1982-04-BOS-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Firs. Battin stated the difference is that the By -Laws Committee was a committee authorized, established and charge developed by Town Meeting and reported back to them. She felt that the Town Mana Act is, in essence, the charter of the Town, and Town Meeting will have to vote any changes and mod they should determine whether it needs study and what should be studied. She pointed out that the original committee was appointed by the Town Moderator. Ir. Busa stated that he felt that present and former members of the Board of Selectmen would be the people to have a real understanding of the Act having been directly involved with it. He felt that no member of the present Board should be represented on the committee, but that former mem- bers of the Board and also members of the T MMA who have been involved for many years should be represented on the committee. Mr. Politi pointed out that any recommendations made by the committee and adopted. icy the Board would have to go before Town Meeting and then to the State Legislature, thus involving Town Meeting in the process, Mrs. Battin stated that she felt that the time -table was not realistic in that the committee would have to interview the chief administrative officials and various boards to got their sense of how the Act is working, both in the mode of selection, powers of the Manager and Board of Selectmen. It was voted 3-2, Mrs. Battin and Mr. Crain in the negative, that the Selectmen appoint a committee to review the Selectmen /Town Manager Act' and adopt the charge as presented by Ir. Politi. Mr. Crain stated that he felt that it would be very difficult to build the constituency, which he thought "was very sensitive and important" with five people and he asked for reconsideration of the number of people to be appointed to the committee. Mr. Politi pointed out that under the mules of order followed by the Board and according to its axles of procedure, a motion for reconsideration can be made only a member who voted on the mod y ' prevailing side of the issue. The Chairman requested a motion for reconsideration. No motion was forthcoming and the 3-2 vote prevailed, Minuteman Mr. Sacco addressed the Board and stated that he continues to receive Commuter calls on the bike path, both for and against, and he stated that it was his Blk.epath understanding the concept had been approved by the Board on Larch 1 and the Town of Arlington so notified. He also stated that it was his understanding . that no money commitment had been made. He made a motion to hold a public hearing to continue the analysis of the impact of the bake path. Mr. Politi seconded the motion and expressed his concerns that the vote approving the concept had been taken on election night and felt that, due to a full agenda, people's. concerns were not fully listened to and ques- tions had not been answered. He suggested that the hearing be held and then decide if a committee is necessary. Mr. Crain stated that he felt that, consistent with procedures, a com- mittee carefully constructed to represent various constituencies should be appointed by the Board to work on the project on a continui,ng basis and re- port back to the Board. Mrs, Battin agreed with Mr. Crain that a committee should be formed, including those who proposed the bikepath and understand the technicalities, to report back to the Board. She stated the process always has been to have a full hearing before the vote and once the project is underway, work, with sub-committees or advisory committees to work things out. She felt that in this case the process had been followed and the March 1 hearing, plus the NOW previous hearing, provided sufficient time for citizen reaction O