between the Town and the parcel’s owner has resulted in an agreement that the Town will “take” the parcel by eminent domain, paying the owner $160,000 in “damages” or reparations for the taking. That acquisition cost will be included in the total project cost, for which the Town will ultimately be repaid through betterment assessments levied upon the benefitted landowners. In the event that the project, for whatever reason, does not proceed to completion, the cost of the acquisition will be a debt of the Town. However, in that circumstance, the Town may be able to recoup all or a portion of its costs through a sale of the property. Future Town Meeting authorization would be required prior to any expenditure for wastewater treatment facility final design, permitting, or construction costs, all of which costs would also be included in end-user betterment assessments. RECOMENDED: That the Town (1) authorize, but not require, the Board of Selectmen to acquire or obtain by eminent domain or other means an interest in real property for purposes of developing a wastewater treatment facility to serve the Industrial Park Area Sewer District (created by vote under Article 32 at the 2010 Annual Town Meeting) including dispersal area, utility corridor, access easements or roadways and (2) hereby appropriates $160,000 to pay costs for said acquisition, and that to meet this appropriation, the Treasurer, with the approval of the Board of Selectmen, is authorized to borrow said amount under and pursuant to Chapter 44, Section 7(1) of the General Laws, or pursuant to any other enabling authority, and to issue bonds or notes of the Town therefor. ARTICLE 22. Will the Town raise and appropriate, borrow or transfer from available funds a sum of money for the preliminary engineering, permitting, and submissions associated with a prospective wastewater treatment facility or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: To qualify an available property within the Industrial Park Area Sewer District for possible construction of a decentralized, on-site wastewater treatment facility, the Town must conduct engineering and hydrological studies in concert with various testing and documentation activities. Ultimately, any property acquired by the Town for such a purpose must meet the requirements of 310 Code of Massachusetts Regulations 15.000, The State Environmental Code, Title 5: Standard Requirements For The Siting, Construction, Inspection, Upgrade And Expansion Of On-Site Sewage Treatment And Disposal Systems And For The Transport And Disposal Of Septage. This article seeks Town Meeting authorization for up to $190,000 to fund these studies, testing, and documentation activities. Funding would initially be secured through the issuance of Town bonds. Should future Town Meeting authorize the design and construction of an on-site wastewater treatment facility and all necessary State permitting requirements be met, expended funds would be repaid through betterment assessments levied upon end users in the sewer district. Failure to satisfy either or both of these conditions would obligate the Town itself to fund the bond costs. The Board of Selectmen and Sewer Commission as well as the Town Administrator, Projects Engineer, and Director of Community Planning each believe this expenditure to be a reasonable one, since it is a necessary prerequisite for the further economic development of the Industrial Park Area. Such development and the attendant low-impact growth have the potential to yield significant, long-term tax revenue for the Town. The requested funding also enables production of a Project Engineering Report, which is required if the Town is to preserve the option of funding eventual construction through a low-interest State Revolving Fund loan RECOMMENDED: That the Town hereby appropriates up to $190,000 to pay costs of preliminary engineering, permitting, and submissions associated with developing a wastewater treatment facility, including the payment of all other costs incidental and related thereto, and that to meet this appropriation, the Treasurer, with the approval of the Board of Selectmen, is authorized to borrow said amount under and pursuant to Chapter 44, Section 7(1) of the General Laws, or pursuant to any other enabling authority, and to issue bonds or notes of the Town therefor. COMMENT: The easement would be granted to the owners of the Bone and Muscle Center located at 2 Pond Park Road. The slope described above is required to support a retaining wall which is engineered as a component of an onsite septic disposal system. The retaining wall is included in the site plan for the Bone and Muscle Center as approved by the Planning Board in March 2010 and in a landscape plan approved by the Town Planner in July 2010. Landscaping and maintenance will be the obligation of the grantee and such obligation will be incorporated as a component of the easement to be negotiated with the Board of Selectmen. RECOMMENDED: That the Town authorize the Board of Selectmen, for consideration of not less than $1.00 and on such terms as it deems in the best interests of the Town, to grant an easement to Perry South Shore Development, LLC, in order for said company to create and landscape a slope in conjunction with the redesigned intersection at Pond Park Road and Derby Street, necessary to support a retaining wall located on the property located at Two Pond Park Road. ARTICLE 24. Will the Town raise and appropriate, borrow or transfer from available funds a sum of money for civil engineering services