The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:35P.M. in the Town Hall auditorium with all members present.  Also present were Town Manager, David Cressman, Town Counsel, Charles Zaroulis, and Recording Secretary, Charlene Dennehey.  

 

The Chairman opened the meeting with a moment of silence in remembrance of residents Tom Casey and John Synan.  Both were deeply involved with and committed to the town and will be missed.

 

The following scheduled agenda items were discussed this evening.

 

Northeast Cycles, Inc. – Show Cause Hearing

Mr. Peter Pappas appeared before the Board representing Northeast Cycles, Inc.

The Chairman reminded Mr. Pappas that he was notified to appear regarding some violations regarding his license and to discuss the situation to see what could be done to rectify it.  According to the building commissioner and other sources, on or about October 20, 2003 and on other occasions, Mr. Pappas had between 20-50 motorcycles on the site which constitutes a violation as the license allows up to 15 motorcycles.  Also, on this date and other occasions, Mr. Pappas displayed between 3-12 motorcycles where the license allows for 2.  The Chairman requested Mr. Pappas to respond as to what could be done about the situation.

Mr. Pappas stated that recently he had a fire at the establishment which completely decimated the whole operation.  Of the bikes there, 18 are fire damaged which await the insurance company’s approval before removal as they will take them as salvage, and one vehicle was damaged in the fire which cannot be disposed of.  Starting in mid-July, he was able to reopen and had to wait for the landlord to completely finish the building which took 7 months.  As of the middle of September, he started buying motorcycles to replenish the damaged ones and estimated the number between 30-35 including the damaged 18 currently on the premises which he technically owns, but once the insurance company settles, they will own them.  They cannot be removed unless they were stored somewhere else but to do so, the costs are prohibitive.  He restated that was why he has the current number.  He also stated that he probably bought more motorcycles than he normally would because from September until the first snow, is the best time to buy them at an affordable price to make repairs and resell them at a profit. 

 

Mr. Coldwell stated that there were 18 damaged in the fire but the license restriction is for 15 which is a violation.   Mr. Pappas replied that 3 or 4 were customer bikes in for repair.

Mr. Coldwell replied that there is nothing on the license that eludes to repair.   Mr. Pappas stated that the license was issued 21 years ago against some strong opposition from the neighborhood and the restrictions were put in to appease the neighbors at the time and it worked 20 years ago.  Today, displaying only 2 and allowing only 15 on the site is a hardship.

 

Mr. Coldwell asked Town Counsel for the procedure if Mr. Pappas wished to amend his license restriction.   Town Counsel Zaroulis stated Mr. Pappas could file an application for that but he finds it disingenuous that Mr. Pappas stated there was opposition there 20 years ago and this was put in to appease the neighbors at that time.   In fact and what he has been told, there is another matter dealing with the Zoning Board of Appeals.  The neighbors have been upset with the operation down there for the past several years beyond the number of motorcycles in total and on display.  The operation down there shows a callous regard for the neighborhood itself because of debris and junk down there.  When he had the fire and had to store those vehicles, he should have come back and requested an amendment and if he had a problem with the number before, he should have come back and filed an amendment which would have given the neighbors an opportunity to have notice and appear before this board to express their views.  As it stands right now, there is an acknowledgement that this license is in violation and has been for some time.  For Mr. Pappas to try to resolve the issues, he has to acknowledge that it’s not something that happened 20 years ago – it is happening now.  

 

Mr. Coldwell opened the discussion to board members.

 

Mr. Selissen asked when the fire was and Mr. Pappas stated that it was November 2003, Thanksgiving week.   Mr. Selissen reminded him that if all those bikes were on the premises in October, having 18 bikes damaged isn’t a player here as those were on site prior to the fire.

 

Mr. Ryan stated that we have a total disregard for the license permit that was issued by the town for the past 21 years.   Mr. Pappas stated that he operates one bay, had storage containers that he stored those motorcycles in, and got a letter from the Zoning Board which said they were in violation so he removed them.  Mr. Ryan reminded him that there is an amendment procedure to ask for a consideration while certain things happen and that wasn’t done and over a long period of time, there have been violations.  If he wants to change the license, he comes before the board and asks to have it changed, asks to amend the license.  Have the hearing, let the residents have their say, let them weigh in, you weigh in.  You cannot just violate the license that the town has given.

 

Mr. Sears stated that you either meet the terms of the license or you don’t.  It you don’t, you don’t stay in business unless you ask for a change and it gets approved. 

