Laserfiche WebLink
Breadcrumb Navigation:
March 14, 2011 <br />moved to recommend approval of this request. Ms. Garberg seconded the Motion. <br />Vote: Approved 9-0-0. Mr. Parker signed the Request for Transfer from the Reserve <br />Fund. <br />Discussion of Warrant Articles in the 2011 Annual Town Meeting. <br />6. <br />Article 5 -Appropriate FY2012 Enterprise Funds Budget. A motion to recommend <br />approval of this article as it relates to recreation was made and seconded. Vote: <br />Approved 8-0-1 <br />Article 7 -Establish and Continue Departmental Revolving Funds. A motion to <br />recommend approval of this article was made and seconded. Vote: Approved 8-0-1 <br />Article 9 -Appropriate for Recreation Capital Projects. A motion to recommend <br />approval of this article was made and seconded. Vote: Approved 8-0-1 <br />Mr. Pato added an affirmative vote on all prior voted items from 3/7/11, except for Article <br />28 as there was no write-up. This includes Articles 12, 14, 16, 21, 27, and 33. <br />Article 22 -Appropriate from Debt Service Stabilization Fund. A motion to recommend <br />approval of this article was made and seconded. Vote: Approved 8-0-1 <br />Article 30 -Amend Bylaw -Town Meeting Procedure. A motion to table this was made <br />and seconded. Vote: Approved 9-0-0 <br />Article 36 -Analyze Employee Health Benefits (Citizen Article). Mr. Pato gave a <br />summary of his write up. The Committee discussed the request that they develop a <br />plan for this or develop other options, whether they should be responsible in this regard <br />and legal implications. A motion to recommend approval of this article was made and <br />seconded. Vote: Not approved 0-9-0 <br />Article 8 -Appropriate the FY12 CPC Operating Budget and CPA Projects: Motions <br />were made to recommend approval of the following parts of the Article and were <br />seconded: <br />8(a)Vote: Approved 8-0-1 <br />8(b)Vote: Approved 8-0-1 <br />8(d)Vote: Approved 8-0-1. Last year the Committee recommended that something like <br />the current proposal would be preferable to supporting acquisitions that had already <br />been completedby LexHAB. <br />8(e)Vote: Approved 8-0-1 <br />8(g)Vote: Approved 8-0-1 <br />8(i) Vote: Approved 8-0-1 <br />8(j) Vote: Approved 9-0-0 <br />3 <br /> <br />