HomeMy Public PortalAboutCharter Review Minutes 2014-08-04 CIRLEA`.15 TCMfi CL E?K.
'14 SEP Z 4:15Rr
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
August 4, 2014
Approved on August 25, 2014
Call to Order:
A meeting of the Orleans Charter Review Committee was held on Monday, August 4, 2014 in
the Nauset Room of the Town Hall. Present were Chairwoman Patricia Fallender, Vice-
Chairman Charles Ketchuck, Clerk Anne Carron, member Francis Moran Jr., member Carolyn
Kennedy, member Susan B. Christie, member John Crawford, and Recording Secretary Valerie
Picco. Town Administrator John Kelly, Board of Selectman liaison David M. Dunford and
Finance Committee liaison Mark Carron were also present for the meeting.
Public Comment:
Member of the public Alan McClennen. There was no public comment.
Aooroval of Minutes of July 21. 2014:
On a motion by Ms. Kennedy, and seconded by Mrs. Christie, the Committee voted to
accept the minutes, as amended, of the July 21, 2014 meeting.
The vote was 7-0-0.
Meet with Town Administrator John Kellv:
Town Administrator John Kelly answered questions posed by the Committee (attached).
Intermunicioal Agreement Provision. Mr. Kelly would like to see the Intermunicipal Agreement
Provision (IMA) addressed (Section 3-5-3). Our Charter currently requires Orleans to obtain
Town Meeting approval for IMAs exceeding 3 years. The law has changed and other Boards of
Selectmen can sign IMAs for more than 3 years. He would like to see the Board of Selectmen
enter into IMAs with greater flexibility, which currently the Charter does not allow. The Town has
missed opportunities for signing cooperative agreements between towns because of this, and
he suggested that allowing a 5 year agreement without an appropriation might be a good place
to start. Currently the town cannot sign anything beyond 3 years, or in excess of$50,000.00,
without Town Meeting approval. The Committee discussed 5 years without a limitation on a
dollar amount. Mr. Kelly would prefer no dollar limit and to leave it up to Town Meeting when
they approve the budget.
Election vs. ADDOlntment. Regarding the election vs. appointment of Multi Member Bodies
(MMBs), Mr. Kelly stated that the Library Board and the OES have statutory authority, so they
should remain elected. The Board of Health deals with properties and issues that cost money.
Their election provides insulation from politics, but the desire to have accountability to the Board
of Selectmen is understandable. Every town on the Cape has an elected Board of Health.
Term Limits. Mr. Kelly generally supports the idea of term limits. Term limits are one way to
foster increased interest in boards and committees, as there would be more opportunities to
serve. Term limits also bring change and new ideas. As far as the Board of Selectmen, the
same benefits to having term limits apply. If the goal is to provide new opportunities for
residents, then the Board of Selectmen should be looked at in the same way. Mr. Kelly does not
agree that it takes numerous years on a committee to understand it. There is professional staff
to help.
Mr. Crawford asked for input on how long term limits should be. Mr. Kelly thinks 6 years, or 2
terms on a board, is a good number. He reminded the Committee that the Charter is only going
to affect the Committees in the Charter. Most of them are regulatory in nature, and MMBs, and 2
terms might be a good place to start.
The Committee will speak further about creating a list of interested citizens, and having term
limits, in order to have more volunteers.
Mrs. Fallender asked that if the Board of Selectmen already has a policy for their appointments,
which is 2 terms with the caveat that 3 terms can be considered, is it necessary for that to be
put in the Charter for the appointed? Mr. Kelly said that should be done.
Recall. The requirements for a recall are purposefully steep. It is a last resort. Mr. Kelly warned
against making recall easier. Recall is meant to be difficult because of the importance and the
cost. Term limits might be a better answer to the recall question. Orleans has not had a recall
and has only had one threat of one.
Difference between Town Administrator and Town Manager.