 

Mr. Ryan, added that the first thing to do if he’s having trouble with his insurance company and those vehicles are not moved out and have to be extended for a period of time, he should provide some material to this committee to indicate there is something that is being held up.  We’re taking his word for it but we’re looking at violations that go way back.

 

Mr. Sears stated that he heartily agrees as in a fender bender, the insurance company comes in and takes title to the car pretty quickly and then you can buy it back and it is unlikely the insurance company would treat a motorcycle much differently.   If the insurance company owns those, you should indicate to the insurance company that it shouldn’t be your problem.   If you do own them, then it is your problem and you should do as this board suggests you do.

 

Mr. Gill asked that if the fire was November 2003 and the violation before us was written on October 20, were you notified of that violation?  Mr. Pappas stated absolutely not.  Mr. Gill asked if he knew he was in violation of the permit.   Mr. Pappas replied he probably knew but as bikes come in and leave on a weekly basis, some can be repaired and resold, some cannot.  The ones that cannot, are junked but there is a possibility that he had more vehicles than the license said, not necessarily ones for sale.  Mr. Gill asked if the new bikes were in now.  Mr. Pappas stated that he buys used bikes--not new--and reconditions them and resells them. He bought 15 or 20, some on the premises and some at another location.  Mr. Gill stated that there are a couple of issues here:  It states that your building is 60 x 25.  We need some guidance from the inspectional services department on how many bikes that size building could handle.

 

Mr. Coldwell stated that by your own statements, you have been in violation prior to the fire and you are in violation now.   We have a picture taken on December 18, 2003 showing a number of bikes outside the parking area -- at least 10.   You have to come in compliance with the license restrictions.  That is how it is issued, how you must comply, and it is up to you to get things in order.

 

Mr. Zaroulis added that there are other issues to clarify.  Because of the nature of that particular area, a visit to the site indicates a lot of debris and one question is whether or not there are parts being placed outside of the premises so that they are visible to the neighbors contributing to the derelict condition.   Mr. Pappas replied that he does have bikes in the back of the building but neighbors couldn’t see them.   Mr. Zaroulis reminded him that is a violation -- even those not visible from the street, and asked if there are parts of motorcycles being stored outside to be used for repairs, etc.    Mr. Pappas replied that only ones that are being junked, i.e. they go on a pickup truck or a truck and brought to a salvage yard but some are outside in a fenced in area. 

Mr. Zaroulis responded that is a problem for the neighbors as he doesn’t have a permit for that fenced in area.   Also, you indicated that you weren’t notified of any violations but I was under the impression that you were occupying another bay and there were conversations by you and the building department concerning use of the premises.  Mr. Pappas stated that the building inspector never came and talked to him about Bay number 2 nor did he receive any information from the owner -- he leases the premises.  Mr. Zaroulis stated that he is in compliance since the past 3 or 4 months.  Mr. Pappas stated that he doesn’t have Bay 2 but asked why he was in violation when using Bay 2.  Mr. Zaroulis responded that he did not have a license for those premises and the license is restricted to the area he is in now.   Mr. Pappas stated that it was used as cold storage, just renting another bay, not using it to sell them out of.   He asked if he could rent Bay 2 and store 3 or 4 cars he owns in there.   Mr. Zaroulis responded, not necessarily unless under a Class II license you have permission to do so.  You can’t store vehicles anywhere.  

 

Mr. Sears added his concerns about fire and pollution.  Each motorcycle at some point has gas and oil in it and where does the oil go when you change it, as well as the fact that it is essentially storing gasoline and if someone lit a match, it can be a problem.  You now have a problem from fire that has impacted your business so if you had fewer bikes as is suggested, it might have been less of an opportunity to become a problem.  Mr. Pappas replied that he may be right -- 15 gas tanks full of gas or 25 gas tanks full of gas – kind of a moot point.  The fire wasn’t caused by anything that I did or any of my vehicles.   It was a set fire from a break in.  I’ve been there 20 years, never had a fire or even close to a fire.  Someone broke in and to disguise the burglary, they set the place on fire -- simple as that.  Motorcycles are stored in people’s cellars and garages full of gas and on occasion they do catch fire but this one didn’t catch fire because of anything that I did.  They’re fairly safe.   Mr. Sears stated that he has owned motorcycles but when you have a whole pile of them, they’re each like a little storage unit of gasoline.  And the nuisance value of parts around, a chance that each one has some level of gasoline even if it just has fumes – the more there, the more opportunity that someone will light one on fire.  Fewer ones with the license, is a step in the right direction.

