Board of Selectmen

Meeting Notice

Date

Tuesday

February 21, 2006

1. Call to Order

2. Salute the Flag/A Moment of Silence for our Troops

3. Approval of Minutes

4. Public Comment – Non Agenda Items

5. Correspondence

6. Shellfish Amendment – Reopening of Little Bay

7. Licenses/Permits

a. Lobster Trap Common Victualer

8. 7:15 p.m. Public Hearing – Reorganization of the Natural Resources Department

9. Town Administrator’s Report

10. Selectmen’s Reports

11. Adjourn

Selectmen Minutes

February 21, 2006

Bourne Veterans’ Memorial Community Center

239 Main Street

Buzzards Bay, MA 02532

************************************************************************

Attendance:

Town Administrator

Thomas M. Guerino

Board of Selectmen:

Carol A. Cheli, Chairman

Galon “Skip” Barlow, Vice Chairman

Richard E. LaFarge, Clerk

Linda Zuern

W. Thomas Barlow

Call the Meeting to Order

Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.

Salute the Flag/A Moment of Silence for our Troops

Approval of Minutes

No minutes for approval

Public Comment – Non Agenda Items

Don Hayward came to present the case of the transparency in the process of government in regards to the Charter. He also spoke of the work done by the Charter Review Committee, the micro-management of town departments and resources and the need of contacting Town Counsel to see if it is permissible to censure or prohibit public comment in the time reserved for public comment.

Ron Bookman, Commodore of the Bourne Yacht Club asked that they have a voice in any discussion as to the future of the DNR and in particular the marinas.

Correspondence

Selectman LaFarge read the correspondence.

Comments on Correspondence

Selectman Zuern will not be able to participate in “Read Across America” on March 1.

She further asked about the letter from Michael Leon regarding the composting proposal.

TA Guerino explained that EDG & Michael Leon both talked about where the proposal was going and opted that they had other things in the fire. It was an amicable departure of the ways and will leave things open if they want to come back in the future. They have some other major projects that they are look at and it’s a cost analysis on their part.

Selectman Cheli commented on the letter from Town Counsel Troy stating that the Chairman is never mentioned in his reply and read the opinion dated February 13, 2006 regarding SEMASS. She said SEMASS has come and gone, they made their presentation and a vote of 5-0 that it was not going any further. It was a dead issue and to let it go.

Selectman LaFarge said that comments were made during the SEMASS process that a vote was not needed. Town Counsel made it very clear that a vote was needed of the Board, which he interrupts to mean that no individual Selectman, acting alone, can invite people to come and discuss matters of municipal importance. It takes a vote of the Board.

Shellfish Amendment – Reopening of Little Bay

TA Guerino spoke of the presentation last week with discussion on opening a portion of Little Bay. The Board, after presentation, determined that they should open the entire area of Little Bay, effective March 1^st.

Selectman W.T. Barlow read the amendment that was voted last week.

Licenses/Permits

a. Lobster Trap Common Victualer

A letter was submitted from Logan Clarke indicating the sale of the Lobster Trap Restaurant and Fish Market to David Delancey on December 7, 2005. The sale included the property, building and all of its contents located at 290A Shore Road.

Don Cunningham spoke of the policy the Town has on allowing the establishment to allow alcoholic beverages to be brought into the establishment, which is in violation of the Town Bylaws. He was questioning why the Selectmen allowed it to happen.

Mr. Cunningham called the Police Department twice and was told it was all right and then spoke with an officer at the meeting and was told it was one of those that they don’t talk about.

TA Guerino was unaware of this happening and will look into the bylaw and check with the Police Chief.

Selectman W.T. Barlow said the issue needed to be reviewed; however the issue before them was the issuance of a Common Victualer Food License.

Selectman W.T. Barlow MOTIONED, and SECONDED, Selectman LaFarge to approve the request for a Common Victualer License for the sale of food. SO VOTED (Selectman G. Barlow excused himself from participating)

7:15 P.M. – Public Hearing – Reorganization of the Natural Resources Department

Chm. Cheli opened the meeting by announcing that in planning for the public hearing she followed the suggestions set forth in the Handbook for Massachusetts Selectmen and also referred to another community, which successfully conducted public hearings. The hearing tonight was regarding a 4-1 vote taken on January 24^th for reorganization of the DNR.