Mr. Kelly suggested that instead of looking at the titles, instead look at the responsibilities and
authorities of each, as they vary from town to town. There are Town Managers in 6 Cape towns,
but they do not all have the same authority. The Town Manager form of government is the
strongest of all town forms of government and has the most authority and responsibilities vested
in one person, some of which are removed from the Board of Selectmen. The Town Manager is
the appointing authority for the police, and setting compensation, and handling collective
bargaining. The Town Administrator is the next strongest form, although some Town
Administrator forms may be stronger than others. Mr. Kelly, as a Town Administrator, does not
have the direct line authority with Chiefs that he would have as a Town Manager.
Orleans has the Town Administrator, Open Town Meeting, and Town Charter. The Town Charter
was adopted in 1985. There are limits on what a Charter Committee can do vs. a Charter
Commission. Mr. Kelly believes that only a Charter Commission can change the Town
Administrator to the Town Manager. Law and authorities and fiscal responsibilities would have to
be rewritten. Mrs. Fallender would like to find out whether or not the Charter Committee could
make the recommendation to have a Charter Commission instead. Regarding the question of
whether being a Town Administrator is in the best interest of the Town, Mr. Kelly replied that
having a Town Manager would further streamline things. At this point, however, nothing other
than the IMA is broken, and if the Committee wanted to move in that direction, changing some
Town Administrator responsibilities could be a next step.
Streamline Town Meetina. Mr. Kelly is looking at the idea of a consent calendar. Housekeeping
issues could be addressed in one block. Other ways being looked at are electronic voting ideas
and doing away with the requirement that every split vote have a pro and con oral presentation.
Town Meetina Participation. The Town has talked about the days of the week before in regard to
Town Meeting and no changes have been made. Mr. Kelly believes the biggest thing that helped
thus far was reducing the quorum from 5% to 200. He recommends reducing the quorum to
zero. The attendance number goes up in every town that reduces the quorum to zero. Without a
quorum Town Meeting business can be completed. Secret ballots are up to the Moderator and
he has said before that he will listen to the voters. The Committee will speak to the Town
Moderator when he attends the meeting on August 25 regarding this. Electronic voting is a
possible solution. Eastham had a $20,000 appropriation to study it this year. The Committee
discussed renting or leasing the equipment and the setup involved. Mrs. Carron has suggested
a new chapter on technology. Mr. Kelly explained that as of 2 years ago, remote participation is
allowed under the Open Meetings Law, and now would be a time to hear recommendations.
Review and Adoot "Basic Principles" and amendment to Charter Introduction reaardinc
transoarencv:
Mrs. Fallender put together the Orleans Charter Review Committee 2014-2015 Basic Principles
and added No. 6, the transparency language, as follows: "To promote transparency in
government, that is, providing information to citizens about what their government is doing, at all
levels, and providing the rationale for its decisions."
The Committee decided they wanted to reword No. 3, second sentence, to read "Elected
officials will be subject to recall; appointed officials may be removed for cause by the
appointing authority."
On a motion by Ms. Carron, and seconded by Mr. Ketchuck, the Committee voted to
approve the Basic Principles as amended.
The vote was 7-0-0.
Review Charter Suaaestion Database and add anv new input from Committee Members and
others:
Mrs. Fallender updated the database per discussions from the previous meeting. She asked for
any comment or discussions. Mr. Moran asked that an addition for Chapter 5 be "review
whether any elected boards or offices should be appointed" and, secondly, "review whether any
elected boards or offices should have term limits." Mr. Moran requested an addition to Chapter 6
be "review whether any appointed MMBs should be elected" and then add "whether any of
these MMBs should have term limits."
Mr. Ketchuck asked what the rationale was for the Finance Committee being appointed by the
Moderator. Mrs. Christie explained that the Moderator is independent and that his selection
reflects that, so the Committee can look at different matters impartially. The Moderator is elected
annually and is independent of the Board of Selectmen.