 

Mr. Coldwell requested any neighbors or residents to come forward for the public hearing.

 

Lisa Higgins, 45 Highland Avenue wanted to correct something -- the fire happened on November 16, 2002 not 2003.  It has been a year and two months.   Mr. Pappas stated that he was sorry, it was 2002.

 

Mr. Coldwell and Mr. Selissen stated that changes the picture.

Mr. Ryan asked him why the insurance company is still having trouble.  Mr. Pappas replied that the problem with the insurance company is that of those 18 bikes, he has titles for 9 of them.  The rest of the titles burned in the fire.  They are disputing whether or not they should pay for them regarding his not having titles for them.

 

Ms. Higgins stated that the way the building is situated, you have the building, and behind the building, is a fenced in area that runs from one end to the other.  Two pickup trucks end to end, is approximately the width away from the building and beyond that goes into the rest of the lot.  She submitted pictures taken today and pointed out the part of the back yard outside of the fenced area.  Also, Mr. Pappas has stated he had motorcycle parts in the fenced area so this isn’t just contained in his area, it is now going out into the lot.  Some of the motorcycles are just dropped on the ground, parts all over the place, it is turning into a junk yard.  She also had pictures of the front, displaying more than two motorcycles in front of his garage.   The parking ends up that the trucks that come into the area, end up parking in the driveway or parking on the street because they can’t get into the lot.  It’s definitely an issue.  People coming in and out of the driveway don’t look down Highland Avenue -- it’s as though it’s an extension of the road.  A problem when everything is parked in the driveway; she would like to see this cleaned up.

 

In addition, Ms. Higgins confirmed that the photographs taken today are representative of the condition of the premises prior to the date of the notice, December 29, 2003 and that in her 12 years, there have always been motorcycles out in front and out in back and asked if there’s any restriction in the license about test driving motorcycles.  Mr. Coldwell replied the permit is a license to sell used motorcycles with nothing about test driving.   If there’s a noise problem, she could be directed by our office on where to handle that issue.  Ms. Higgins stated that it is not so much a noise issue as it is the motorcycles coming down into the residential area of Highland Avenue -- no plates on the motorcycles, drivers aren’t wearing helmets, and they’re test driving a motorcycle.  This is a residential area with children.  They’re not putt putt putting down the street -- they’re trying to see what this motorcycle can do if they’re interested in buying it.  In past years it has been worse and has gotten better but they’re still coming into the residential area. 

Mr. Coldwell  stated that we will make note of that.

 

Mr. Zaroulis noted that some licenses you have or by agreements with the Planning Board, i.e.  when people go for a site plan review for an automobile dealership, the issue of where the test drives can go is often addressed so they don’t go through residential areas.  There would be nothing to prevent the Board at a future date to consider that in regard to this license.

Mr. Pappas stated that he does not test ride bikes on Highland Avenue or any other street.  He is aware that bikes go up and down Highland Avenue, James Avenue, Woburn Street:  4-wheelers, 3-wheelers, 2-wheelers, and feels that they come from the neighborhood not from his shop.  Anyone who pulls in his shop, he asks them to leave quietly down Woburn Street. 

Ms. Higgins agreed that there are a lot of things that go through the neighborhood but we have watched those bikes come down, turn around in the circle of our street because it’s a dead end, and pull back into his lot.   Mr. Coldwell stated that we will ascertain what’s going on.

Mr. Pappas stated that if this is something that’s going on,  it’s a police issue and maybe the neighbors should call the police and stop this person, find out what he’s doing there.  The fact that they believe they’re coming to my shop, may or may not be true. 

 

Linda Blanco, 51 Highland Avenue:  Lived there 25 years and when Mr. Pappas’ shop first opened, everything seemed to be fine.  Then the property seemed to go really down hill with motorcycle parts being stored in a pickup truck that has since been removed and she believes is stored at his home.   Concern is that if the business is going to stay there, that it is run as a clean operation and not as a junk yard.

 

Seeing no other residents who wished to speak, the Chairman called for a Motion.

 

Motion by Mr. Gill, seconded by Mr. Sears, that a license violation has indeed occurred.  Unanimous vote.

 

Motion by Mr. Gill, seconded by Mr. Sears, that within 7 days, the licensee comes in compliance with his license and there will be no storage of parts of any type outside the premises, and the matter be continued to the next meeting, January 20 at 8:45PM, and the building commissioner reports back to the Board of Selectmen.  Unanimous vote.