Chm. Cheli asked the Board’s opinion (informally) if it was there intention to vote again on the subject or take the issue under advisement after the public hearing.

Selectman Zuern didn’t think a vote should be taken tonight, but rather consider any information they receive tonight.

Selectman G. Barlow needed to hear from everybody and that making an immediate decision would not be good. Whatever will be done, will be done in open session?

Selectman LaFarge asked how can we say we will or won’t vote depending on the outcome of the hearing? It may be so clear that an instant action is required. A split second decision was made on January 24^th so he felt they should get the information and then decide or not.

Selectman W.T. Barlow said the reorganization of the DNR has been looked at for a number of years and not a split second decision. A study was conducted with 3 Selectmen participating and meeting with the consultant. He asked Selectman LaFarge if he was going in, he was told he wasn’t. He said that Selectman LaFarge then told him that he knew nothing about shellfishing or the DNR. It was his statement and he did not participate in the study. At goal setting sessions, they talked about reorganization of the DNR. He said it had been discussed before and did not just come up and happened the night the vote was taken, especially when coming from someone who sat in on the meetings and participated. He’s not in favor in changing or looking at the DNR, he’s not familiar with the waterways, he’s not familiar with the shoreline. He has been consistent throughout the process. The Board has looked at this over a number of years, talked about it and had the study before them. The advertisement tonight was the public hearing for the reorganization of the Natural Resources Department and did not mention a vote. He felt it should be handled the way it was advertised – a public hearing with comments from the public, and the matter taken under advisement.

Selectman LaFarge responded that he did not act out of ignorance, he said he was familiar with the shoreline, shellfishing, and familiar with the waters. He chose not to be the source of information for a Consultant who is supposed to report the study back to the Selectmen. If you give it to them, you get it right back and the outcome was obvious. He wasn’t impressed with the Consultants who were far more ignorant of the local issues pertaining to shellfishing, the shoreline and maritime issues in the Town of Bourne than he was. He also thought the quality of their report demonstrated that he was right. He has spoken with a former Selectman who participated in setting a goal to reorganize the DNR and his recollection was to enhance and increase the DNR since it serves as a multi-function role. It was not to dismember and throw it away. It was to realize its value and make it work better.

Selectman W.T. Barlow said that Selectman LaFarge states that he is around the waterways, familiar and knows waterways and nothing could be farther from the truth. He said that knowing the waterways is actually going out on the water, going through the channels and knowing what areas are open and closed, shellfishing, the beauty of the shoreline.

Chairman Cheli said that in order to participate you had to sign up. A normal hearing time would be about 1 hour, but since so many want to be heard they will allow at least 1 ½ hours. She asked them to hold their speaking time to 2 minutes and also asked that they try not to be repetitive. She asked that personalities not be involved in the discussion. The hearing was on issues and not to save a persons job.

TA Guerino started by reading the Legal Notice that appeared in the February 10^th edition of the Bourne Enterprise and followed that with a power point presentation.

The issue as a goal of the Selectmen was to reorganize the Department of Natural Resources. A study was undertaken by the Massachusetts Municipal Consulting Group as an overview and not as a detailed study. The study reported back with 3 recommendations and incorporated as part of the minutes.

1. DNR organization of the Department generally remains the same, but the role of director is refined and responsibilities adjust to be that of administrative and internal.

2. Similar to #1 but the management of marinas is removed from DNR to separate division (and possibly an enterprise fund – not in the report, but the Town Administrator’s addition).

3. Abolish the DNR and transfer DNR officers to the Police Department for Harbor and Animal Control. Director’s position would be abolished and Marina Manager responsibilities would be to the three marinas. Shellfish also to be separated.

The problems as defined in the report were:

· Communications to the Town Administrator and Board of Selectmen

· Mission and Priority require clarification for the DNR

· Shellfish propagation is a major conflict.

· Marina Management is emphasized, resulting in decline in the delivery of other regulatory services.

