Thursday, January 19, 2012
Town Council - 01/18/2012
The collection of posts from the Town Council meeting on Weds, Jan 18, 2012 can be found here
Live reporting - closing
K. TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT
Nustyle building was rebid and bids came in under by $60K, should be able to award the contract soon and have the building demolished (finally).
L. OLD BUSINESS
Jones - when will we see department presentations?
Nutting - Feb
M. NEW BUSINESS
Powderly - What is happening with the DelCarte property?
Nutting - as the engineers work on the plans for fixing the dams, they do have plans to incorporate improvements to the 1.5 acres where the house was.
N. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Bissanti - kudos to Mr Mercer for the presentation to the community the other night. Kudos as well to Michael Doherty for pulling together the meeting on this topic.
Mercer - The Building Committee will be meeting the MSBA on Jan 25th and with an approval we will be back here on Feb 1.
O. EXECUTIVE SESSION – not required
P. ADJOURN
motion to adjourn, passed 9-0
Live reporting - action items
I. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
Roy - honored to be selected as Chair, the Master Plan committee met last night Bissanti (Clerk), Kelly (Vice-Chair)
J. LEGISLATION FOR ACTION
1. Resolution 12-03: Master Plan Committee
motion to approve, passed 9-0
2. Resolution 12-04: Creation of A Citizen Committee
motion to approve, passed 9-0
Discussion - seeking volunteers, contact Chair or Town Administrator, to be selected by Feb 15th
3. Zoning Bylaw Amendment 12-669: Amendment to Chapter 185-45 Administration and
Enforcement - Referral to Planning Board
motion to waive reading, passed 9-0
motion to s=refer to Planning Board, passed 9-0
B Taberner provided an intro
M Cerel indicates this was the re-write to clean up language and make it more clear and enforceable; Special permits are recognized by our zoning bylaws. This will be back before the Council for public hearing.
4. Zoning Bylaw Amendment 12-670: Amendment to Chapter 185-3. Definitions – Referral to Planning Board
motion to waive reading, passed 9-0
motion to s=refer to Planning Board, passed 9-0
B Dahlstrom provides an update on the next three all related to a sign bylaw, a complete re-write of the existing bylaw.
More succinct and easily readable, schedule of signs per district, a summary of the districts created
Clearly defines the Building Commissioner as the point of enforcement for all signs
major changes to temporary signs, defined the role of the design review commission
Pfeffer - objecting to one road (i.e. RT 140) not having the same bylaw all along it. It is an other level of bureaucracy, it is confusing things and not making it easier for businesses coming in.
Taberner - different sections of town have a different feel, and respectfully so. Overall, we already have a sign bylaw, this is an attempt to eliminate some of the problems with the existing bylaw. It should help to make it easier spelling things out. I won't say it will fix all the problems, in general, it lays things it out simply.
Vallee - what happens if a national company has specific colors, would they be prevented?
Dahlstrom - No, the Town Council has determined that for a national company, they would not need to abide by our color scheme. This has been vetted through a number of groups, Downtown Partnership, other businesses and town bodies.
Pfeffer - Design Review should be out of this completely, it is another level of the problem and shouldn't be there.
Bissanti - signs for businesses are very important, the gauntlet that they run through is not that easy. I applaud the hard work that has gone into this.
Nutting - I keep hearing that and yet when I meet with the developers and find that we are the easiest town to deal with, organized, easy to work with, I am dumbfounded that we are difficult to work with.
Kelly - I understand what you are saying, they will paint a rosy picture as they do not want to hinder their permit processing.
Nutting - There is a difference between being easy and letting people running over of you? Do you want a hundred different ugly signs? I don't think you do.
Bissanti - I don't think we are taking potshots at any departments. You are talking about some big companies, we are talking about the small and medium size projects to try and get it through the process. The Special Permit was a nightmare, I am glad we are cleaning it up.
Roy - I want to switch gear a little, I was hoping we would get out of regulating political signs. It still says we have to have them removed 7 days after the election. The better way would be to try and get the political groups (Democrats and Republicans), we have already meet. I think it would be better to allow the groups to do so.
Cerel - no one has a right to any activities in the public way except by bylaw or common use. People are prohibited from posting signs but they are not prohibited from holding a sign.
Roy - I think we have an opportunity to draft specific language to help resolve this situation.
5. Zoning Bylaw Amendment 12-671: Amendment to Chapter 185-4. Districts Enumerated – Referral to Planning Board
motion to waive reading, passed 9-0
motion to refer to Planning Board, passed 9-0
6. Zoning Bylaw Amendment 12-672: Amendment to Chapter 185-20. Signs – Referral to Planning Board
motion to waive reading, passed 9-0
motion to refer to Planning Board, passed 9-0
Live reporting - Town Council - 1/18/12
Present: Mercer, Dellorco, Kelly, Powderly, Vallee, Pfeffer, Jones, Bissanti, Roy
Absent: none
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
B. ANNOUNCEMENTS
This meeting is being recorded by Verizon, Comcast, and Franklin Matters
C. PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS - none
D. CITIZEN COMMENTS - none
E. APPOINTMENTS - none
F. HEARINGS - none
G. LICENSE TRANSACTIONS - none
H. PRESENTATIONS/DISCUSSIONS – Discussion of Remote Participation
Nutting recommendation to hold off on this for now, would require additional technology to provide for all meetings to have this benefit. If critical discussions need to be had, the agendas can be adjusted and have been. This is not just for the Town Council, it would also need to be made available for the other 25 committees.
