HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-11-07-State-Election-Warrant COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
WILLIAM FRANCIS GALVIN
SECRETARY OF THE COMMONWEALTH
SS.
To either of the Constables of the Town of Lexington:
GREETING
In the name of the Commonwealth, you are hereby required to notify and warn the inhabitants of said town who are
qualified to vote in State Election to vote at:
PRECINCT ONE, CARY MEMORIAL BUILDING; PRECINCT TWO, BOWMAN SCHOOL,
PRECINCT THREE, JONAS CLARKE MIDDLE SCHOOL, PRECINCT FOUR,BRIDGE SCHOOL,
PRECINCT FIVE, CARY MEMORIAL BUILDING; PRECINCT SIX, WILLIAM DIAMOND MIDDLE
SCHOOL, PRECINCT SEVEN, ESTABROOK SCHOOL, PRECINCT EIGHT,FIRE HEADQUARTERS
BUILDING; PRECINCT NINE, MARIA HASTINGS SCHOOL,
on TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER,2006,from 7:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. for the following
purpose:
To cast their votes in the State Election for the candidates for the following offices and questions:
SENATOR IN CONGRESS .FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
GOVERNOR/LT GOVERNOR .FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
ATTORNEY GENERAL .FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
SECRETARY OF STATE. .FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
TREASURER .FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
AUDITOR. .FOR THIS COMMONWEALTH
REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS 7TH DISTRICT
COUNCILLOR. 3rd DISTRICT(Precincts 3, 8, 9)
COUNCILLOR. 6th DISTRICT(Precincts 1,2,4,5,6,7)
SENATOR IN GENERAL COURT 3rd MIDDLESEX DISTRICT(Precincts 3, 8, 9)
SENATOR IN GENERAL COURT 4th MIDDLESEX DISTRICT (Precincts 1,2,4,5,6,7)
REPRESENTATIVE IN GENERAL COURT 9`h MIDDLESEX DISTRICT(Precincts 2, 3,4)
REPRESENTATIVE IN GENERAL COURT 15`h MIDDLESEX DISTRICT (Precincts 1,5,6,7,8,9)
DISTRICT ATTORNEY .NORTHERN DISTRICT
CLERK OF COURTS. .MIDDLESEX COUNTY
REGISTER OF DEEDS MIDDLESEX SOUTHERN DISTRICT
QUESTION 1. Law Proposed by Initiative Petition
Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of
Representatives before May 3, 2006?
SUMMARY
This proposed law would allow local licensing authorities to issue licenses for food stores to sell wine. The
proposed law defines a"food store" as a retail vendor, such as a grocery store, supermarket, shop,club, outlet,or
warehouse-type seller,that sells food to consumers to be eaten elsewhere(which must include meat,poultry, dairy
products,eggs, fresh fruit and produce, and other specified items), and that may sell other items usually found in
grocery stores. Holders of licenses to sell wine at food stores could sell wine either on its own or together with any
other items they sell.
The licensing authorities in any city or town of up to 5000 residents could issue up to 5 licenses for food stores to
sell wine. In cities or towns of over 5000 residents, one additional license could be issued for each additional 5000
residents (or fraction of 5000). No person or business could hold more than 10% of the total number of the licenses
that could be issued under the proposed law Such licenses would not be counted when applying the laws that limit
the number of other kinds of alcoholic beverage licenses that may be issued or held. Any applicant for a license
would have to be approved by the state Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission,and any individual applicant
would have to be at least 21 years old and not have been convicted of a felony
In issuing any licenses for food stores to sell wine,local licensing authorities would have to use the same
procedures that apply to other licenses for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages. Except where the proposed law has
different terms,the same laws that apply to issuance,renewal, suspension and termination of licenses for retail sales
of alcoholic beverages which are not to be consumed on the seller's premises, and that apply to the operations of
holders of such licenses, would govern licenses to sell wine at food stores, and the operation of holders of such
licenses. Local authorities could set fees for issuing and renewing such licenses.
A YES VOTE would create a new category of licenses for food stores to sell wine,and it would allow local licensing
authorities to issue such licenses.
A NO VOTE would make no change in the laws concerning the sale of wine.
QUESTION 2: Law Proposed by Initiative Petition
Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of
Representatives before May 3,2006?
1 SUMMARY
This proposed law would allow candidates for public office to be nominated by more than one political party or
political designation,to have their names appear on the ballot once for each nomination,and to have their votes
counted separately for each nomination but then added together to determine the winner of the election.
The proposed law would repeal an existing requirement that in order to appear on the state primary ballot as a
candidate for a political party's nomination for certain offices,a person cannot have been enrolled in any other party
during the preceding year. The requirement applies to candidates for nomination for statewide office,representative
in Congress,governor's councillor, member of the state Legislature,district attorney, clerk of court,register of
probate,register of deeds,county commissioner, sheriff,and county treasurer. The proposed law would also allow
any person to appear on the primary ballot as a candidate for a party's nomination for those offices if the party's state
committee gave its written consent. The proposed law would also repeal the existing requirement that in order to be
nominated to appear as an unenrolled candidate on the state election ballot,or on any city or town ballot following a
primary,a person cannot have been enrolled in any political party during the 90 days before the deadline for filing
nomination papers.