to begin development of plans and specifications for the Derby Street Corridor roadway improvements and all incidental costs, or act on anything relating thereto? COMMENT: The Derby Street Corridor is that portion of Derby Street which extends from the Weymouth town line to the Gardner Street intersection at Route 53, Whiting Street. It is termed a ‘corridor’ because it separates the northern and southern portions of the Industrial Park Area. Roadway improvement of the corridor is a necessary adjunct of further Industrial Park Area economic development, with its potential to benefit the Town through increased tax revenues. Accordingly, the Town has designated corridor improvement as its top priority for expenditure of road construction funds received from the State. The first phase of corridor improvements would include further signalization, expanded sidewalks and roadways, as well as realignment of the Gardner Street intersection to enable greater traffic capacity, better traffic flow, and increased safety. A second phase is contemplated that would reconfigure entry and exit ramps between Derby Street and Route 3. The State would be responsible for roadway improvement construction costs, which are currently estimated to be at least $7,200,000. However, engineering design costs would be the responsibility of the Town. This article seeks authorization for the initial portion, $75,000, of the first-phase engineering design cost. The total first-phase engineering design cost over the project’s two- to three-year timeframe may approach $400,000, for which the Town is seeking funding assistance from business owners who would benefit from the corridor improvements. RECOMMENDED: That the Town appropriate $75,000 from available funds for civil engineering services to begin development of plans and specifications for the Derby Street Corridor roadway improvements and all incidental costs. ARTICLE 25. Will the Town amend the General By-laws of the Town of Hingham adopted March 13, 1939 as heretofore amended by adding the following Article 5 or act on anything relating thereto? Section 1, Purpose: This by-law is enacted to establish a process by which the election of Town offices will be conducted to insure that all candidates are given equal exposure and an opportunity to inform the electorate of their qualifications, educational background and experience each has acquired. In addition, the candidate shall be given time to explain his views on the important issues that beset the Town. Section 2, Definitions: 1. Advertising – All advertising by the candidate, his supporters, or a political committee organized on his behalf is prohibited. Advertising shall be interpreted in its broadest meaning. There shall be no resort to television, radio, newspapers, other forms of the media, computer enhancements, loud speakers, telephone solicitations electronic and paper transmissions, and the posting, exhibition, circulation or distribution of materials including pasters, stickers, posters, handbills, placards, pictures, or circulars, campaign buttons and signage intended to influence the action of the voter shall all be forbidden. The candidate may address the voters in person after timely notice of his appearance has been given by the local media. A candidate who violates the provisions of this section shall be disqualified from holding office. 2. Political Contributions – Since the ban on advertising eliminates the need for large sums of money demanded by the media, contributions to the candidate or his affiliates shall be limited to a nominal sum, not more than one hundred dollars. Only a natural person who is registered to vote and a Town resident may contribute to a candidate or his affiliate. No contribution shall be made to a candidate or his affiliate. Each check must be delivered to the Office of the Town Clerk. The instrument shall be made payable to the Town of Hingham and reflect the name of the candidate and position sought in the memo line. Once said office verifies the identity of the donor and the instrument clears, one half of the designated amount will be credited to the candidate’s account while the remainder will be retained by the Town Clerk to offset the operational expenses used in conducting the election. Donors will not be identified in order that the candidate will not learn the names of his financial supporters and be beholding thereto. This system will eliminate the effects of undue influence and the appearance of a conflict of interest presently manifest in the elective process. Unless such heroic measures are undertaken, the prevailing view that all politicians are for sale and that the laws are enacted to favor the highest bidder will remain the demonstrable reality. Section 3, Procedure: The Town clerk shall attach a copy of Article 5 of the Town By-Laws to the nomination papers when requested by one seeking to be elected to a Town office. Once the candidate returns the properly executed nomination documents, the Town Clerk shall attach thereto a document prepared by the candidate briefly and truthfully reflecting his qualifications to hold office, his educational background, and his experience that relates to his ability to serve the Town in said capacity. Any misrepresentations regarding the foregoing information shall disqualify the candidate from holding office. The candidate shall also prepare and submit an additional document reflecting his opinion on the important issues facing the Town and his recommendations for their proper resolution. Each separate item set