Receive anv research input from Committee members reaardina suaaested charter chanoes:
Memos from Frank Moran
Mr. Moran sent the CRC a memorandum regarding his legal review of the recommendations to
the CRC by Selectman Jon Fuller (attached). This review is intended for discussion purposes
only for the CRC. The CRC will decide on any matters to be reviewed with Town Counsel.
Regarding Mr. Fuller's suggested change to Section 2-7-8, he quoted the general rule in
Massachusetts Practice— Municipal Law, Vol. 1, Section 7.11, and said if the general rule is the
case, matters do remain in limbo until the conclusion of the Town Meeting. He also commented
the issue may be one more of parliamentary or Town Meeting procedure, rather than state law.
He recommended the Committee consult with Town Counsel and Town Moderator.
Regarding Mr. Fuller's suggested change to Section 2-6-1 of the Charter from 50 voters to 10,
state law sets 10 voters as a minimum to secure inclusion of an article in the warrant. This is
correctly stated in the Charter and must remain this way.
Regarding Mr. Fuller's suggested change to Section 3-5-3, Mr. Moran thinks he is on the right
a
track for IMAs, and suggests the amendment be adjusted, to state this is the new law which
says "any period of time which serves the best interest of the governmental body."
Mr. Moran also gave the Committee Members a Memorandum with Legal and General Sources
of Law and Information, which included a website source and other reference materials
(attached).
The Committee discussed the short time frame for their charge and whether they could
recommend the CRC remain in place for any topics not concluded in time for final
recommendations for Town Meeting. Selectman Dunford said he did not believe the committee
was supposed to lengthen their term of service.
Mr. Moran is concerned about the lack of input from the public regarding term limits and what to
bring the public regarding appointed vs. elected committee members. He submitted a draft
survey to be used to gather information (attached). After discussion, the Committee decided to
add an additional question to the survey inquiring about any other issues to be brought to the
CRC. The surveys will be put into the mailboxes for elected and appointed Committees and
Boards and any responses will be returned to the CRC mailbox. Mrs. Fallender and Mr. Moran
will work to get the survey out before the next CRC meeting.
Items for Future Aaendas:
Town oraanizations—schedules. CRC attendance
• Mrs. Fallender is still working on a list of other organizations that the CRC may reach out
to.
• Town Moderator Duane Landreth will attend the meeting on August 25, 2014. The CRC
will email their questions to Mrs. Fallender or bring them to the meeting.
• Finance Committee Chair Gwen Holden Kelly will attend the October 6, 2014 meeting.
• Residents Len Short and Jim Bast will attend the meeting on September 8 to speak with
the CRC concerning the need for nonpartisanship in Orleans government.
• Data Base.
• Research.
Adiournment
On a motion by Mrs. Christie, and seconded by Mr. Moran, the Board voted to adjourn.
The vote was 7-0-0
Adjourned at 9:10 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Valerie Picco
Recording Secretary
Anne Carron,
Clerk
Attachments:
CRC Questions for Town Administrator John Kelly
Memo by Mr. Moran regarding Legal Review of Recommendations to CRC by Selectman Jon
Fuller(for CRC use only).
Memo by Mr. Moran — List of Legal and General Sources of Law and Information
Draft Survey of Elected Town Boards and Officers and Appointed Multi-Member Bodies
Page 4 15
Hi All
I sent this email to John Kelly with questions I had received by Friday AM.
Thought you would all like to see them before Monday's meeting.
Pat Fallender, Chairman CRC
----- Original Message -----
From: Patricia Fallender
To: John Kelly
Sent: Friday,August 01, 2014 3:02 PM
Subject: CRC Questions for August 4, 2014 Mtg
Hi John,
Below you will find some questions that the Charter Review Committee members have
regarding issues about the Charter. I am sending them to you before the meeting on Aug 4
so you have time to prepare a response. The Committee is looking forward to our
discussion.
From Frank Moran:
1. What is your view on the election vs. appointment of multi-member bodies?
Are there certain benefits to the election of such bodies?
Are there certain benefits to the appointment of such bodies?