TA Guerino then spoke of the vote taken at the January 24^th meeting and directed the Town Administrator to put together a plan and establish a Shellfish Propagation Committee with a report due in 6 months. The Selectmen were looking for an outline as what was to be desired with some flexibility.

Selectman Cheli read a letter from the Shellfish Working Group that was received just prior to the meeting.

Those who wished to speak at the DNR public hearing were then heard.

Joan Delapp said that her overall feeling is Bourne is a town that thrives around natural resources and in particular to the maritime resources and to take away the focus and guidance that goes into those resources would be short sighted.

Bill Grant spoke on behalf of Bourne Concerned Citizens. He said the Plan was not an agenda item, but a study and then reorganization. Tonight was the first time a cost analysis was presented with the 3 options. He said the process was faulty with people wanting to speak split between 2 rooms with no foresight given to the process. He asked if they had gone to any other groups for other thoughts and ideas. He asked if and when the plan came up again, people are given the basic information before hand and to be able to participate.

Brad Thornton directed a question to the Selectman as to what the qualifications of the MMA Consulting Group were. He felt that a decision was made based on the report and felt the report seemed to shallow.

Don Cunningham does not agree with the plan. He agreed that the DNR needs an overhaul. He would like to see an organizational plan utilizing the staff on board and include 1 senior NRO, 1 marina manager, both answering to a director of the DNR who in turn would answer to the Town Administrator. He believed there were many options out there and deserve better than just having 5 Selectmen look at them. He asked that the whole process start over using the procedures in the Town Charter.

Paul Bushueff said his comments were not about the current director or how the Selectmen review his performance, but of the functions of the DNR.

He felt the MMA report had a few good points, but it was negative and based on individual biases and incorrect facts. The emphasis of the report is on side issues and does not address the major responsibilities of the DNR. He believes the DNR has developed a highly qualified and dedicated staff. He spoke of the postponement of goals until after the election. He said the report contained only 3 pages on shellfish propagation. He commented on the decline of permit revenue as pointed out in the report, the decline of shellfishing, marina management, lack of confidence in the DNR (tent issue), shellfish propagation, and Shellfish Advisory Committee. He felt the money spent on the report was a waste of taxpayer’s money. He felt the town should establish needs, goals and priorities before starting the reorganization process and urged the Board to create the study group recommended in an article being submitted to Town Meeting.

Billy Wright said the DNR has too many irons in the fire and felt that if more attention had been paid at the marina, they wouldn’t have had the problems that they did.

Doug Baker spoke on the flow chart and didn’t understand how it works.

Win McLane spoke from the Shellfish Working Group. He spoke on the special meeting held with a close vote (22-0) on whether they wanted to keep it as is or move it around. They were not for or against the director, but what was best for the Town of Bourne. The vote was to keep the DNR the way it was. They felt for some time that there should be changes and hoped the Selectmen would support moving this along with the various groups.

In speaking for himself, he did not see a lot of expertise or experience in the Selectmen with managing departments or people. He hopes that in the future if there were any problems that they sit down and go over them.

David Foynes said the message that has been repeated over and over is to reverse their vote to dismantle the DNR and start over. He also commented on a quote made by Chm. Cheli in newspaper.

Tom Fallon has been a neighbor, friend and employee of the DNR Director for 8 years. He said Mr. Weinert has a vision for the Town of Bourne and knows a lot about the waterways around the Town of Bourne.

Bill Cottle asked the Board to listen to those who are trying their best to advise them. He said the plan was ill advised, ill planned and ill conceived. He asked that if they are going to change the DNR that they engage in a process that is fair, equitable and reasonable. He asked that they seek input from the involved constituencies, gain consensus for the good of the town and then take action for the good of the Town.

Judy Conron commented on the goal setting and policy making. She discussed a 2003 goal regarding the DNR with 3 current Board members were serving. The goal was to define the mission and scope of responsibility of the DNR and to develop strategies to improve the town’s beaches, marinas and recreational facilities. She further stated, that this was never acted on and she felt if they had, that the town would not be in the chaotic and confusing situation the are today. She wanted to see the Board adopt the 2003 mission and scope goal and then use an open process involving interested citizens to achieve the goal.