forth in this document shall not exceed one hundred words. The Town Clerk shall incorporate the relevant information described in the foregoing paragraph prepared by each candidate into a single document which shall be annexed to the Warrant for the Annual Town Meeting sent to each residential customer in the Town. The Town Clerk shall also transmit a copy of the above described election documents to the local newspaper for publication not sooner than thirty days before the election date. The Town Clerk, not more than thirty days before the election date will convene a public forum after reasonable notice has been given to the candidates who have complied with the forenamed requirements and timely notification has been given to the electorate of its occurrence. The Town Clerk will preside at this public forum. The qualified candidates will appear in separate panels determined by the office sought. Each will be given three minutes to address the assembly and after all have spoken; the members of the panel will be subject to questioning by the public for not more than thirty minutes unless the Town Clerk determines that an extension of time is necessary and proper. Those candidates who return their nomination papers without the aforementioned documents shall be deemed to have waived their right to have said information incorporated and transmitted to the media and residential customers as aforesaid and shall not be permitted to participate as a candidate for office at the public forum and the provisions of Article 5 shall not apply to their candidacy or their campaign for Town office. Section 5, Severability: The invalidity of any section or provision of this Article shall not invalidate any other section or provision thereof. COMMENT: This article pertains to elections of Town officers and proposes to restrict political advertising, a broad range of campaign activities, and the amounts of financial contributions that can be made to candidates for local office. The article would require the Town Clerk to act as the collector and distributor of all contributed campaign funds. After consultation with Town Counsel, it is the Advisory Committee’s belief that the Massachusetts Attorney General would refuse to grant the required approval for enactment of this article, because the article is most likely unconstitutional. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and similar provisions of the Constitution of Massachusetts, protect the right to free speech in general and to political speech in particular. It is well-established in law that campaign literature, political contributions, and face-to-face meetings between candidates for local office and prospective voters are forms of protected political speech. They cannot be limited as the article proposes. Furthermore (but omitting details here), various activities referenced in the article are already subject to restrictions in ways that have been found useful and approved as constitutional. The restrictions proposed by the article are not advisable apart from their likely unconstitutionality. “Standouts” at the transfer station or the commuter boat, lawn signs, leaflets and financial contributions are a fact of life because people wish to express their opinions and interact with political candidates freely. That these things are more prevalent now than in times past may be a felt necessity of our day, which may continue or fade as experience recommends. In any event it does not seem to the Advisory Committee that elections for town offices are now overrun with the influence of money or special interest groups. Hence this article proposes to cure an ill that does not afflict us. The comprehensive re-engineering of elections for local office proposed by this article is unwise. RECOMMENDED: That no action be taken on this article. ARTICLE 26. Will the town amend the General By-Laws of the Town of Hingham adopted March 13, 1939 as heretofore amended by adding the following Article 6 or act on anything related thereto? ARTICLE 6 TERM LIMITS SECTION 1 Purpose: Term limits represent a priority if any meaningful reform is to occur in the electoral process. Interminable incumbencies have resulted in a system frozen in the past, anchored by the status quo, and totally resistant to any positive changes and the influx of new ideas. Members who have served together for years develop an affinity for congeniality and suppress reasonable dissent. Familiarity does not breed contempt, it perpetuates mediocrity. SECTION 2 Procedure: No candidate for the office of Town Moderator, School Committee, or Board of Selectmen shall be elected to serve in said positions for a period of time longer than six consecutive years. COMMENT: This article seeks to avoid the abuse of entrenched power by establishing term limits on the elected offices of the Board of Selectmen, the School Committee and the Town Moderator. The proponents argue that term limits would lessen the influence long-term politicians and inject fresh ideas into local government. Town Counsel has considered this article and has concluded that this by-law is impermissible as cities and towns are not empowered by the Massachusetts Constitution to regulate elections. It is not permissible for a city or town to enact a law that would set term limits for local officials such as the Town Moderator, School Committee, or Board of Selectmen; as such a law would regulate elections. As state law sets the qualifications for these officials, it is improper for a by-law to add a term limit qualification and as such