2. What is your view concerning term limits for multi-member bodies?
3. What is your view concerning term limits for the Board of Selectmen?
4. What views do you have concerning improvements to the rules for recall?
5. Should the CRC recommend a change from BOS/TA to BOS/Town Manager?
From Anne Carron:
1. Would you please explain the differences between Town Executive, Town Administrator
and Town Manager?
From Pat Fallender:
1. Do you have any input as to how we might streamline the Town Meeting procedures?
2. Should we consider a different day of the week and time for Town Meeting?
I know there will be more questions when we get together.
Looking forward to seeing you on Monday evening.
Pat Fallender, Chairman, CRC
A
A
fi
MEMORANDUM
TO: Orleans Charter Review Committee
FROM: Francis S.Moran,Jr.
RE: Legal Review of Recommendations to CRC by Selectman Jon Fuller
DATE: July 30,2014
On July 14,2014, Selectman Jon Fuller submitted several suggested changes to the Orleans Town
Charter. His recommendation for Section 2-7-8 contained the note"(This is proposed if not a violation of
state law.)" The Charter Review Committee(CRC)has asked me to review Mr. Fuller's suggestion for
consistency with state law.
1, Mr. Fuller suggests adding the following sentence to Section 2-7-8 of the Charter:
In the event that Town Meeting is interrupted due to lack of a quorum, or other circumstance, as
approved by the Town Moderator, and cannot be reconvened due to a lack of a quorum or other approved
circumstance, those Articles of the Warrant duly acted upon by Town Meeting, shall stand and not have to
be reconsidered.
Mr. Fuller is obviously seeking ways to make Town Meeting for efficient and effective. He
explained his rationale for the suggestion in his July 17,2014 e-mail: That he finds it counterproductive if
Town Meeting initially has a quorum and votes approval of an article,then if Town Meeting is adjourned
say, for a lack of quorum at a later time in the meeting, it makes no sense to then have to "do the whole
process over again." "If they are completed they should stand, if they are not they would have to be done
at some future re-convention."
Massachusetts Practice—Municipal Law, Vol. 1, states the following at Section 7.11:
Adjourned meetings. A town meeting may be adjourned from time to time,and meet and
adjourn to any place authorized by law. ... The eeneral rule is that unless riehts have been vested
in other Dersons in the meantime. anv matter included in the warrant for the prior meetine may be
reconsidered or acted upon at an adiourned meetint?. ...It is a not uncommon provision(in town
by-laws)that reconsideration must be voted on at the same session at which the original action
was taken. (Emphasis provided.)
I believe the CRC ought to look further into this suggestion and consult with Town Moderator
and Town Counsel. It appears that this issue may be one more of parliamentary or Town Meeting
procedure,rather than one of state law. It appears from the above that if a meeting is adjoumed to a new
date without completing all the Articles,then that meeting is considered still in being and therefore would
allow for a motion for reconsideration of any Article that was duly approved. However,the operative
word is"may",not"must". Yet,on the other hand, if the accepted procedure is, in fact,to reconsider at
the adjourned meeting all Articles that were approved at the start of the prior meeting that had a proper
quorum, such a procedure is very inefficient and should be changed.
2. Mr. Fuller also suggested a change to Section 2-6-1 of the Charter. Section 2-6-1 states:
By written petition to the Board of Selectmen, any ten voters of the Town may secure the inclusion
of an article for the Warrant of the Annual Town Meeting,provided that such petition shall be
submitted at least sixty calendar days in advance ofsuch meeting. (Emphasis added.)
Mr.Fuller suggests that 50 voters be required rather than 10,and maintains that 50 citizens would
be a better representation of an opinion and reflect more voters than a very small minority.
a
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 39, Section 10 provides:
Every town meeting or town election, except as hereinafter provided, shall be called in
pursuance of a warrant, under the hands of the selectmen, notice of which shall be given
at least seven days before the annual meeting or an annual or special election and at
least fourteen days before any special town meeting. ...