Stephen Mealy presented a brief report from the Shore & Harbor Committee from a February 16, 2006. The committee voted unanimously 7-0 not to support the reorganization of the DNR. Mr. Mealy said the Committee is willing to assist the Board in any deliberations that they have. He cited the Town Bylaw on the Shore & Harbor Committee and asked the Board to form a Study Committee made up to address the whole Department of Natural Resources.

Michael Frasier was looking at interests of the Town. He said his comments reflected the science of the department and if it went under the Chief of Police, did the Police Department have any type of ecological or environmental background and training. If it were put under law enforcement without any background the town would be open up to liability.

Brian Handy was concerned with the process and felt they needed the hearing first and then render a reasonable decision. He asked that they think this over again and utilize the volunteers with the expertise to form a reasonable decision

Jim Mulvey does not support the reorganization of the DNR, but is in support of realignment. He said the present structure is fine and the defining the operations and responsibilities needs attention.

Hunter Scott reiterated that Bourne has the luxury of shoreline that few others have. To break up DNR would be a big mistake. He feels the Board is acting irresponsibly in not defining the goals and objectives of not only the DNR but also others.

Charlie Miller feels the DNR should remain intact. He thought that marina management could be put under a separate roof rather than connected to the DNR.

T. Gray Curtis feels the Selectmen have indicated an intent to undermine the government intended by the Town Charter. If they are not illegal, they violate the spirit of the Charter. He said that 3 weeks ago he requested the Selectmen to clear the reasons for disbanding the DNR and to provide it in advance of the meeting. He also asked for an explanation on why the Consultant’s report was ignored. He has not seen a public statement for those reasons, nor a letter as to what the reasons might be.

Michelle Ford agrees with the Board of Selectmen that a plan is needed but disagreed with the process. She said the Charter is silent on the process leading to the organization/reorganization. Her concern is not with the DNR, but the process used by the Board of Selectmen. She questioned the data to support the plan, asked if alternatives were considered and associated costs were evaluated. She said if the data to support the plan was examined in public, then the final decisions should not be a surprise to anyone. She urged the Selectmen to rescind their decision to reorganize the DNR and to propose a more thoughtful fact base plan(s). She said if the Charter is followed, the proposed organizational design of January 24, it must become effective 90 days (May 2l) and asked how the reorganizing of the marinas, moorings, harbormaster, shellfishing and animal control can take place 1 week before Memorial Day.

Donald MacDonald commented on the efficiency of the DNR. He said in the past few years he has had instances where he’s received no response at all and gave two instances – 1 there was a fox that was sick, screaming and dying in the neighborhood he called the DNR and there response was to go away and leave it alone. Last year he had a mooring in Buzzards Bay, had a problem with lobster pots getting caught up in his outdrive and mooring and asked them if they could do something about it and was told that not only could they not do anything, but neither could he. He then received a letter, which he read from the DNR regarding mooring inspections. After receiving the letter he went to the DNR Office, there were 2 DNR Officers there, when he started to voice his disapproval of the situation, they disappeared and left the Secretary there. When the file was pulled there was 1 slip of paper and probably should have been 15 slips since the inspections started. He explained the mooring was inspected by Mr. Harrington and said they had no record and would have to go down to see him. Mr. Harrington told him that it has happened to others he inspected.

He also commented on the proposed charging of moorings off of Bassett’s Island and the responsibility and liability of the moorings.

Mary Jane Mastrangelo spoke of her opposition to the proposed plan because it does not outline the functions, set the priorities, goals and objectives and does not state what positions and qualifications are needed to perform the functions and to reach the goals and objectives of the department. She said the plan does not explain how dismantling the DNR is going to preserve our natural resources and asked to reverse the vote to dismantle the department and create a vision for the DNR dedicating and preserving the natural resources in Bourne.

Joe Agrillo was opposed to the reorganization. He questioned the MMA report and asked if they had done this type of report in other towns and their success rate.

Nancy Ruggeri felt the Board was not following the will of the people, not doing what’s best for the Town. The study was incomplete and flawed. She asked who picked the MMA Group and how it was determined to go with them?