this by-law would be struck down. Furthermore, the Advisory Committee believes term limits to be inadvisable because regular elections and the right to vote are key features of representative democracy. Regular elections safeguard against the accumulation of power in the hands of elected officials by providing voters, at regular intervals, the means to unseat representatives with whom they are dissatisfied. Implicit in the right to vote is the right to check the power of officials who no longer represent the will of the people. Term limits interfere with voter rights by limiting voter choice and denying voters the ability to reelect those who have served them well. In establishing regular elections, the framers of the Constitution recognized that an official’s desire for reelection motivates the official to be honest and more responsive to the electorate. An official not facing reelection does not have the same incentive to act in the interest of the voters. Therefore, term limits can make elected officials more likely to act out of self interest. Finally, limited terms decrease the incentive for elected officials to tackle long-term problems since there is less likelihood of seeing a solution through to the end. RECOMMENDED: That no action be taken on this article. ARTICLE 27. Will the Town amend the General By-Laws of the Town of Hingham adopted March 13, 1939 as heretofore amended by adding the following article 7 or act on anything related thereto? ARTICLE 7 SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEMBER DISQUALIFICATIONS SECTION 1 Purpose: An irreconcilable conflict of interest exists when a member of the School Committee is the parent of guardian of a child attending a public school in the same system. The love and affection a parent has for his own flesh and blood is totally inconsistent with the ability to maintain objectivity when called upon to evaluate a matter that either directly or indirectly effects the education of that child. SECTION 2 Definitions: School Committee members are defined as municipal employees under the provisions of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 268A sec. 1. SECTION 3 Procedure: No person who is the parent or guardian of a child enrolled in the Hingham Public Schools shall be eligible to serve on the Hingham School Committee. COMMENT: Town Counsel has considered this article and has concluded that this by-law is impermissible as cities and towns are not empowered by the Massachusetts Constitution to regulate elections. This by-law would improperly regulate elections as it would prohibit a large class of individuals from running for the office of School Committee. Furthermore, qualifications for School Committee members are set by state statute, so creating the additional qualification of an individual not being a school parent is impermissible. Moreover, in the text of the proposed by-law the Massachusetts Conflict of Interest Law is cited as a reason for enacting the law. However, the Massachusetts Conflict of Interest Law does not prohibit parents of students in that school district from running for or serving on the School Committee. Furthermore, M.G.L. c.268A, section 19 prohibits a municipal employee from participating in a particular matter in which to his or her knowledge he or she or an immediate family member has a financial interest. This provision of the Massachusetts Conflict of Interest Law allows employees of the Town including School Committee members to make determination of “general policy” which affects a substantial segment of the population of the community in the same way, even if such general policy decision will also have an effect on members of their families. As such the Conflict of Interest Law specifically contemplates such family relationships. RECOMMENDED: That no action be taken on this article. ARTICLE 28. Will the Town for the purpose of better disseminating to citizens information concerning warrant articles for annual and special Town meetings, amend the General By-laws of the Town of Hingham as heretofore amended as follows: 2. Delete entirely the current text of Section 8 of Article 2 and substitute the following: COMMENT: During the past two and a half years, the League of Women Voters has studied the town meeting practices of our “benchmark” communities to see if there were opportunities Hingham could pursue to more fully engage and educate citizens about the issues coming before Town Meeting. The League found that some towns provide earlier public access to warrant articles in a more organized format. The League, with the concurrence of the Board of Selectmen and the Advisory Committee, believes that early access to clear information lays the foundation for a more effective and collaborative review process for all open Town Meeting participants. RECOMMENDED: That the Town, for the purpose of better disseminating to citizens information concerning warrant articles for annual and special Town meetings, amend the General By-Laws of the Town of Hingham, as heretofore amended as follows: 1. Delete entirely the current text of Section 6 of Article 2 and substitute the following: “SECTION 6 -In connection with each article made a part of the warrant for a town 2. Delete entirely the current text of Section 8 of Article 2 and substitute the following: “SECTION 8 - (a) Each matter produced for insertion in a warrant for an annual or special town meeting, whether by a Town board or by petition, shall be submitted to the Selectmen in the form of the complete text of the proposed article