The selectmen shall insert in the warrant for the annual meeting all subiects the insertion
of which shall be reauested of them in writing b_v ten or more registered voters of the
town and in the warrant for every special town meeting all subjects the insertion of which
shall be requested of them in writing by one hundred registered voters or by ten per cent
of the total number of registered voters of the town whichever number is the lesser.
(Emphasis added.)
Thus, the state law sets 10 voters as a minimum to secure inclusion of an article in the
warrant.
3. Mr. Fuller has also made a suggestion to change Section 3-5-3. This section states:
Any contract or formal agreement establishing such cooperation (intermunicipal and
regional cooperation with one or more other towns, civil division, subdivisions or
agencies of the Commonwealth or the US. government) which requires an
appropriation of Town funds in excess of S50,000 or entails a commitment by the
Town in excess of three vears. shall require the approval of Town Meeting.
(Parentheses content and Emphasis added.)
Mr. Fuller states that the Board of Selectmen should be able to make agreements for up to
five years instead of three.
It should be noted that Section 3-5-3 refers only to contracts that are in furtherance of
intergovernmental relations, as noted above in parentheses. However, it appears that a contract
generally cannot exceed three years, unless a longer term is authorized by town meeting, town
by-laws, or a charter. Thus, if Mr. Fuller wishes a eg neral authorization to award any contract
for up to five years, it appears that such authorization should be stated in a separate sub-section
of Section 3, Executive Powers. of Chapter 3, Board of Selectmen.
The views ex_nressed above are intended for discussion nurooses onlv for the Charter
Review Committee. The Charter Review Committee should decide whether to consult with
Town Counsel on anv legal opinions concerning anv possible changes to the Charter-
MEMORANDUM
TO: Orleans Charter Review Committee
FROM: Francis S.Moran, Jr.
RE: Legal and General Sources of Law and Information
DATE: July 30, 2014
At the last meeting, I indicated that I would provide a website source for Massachusetts
General Laws. That website is at httns://maicaislature.eov/Laws/GencralLaws/Search. One can
do a subject matter search (which may at times produce an enormous amount of references), or
cite a specific chapter and section search.
In addition, one may find the following to be helpful:
1. Massachusetts Municipal Law, 2 volumes, Massachusetts Continuing Legal
Education, Lampke and Vrabel
2. Generally, Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 39 to 49A
3. Generally,Massachusetts Practice—Municipal Law, Volumes 18, 18A, 18B, 18C
4. Handbook for Massachusetts Selectmen, Massachusetts Municipal Association
I am sure there are many more reference materials available, and we should inform each
other when we discover them.
A
(Yl r vA�,z:-�
DRAFT
Survey of
Elected Town Boards and Officers and Appointed Multi-Member Bodies
The Orleans Charter Review Committee (CRC) is in a process of determining
whether to make recommendations for change to the Orleans Town Charter. We
would appreciate requesting that you, as an elected member of a board or
committee, or as an appointed member of a Multi-Member Body take a few
moments of-your time to provide the CRC with your views concerning some of the
important issues it is examining. The survey is anonymous, or if you wish, you
may sign your name. (Please continue any answer on the reverse side and
number the appropriate question.) Please return this survey to no
later than
If you are an elected official under Chapter 5 of the Charter:
1. Do you see any advantages to being appointed rather than elected?
2. What are those advantages?
3. Are there disadvantages to being appointed?
4. Should you be appointed by the Board of Selectmen or some other
appointing authority?
5. Are you for or against limits in the term of your office?
6. If you are in favor of term limits what is your view of what the term
should be and for how many renewable terms?
If you are an appointed member of a Multi-Member Bodv under Charter 6
of the Charter:
1. Do you see any advantages to being elected rather than appointed?
2. What are those advantages?
3. Are there disadvantages to being elected?
4. Are you for or against limits in the term of your office?
S. If you are in favor of term limits what is your view of what the term
should be and for how many renewable terms?
Printed Name (Optional)