The proposed law would provide that if a candidate were nominated by more than one party or political
designation,instead of the candidate's name being printed on the ballot once, with the candidate allowed to choose the
order in which the party or political designation names appear after the candidate's name, the candidate's name would
appear multiple times,once for each nomination received. The candidate would decide the order in which the party or
political designation nominations would appear,except that all parties would be listed before all political
designations. The ballot would allow voters who vote for a candidate nominated by multiple parties or political
designations to vote for that candidate under the party or political designation line of their choice.
If a voter voted for the same candidate for the same office on multiple party or political designation lines,the
ballot would remain valid but would be counted as a single vote for the candidate on a line without a party or political
designation. If voting technology allowed,voting machines would be required to prevent a voter from voting more
than the number of times permitted for any one office.
The proposed law would provide that if a candidate received votes under more than one party or political
designation,the votes would be combined for purposes of determining whether the candidate had won the election.
The total number of votes each candidate received under each party or political designation would be recorded.
Election officials would announce and record both the aggregate totals and the total by party or political designation.
The proposed law would allow a political party to obtain official recognition if its candidate had obtained at least
3% of the vote for any statewide office at either of the two most recent state elections, instead of at only the most
recent state election as under current law
The proposed law would allow a person nominated as a candidate for any state,city or town office to withdraw
his name from nomination within six days after any party's primary election for that office,whether or not the person
sought nomination or was nominated in that primary Any candidate who withdrew from an election could not be
listed on the ballot for that election,regardless of whether the candidate received multiple nominations.
2
The proposed law states that if any of its parts were declared invalid,the other parts would stay in effect.
A YES VOTE would allow a candidate for public office to be nominated for the same office by more than one
political party or political designation at the same election.
A NO VOTE would make no change in the laws concerning nomination of candidates for public office.
QUESTION 3: Law Proposed by Initiative Petition
Do you approve of a law summarized below,on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of
Representatives before May 3, 2006?
SUMMARY
This proposed law would allow licensed and other authorized providers of child care in private homes under the
state's subsidized child care system to bargain collectively with the relevant state agencies about all terms and
conditions of the provision of child care services under the state's child care assistance program and its regulations.
Under the proposed law,these family child care providers who provide state-subsidized child care would not be
considered public employees,but if 30% of the providers gave written authorization for an employee organization to
be their exclusive representative in collective bargaining,the state Labor Relations Commission would hold a secret
mail ballot election on whether to certify that organization as the exclusive representative. Parts of the state's public
employee labor relations law and regulations would apply to the election and collective bargaining processes. The
proposed law would not authorize providers to engage in a strike or other refusal to deliver child care services.
An exclusive representative,if certified,could then communicate with providers to develop and present a
proposal to the state agencies concerning the terms and conditions of child care provider services. The proposed law
would then require the parties to negotiate in good faith to try to reach a binding agreement. If the agreed-upon terms
and conditions required changes in existing regulations, the state agencies could not finally agree to the terms until
they completed the required procedures for changing regulations and any cost items agreed to by the parties had been
approved by the state Legislature. If any actions taken under the proposed law required spending state funds,that
spending would be subject to appropriation by the Legislature. Any complaint that one of the parties was refusing to
negotiate in good faith could be filed with and ruled upon by the Labor Relations Commission. An exclusive
representative could collect a fee from providers for the costs of representing them.
An exclusive representative could be de-certified under Commission regulations and procedures if certain
conditions were met. The Commission could not accept a decertification petition for at least 2 years after the first
exclusive representative was certified,and any such petition would have to be supported by 50%or more of the total
number of providers. The Commission would then hold a secret mail ballot election for the providers to vote on
whether to decertify the exclusive representative.
The proposed law states that activities carried out under it would be exempt from federal anti-trust laws. The
proposed law states that if any of its parts were declared invalid, the other parts would stay in effect.
A YES VOTE would allow licensed and other authorized providers of child care in private homes under the state's
subsidized child care system to bargain collectively with the state.
A NO VOTE would make no change in the laws concerning licensed and other authorized family child care providers.
3'd Middlesex Senate District(precincts 3,8,9)
QUESTION 4: This question is not binding
Shall the state senator from this district be instructed to vote in favor of legislation that would allow seriously ill
patients, with their doctor's written recommendation,to possess and grow small amounts of marijuana for their
personal medical use?
3
9th & 15th Middlesex Representative Districts
QUESTION 4: (precincts 1,2,4,5,6,7)
QUESTION 5: (precincts 3,8,9)
This question is not binding
Shall the state representative from this district be instructed to vote in favor of a resolution calling upon the President
and Congress of the United States to end the war in Iraq immediately and bring all United States military forces home
from Iraq?
And you are directed to serve this warrant seven days at least before the time of said meeting as provided by
the General Laws of the Commonwealth.
Hereof fail not and make return of this warrant with your doings thereon at the time and place of said
voting.
Given under our hands this 6th day of October 2006.
Jeanne K. Krieger Selectmen
Peter C.J Kelley
Richard Pagett of
Norman Cohen
Hank Manz Lexington
I have served the foregoing warrant by posting a printed copy thereof in the Town Office Building and also by sending by mail,postage prepaid,a printed copy of
such warrant addressed to each dwelling house and to each dwelling unit in multiple dwelling houses,apartments or buildings in the Town,7 days at least before
the time of said Election.
Attest:
Richard W Ham
Constable of Lexington
Town of Lexington
Lexington, MA 02420 Bulk Mailing
U.S. Postage
PAID
Boston,MA
Permit No.
3011
Warrant—State Election
WS CAR SORT
POSTAL PATRON
J.FXINGTON, MA
4