accompanied by the full name and contact information of a knowledgeable representative of the proponent. In the case of an article submitted by petition, the submission also shall include the required signatures of at least ten registered voters of the Town. Section 8 - (b) The Selectmen, no later than ten days after any of the following: the January 20th date described in SECTION 7, the closing date of a re-opened warrant described in SECTION 7 or the closing date of the warrant for a special town meeting shall: (i) cause to be posted in a clearly identified position on the Town’s website, a complete copy of each submission described in Section 8(a) above; and, (ii) transmit a copy of such submissions to the Advisory Committee; and (iii) make available for viewing or purchase a paper copy of such submissions.” ARTICLE 29. Will the Town amend the General By-laws of the Town of Hingham adopted March 13, 1939, as heretofore amended, at Article 3, “Procedure at Town Meetings,” Section 6, by deleting the current Section 6 and replacing it with the following: SECTION 6 - Without permission of the moderator, no person shall speak on any subject for more than six (6) minutes for the first time or more than three (3) minutes for the second time, COMMENT: The Board of Selectmen has proposed a change to the Town By-Law governing speaking time at Town Meetings. The current By-Law found at Article 3, Section 6 allows a person to speak for up to ten (10) minutes when first recognized by the Moderator and up to five (5) minutes if recognized a second time. In an effort to facilitate discussion and make Town Meetings more effective and efficient, the Board of Selectmen has proposed reducing speaking times to six (6) minutes and three (3) minutes, respectively. This change would encourage participants to be thoughtful and organized in making their remarks and would potentially allow more viewpoints to be heard in a shorter amount of time. While the Advisory Committee supports efforts to make Town Meetings more efficient, we are concerned that in certain circumstances speakers may need more time to present particular warrant articles and/or more time to respond to questions or concerns raised by Town Meeting participants. Therefore, the Advisory Committee expects that the Moderator would, as in the past, recognize consecutive speakers to share presentations each within the time limits and could in exceptional circumstances give leave to speakers to exceed these time limits, as the Moderator judges to be fair and reasonable and in the best interest of a full and fair discussion at Town Meeting. Participants concerned about the application of speaking limits should be encouraged to contact the Moderator in advance Town Meeting. RECOMMENDED; That the Town amend the General By-laws of the Town of Hingham adopted March 13, 1939, as heretofore amended, at Article 3, “Procedures at Town Meetings,” Section 6, by deleting the current Section 6 and replacing it with the following: ARTICLE 30. Will the Town of Hingham amend the Moderator’s Message on Town Meeting Procedures (as reflected in the Warrant for the Annual Town Meeting) by deleting the first four (4) paragraphs and replacing them with the following: Procedures employed at the Annual Town Meeting shall be made consistent with Federal Constitutional Mandates. The First Amendment guarantees the Right to Free Speech. A warrant article represents the will of not less than ten registered voters to petition the governing authority for redress and must be accorded a full and fair hearing. • When an article is presented to the Town Meeting the petitioner or his designee shall be initially recognized by the Moderator to address the meeting. • At the completion of the petitioner’s statement, a member of the Advisory Committee shall be recognized by the Moderator to address the meeting. • At the completion of the Committee’s statement, the Moderator shall recognize the voters who wish to address the meeting. All proposed motions will be recorded and taken under advisement. • Once the discussion on the article has ended, the Moderator shall recognize the petitioner or his designee for a reply statement. • Once the reply has ended, the Moderator shall call for an immediate vote on the warrant article. If the warrant article has not been approved by the required number of votes, the Moderator shall call for a vote on each of the motions heretofore recorded and taken under advisement in their order of presentment, except where priority has been established under Article 3 Section 9 of the Town By-laws which must be recognized as controlling. COMMENT: The Moderator’s Message on Town Meeting Procedures (“Moderator’s Message”) appears at page 3 of this Warrant. The proposed article would delete the first four paragraphs of the Moderator’s Message, which read as follows: Our town meeting is conducted in accordance with the Town By-Laws and also with regard to the traditions followed in Hingham town meetings for many years. Several matters of procedure are summarized below. • An article in the warrant states a question for the town meeting to answer. A motion is a proposed answer to the question and must be within the scope of the article. An article (once published in the warrant) may not be amended but a motion may be amended by vote of the meeting. • If the Advisory Committee is recommending an affirmative motion under an article, its motion will be received as the main motion under the article. A voter may propose to amend this motion either to change it in part or to