Alcott Tobey said that he hoped the DNR director remains in his position.

Chm. Cheli apologized to David Foynes for the comment made and said it was a poor choice of words.

She further followed up on a comment made from Donald Cunningham regarding resident’s having a “fear of Selectmen”. She said she loves helping people of Bourne and was sorry that his family felt that way.

Chm. Cheli calls the Massachusetts Selectmen’s Handbook as her “Bible.” She then read an excerpt from the Handbook that she refers to all the time. She thought the pubic testimony was very compelling, she saw how much the seashore meant to them. She also spoke of Mr. Mclane’s letter.

Chairman Cheli said that it was hard to say, that maybe they acted in haste, but speaking for herself saying maybe she acted in haste after seeing all of those in attendance. After listening to all concerned, she will give it a lot of thought. She said while in the private sector, she relied on consultants when she was not familiar with something and always went with what they recommended, as was this case.

Selectman Zuern has heard several times that the Board did not follow the right process. She then said the Board did follow the process. She said it was hard to come up with a plan in open session. She said when you hold a public hearing you have to present something. She was not in favor of reconsideration of her vote prior to the public meeting. She said she felt they needed to come up with some type of plan, present it to the public and listen to all the testimony. She has also listened to people over the last 3 years. She cited an organizational chart she had from the Shellfish Working Group meeting and looking at reorganizing and something that has been discussed. She has heard from members of the Shellfish Working Group. She said this was not set in stone and felt a committee should be set up to look at all aspects.

Selectman LaFarge said they should admit they were wrong and reconsider their actions.

Selectman W.T. Barlow strongly feels that shellfishing and marina operations should be separated. The marina is a revenue enhancing operation and doesn’t need to be enforcement.

He wanted to leave the remainder of the DNR the way it was.

Selectman G. Barlow thanked everyone for coming and expressing their thoughts and comments. He said he could not have supported Selectman LaFarge’s motion, because he thought they all needed to review what was said during the public hearing with a possibility of reviewing it again next week.

Selectman W.T. Barlow said he counted 3 people who placed signs in their yard or were supporters of his in the past. He then said Selectman LaFarge’s sign holders represent about 10-15 people here in attendance. He said it was very organized. He said there were 20,000 people in the community and maybe 100-150 at tonight’s meeting. He’s sat in a room with 300 people wanting an override and 2 other Selectmen voted for the override to be placed on the ballot. He said the override failed. He appreciated them coming out and speaking, but there are many more in the community than here tonight.

Selectman LaFarge said the group is organized, but that Selectman W.T. Barlow deserves the credit for it, not himself.

Mr. Conron asked what the next steps were, when are they going to hear from the Board, and when is the next open meeting to discuss the process?

Jim Mulvey commented on points made by 2 previous speakers and under 5.3 of the Charter, the proposed organization shall become effective no sooner than 90 following the public hearing and will go into effect unless they vote to withdraw the motion on reorganization and start again.

Lucia Fulco was concerned with the plan voted on and would like to see a motion to put the plan in abeyance, hold another public hearing and have the clock start then.

Selectman G. Barlow said there was a list to look at and it seemed like there was a lot of support to separate the marinas. He said it was a lot of money, lot of maintenance and it needed to be looked at and discussed. He thought they would want to come back next week and look at the issues

TA Guerino said the Board would have to rescind the vote if the Board chose to look at any other alternatives and move forward with hearings or plans, or committees should the choose. He further said to take it off the table anytime within the next 90 days, the Board would have to rescind their vote.

TA Guerino said the Board has heard the testimony and that it would make sense for the Board to reconsider this and try to put together a plan that makes more sense. He said the plan presented this evening did not meet with public admiration.

There was further discussion on the vote taken on January 24^th, the process followed, and why they would not take a vote at this meeting.

Selectman Zuern made a MOTION, SECONDED by Selectman W.T. Barlow
to recess this public hearing and to put reconsideration of their plan on the February 28, 2006 agenda. UNANIMOUS VOTE

Selectman G. Barlow made a MOTION, SECONDED by Selectman Zuern to adjourn the meeting a 9:45 P.M. UNANIMOUS VOTE