Roy - The Attorney General did study and allow this. In my opinion this would be at no cost. You can do audio and video or just audio. The technology we have is already here. If we don't do remote participation as a board, we prohibit every other group from doing so. It would inhibit participation in the government. Mansfield, Weston, Natick, and others have already passed. Was able to participate remotely via a laptop connection with a FHS committee. I don't think we should pass it up.
Nutting - there is a cost, we would need to put additional technology into the rooms where meetings are held. There is an expense. It is a complication that we don't need now. As volunteers, we understand we won't make all the meetings.
Mercer - I would support remote access for two reasons, it might allow for more participation for those who travel a lot. I travel to China and speak with meetings here a lot.
Powderly - Not sure that approving this now has such a dramatic effect for the other committees. It is like our moving to electronic documentation, we are trying it now. It is not saying all the others have to do so.
Kelly - I agree with my fellow councilors, I don't see a reason why we would not be able to do this.
Nutting - but you got to do it everywhere. If you miss a meeting, it is not the end of the world.
Bissanti - I would like to be part of a group to try this.
Jones - I don't think we should help foster a remote participation just because it is not available.
Bissanti - if we are not the first community to do this, can we make some calls to see how they are doing it?
Roy - I am not advocating for us to spend any cost on this, I believe it can be done without cost.
Jones - If it is all possible to have a demo on the simplicity of the process.
Nutting - I think it is a lot easier here than some other rooms we have and the knowledge of the users. I'll get the get some additional info and costs.
Nutting - it is the Chief Executive Officer who decides (in our case the Town Administrator)
Absent: none
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
B. ANNOUNCEMENTS
This meeting is being recorded by Verizon, Comcast, and Franklin Matters
C. PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS - none
D. CITIZEN COMMENTS - none
E. APPOINTMENTS - none
F. HEARINGS - none
G. LICENSE TRANSACTIONS - none
H. PRESENTATIONS/DISCUSSIONS – Discussion of Remote Participation
Nutting recommendation to hold off on this for now, would require additional technology to provide for all meetings to have this benefit. If critical discussions need to be had, the agendas can be adjusted and have been. This is not just for the Town Council, it would also need to be made available for the other 25 committees.
Roy - The Attorney General did study and allow this. In my opinion this would be at no cost. You can do audio and video or just audio. The technology we have is already here. If we don't do remote participation as a board, we prohibit every other group from doing so. It would inhibit participation in the government. Mansfield, Weston, Natick, and others have already passed. Was able to participate remotely via a laptop connection with a FHS committee. I don't think we should pass it up.
Nutting - there is a cost, we would need to put additional technology into the rooms where meetings are held. There is an expense. It is a complication that we don't need now. As volunteers, we understand we won't make all the meetings.
Mercer - I would support remote access for two reasons, it might allow for more participation for those who travel a lot. I travel to China and speak with meetings here a lot.
Powderly - Not sure that approving this now has such a dramatic effect for the other committees. It is like our moving to electronic documentation, we are trying it now. It is not saying all the others have to do so.
Kelly - I agree with my fellow councilors, I don't see a reason why we would not be able to do this.
Nutting - but you got to do it everywhere. If you miss a meeting, it is not the end of the world.
Bissanti - I would like to be part of a group to try this.
Jones - I don't think we should help foster a remote participation just because it is not available.
Bissanti - if we are not the first community to do this, can we make some calls to see how they are doing it?
Roy - I am not advocating for us to spend any cost on this, I believe it can be done without cost.
Jones - If it is all possible to have a demo on the simplicity of the process.
Nutting - I think it is a lot easier here than some other rooms we have and the knowledge of the users. I'll get the get some additional info and costs.
Nutting - it is the Chief Executive Officer who decides (in our case the Town Administrator)
MassBudget's FY13 Budget Preview
| Having trouble viewing this email? Click here |
| ||||||||||||||||
Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center | 15 Court Square | Suite 700 | Boston | MA | 02108
|
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
STOP SOPA
To support the STOP SOPA Blackout being conducted today, this will be the only post created here:
I have included the link to wikipedia but they are one of the sites reported to be going offline so you may not view this link today.
If you like what I do here, sharing information about what matters in Franklin, MA - then please find out more about SOPA and PIPA.
What would happen if this site got shut down?
Google has a page with information and petition to sign here
https://www.google.com/landing/takeaction/
Note: email subscribers will need to click through to Franklin Matters to view the video.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)