substitute a whole new motion (sometimes called a “substitute motion”). In any such case, the proposed amendment will be taken up and voted on first and then the main motion, as it may have been amended, will be acted upon. • If the Advisory Committee is recommending no action under an article and a voter offers an affirmative motion, the voter’s motion will be received as the main motion under the article. Such a motion is likewise subject to amendment. The deleted paragraphs would be replaced with language set forth in the proposed article. The Moderator’s legal authority is granted by Mass. G.L. c.39, s. 15, which requires the Moderator to “regulate the proceedings” of town meetings, “declare all questions of order, and make public declaration of all votes.” The section also provides that: “A town may pass by-laws, subject to this section, for the regulation of the proceedings at town meetings.” Section 3 of Hingham’s By-Laws sets forth detailed provisions governing the procedures at our town meetings. This article seeks to restrict the discretion of the Moderator in conducting town meetings in accordance with our by-laws and traditional practices, all in the guise of changing the Moderator’s Message to voters. The Advisory Committee recommends no action. The article has four main flaws. The first is that it affords “the petitioner” of a warrant article a disproportionate influence over discussion at town meeting: the petitioner must be allowed to speak first, he must be allowed to speak last, and “the Moderator shall call for an immediate vote on the warrant article” when the petitioner’s last remarks are concluded. In further deference to the petitioner, it appears that the proposed article would insulate all warrant articles from amendment. Specifically, the proposed article requires that, prior to a vote to adopt a warrant article, “all proposed motions” made by those addressing town meeting “will be recorded and taken under advisement.” (The meaning of the phrase “taken under advisement,” in the context of the proposed article, is unclear, but it appears to mean that no motion would be put to a vote prior to a vote on a motion to adopt the warrant article under discussion.) Because the vote on a motion to adopt a warrant article would necessarily precede all motions otherwise regarding the article, a motion to amend - frequently a means of changing the form of an article so that is satisfies town meeting - could not be heard until the motion to adopt the article had been voted on. So too with motions for the previous question, a device sometimes employed to end debate and require a vote on a warrant article when both sides have had a fair opportunity to be heard and it appears that the discussion is becoming repetitious. The proposed article would effectively eliminate this device, because by the time a motion for the previous question could be heard it would be moot. The Advisory Committee recommends against town meeting dispossessing itself of the flexibility that it now enjoys. The proposed article’s second principal flaw is that, in part, it misconceives the function of the Moderator’s Message. The Moderator’s Message concerns procedures for the conduct of town meeting (by paraphrasing the relevant sections of the Town By laws), but that is not its only purpose. It also explains to voters unfamiliar with town meeting the basic terminology and practices employed for resolution of articles in the warrant. The proposed article, in contrast, merely dictates a mandatory sequence of actions. In this, it fails to appreciate the Message’s purpose in educating voters regarding a process that has been formed and shaped by years of tradition. The proposed article’s third chief defect is its insinuation that town meeting in its current and historical form is administered inconsistently with “Federal Constitutional Mandates” including the First Amendment’s guaranty of the right to free speech. A full exposition of relevant First Amendment law and theory is beyond the scope of this Comment (and the Advisory Committee’s expertise), but the Advisory Committee strongly believes that the proposed article’s insinuation is not well founded. Finally, the fourth principal defect with the proposed article is that it seeks to remedy an illness that does not exist. Adoption of the proposed article’s first two “bullet points” would do little good, because the practice generally followed by the Moderator is to recognize the proponent of an article first and an Advisory Committee member (speaking for a majority of the Advisory Committee) thereafter, if the Advisory Committee wishes to be heard. (Notably, the proposed article appears to require recognition of an Advisory Committee member, when in fact none may wish to speak.) Furthermore, it is for town meeting to recall the currently serving Moderator’s general, evident preference for open debate. Particularly on matters of much popular controversy, the Moderator’s tendency is to recognize at least as many voters as is necessary for a full and fair hearing on the article under discussion. This liberality has generally included adequate (and usually ample) speaking time for a warrant article’s proponents, whose interests the proposed article seems intended to advance. In so remarking, the Advisory Committee does not intend to endorse the currently serving Moderator personally. Rather, it approves of his methods. May his successors down the years do likewise. RECOMMENDED: That no action be taken on this article. Continue to Page 2, Articles 31 to 47
|