 

Mr. Sears asked for clarification that if the building inspector goes out and finds that it is not in compliance, then the license will be revoked.  Mr. Gill stated that was his intention.

 

Cable Advisory  Committee -- Joe Dermody, Donna Gacek

Chairman Coldwell stated that this request was made by Selectman Sears.

 

Cable Advisory Committee member Joe Dermody and the Assistant to the Town Manager, Sandra Barbeau, appeared before the Board without Donna Gacek who had a schedule conflict and could not appear, however, she did send a document regarding “Videotape Placement on Channel 10” which was distributed to all the members by Ms. Barbeau.  Mr. Coldwell turned this part of the meeting over to Selectman Sears.

 

Mr. Sears asked Ms. Barbeau for a summary of the handout, however, Ms. Barbeau stated she received the document late in the day and had not had time to digest the contents of it.  Mr. Sears requested the document be added to the contents of the meeting for the record.

Mr. Sears asked who the members of the Cable Advisory Committee were.  Ms. Barbeau replied, that currently Mr. Dermody, Donna Gacek and Bill Marsh with two openings, a 5-person committee.

 

Mr. Ryan asked to comment on this as his recollection was that when there was no committee a few years ago –  not the committee that Joe Gill and another Selectman are doing the negotiations with –  the Board of Selectmen was in fact the Cable Advisory Committee although we went through a period of time where we didn’t have anybody other than Mr. Dermody.   The last official action that the minutes will show somewhere in the archives from 3 or 4 years ago was that this board was going to be the cable advisory board in the absence of anybody volunteering their service and he doesn’t think anything has changed since that time.

 

Mr. Sears asked if the committee has a job description.  Mr. Dermody stated he has not seen a job description for this committee.  Mr. Sears asked the Chairman if we are aware of any job description as to what these people are supposed to do.

Mr. Dermody stated that they have a policy in place but no job description per se.  The policy in place as to what the committee is set up to do as far as programming, goes on Channel 10.  We have a Policies and Procedures statement.  Copies of it were enclosed in the handout tonight.

Mr. Sears referenced Access Programming, Article 5, which is the governing body on the contract – definitions that when the term “issuing authority” is used, it means the Board of Selectmen – “…any resident of Tewksbury or any organization based in Tewksbury shall have the right to place non-commercial programming on the Tewksbury cable system channels provided for such purpose and subject to rules established by the issuing authority.”  Is this policy you’re discussing the same as the “rules established by the issuing authority”?

Ms. Barbeau stated she’d have to say yes, as this is the only document that we function with currently.   Mr. Sears:  And that was approved by the Selectmen?  Ms. Barbeau:  Yes.

Mr. Sears stated that this would be what is referenced and asked Mr. Ryan if he believed that to be true.  Mr. Ryan replied that as far as I know, as I look at the material here, I know that we went through a rather extensive period of time without volunteers to even serve on this board and I’m trying to recall how this document was finally framed.

 

Mr. Gill requested Point of Information -- the title of this document is wrong.  We do not have an Access channel, we have an Informational channel.  Tewksbury doesn’t have a Cable Access channel.  Our channel is for information.  And in the strict sense of the word “Access,” it is understood in the cable industry as a different type of channel altogether.  Ms. Barbeau stated that when this document was prepared, it was presented to the Board of Selectmen in this form.  If it’s worded incorrectly now, that’s the way it was.

 

Mr. Sears attempted to clarify his point:  Section 5.2, says “public and governmental access channel” – this is what Mr. Gill is bringing up.  “The licensee shall initially provide one downstream channel to be used for both public and government access programming.  The licensee shall also provide one upstream channel so that programming may originate from a designated location in Tewksbury Town Hall.”  It seems like there are two channels and one of them is what we’re on here tonight which would be the second.  “After completion of the rebuild, licensee shall provide a second downstream channel for the purpose of public and government access programming.  The issuing authority shall be responsible for the operations and programming of the public and government access channels.”  Mr. Dermody, so we have no public and government access channel or do we?  Mr. Dermody did not respond.

 

Mr. Gill stated, no, you should be asking me as I was in on the last contract and negotiated the last contract.  The Access channel came up at that particular time and had a significant cost per subscriber to it.  The members of the committee at that particular time said it was not worth the effort – Channel 8 –  activate that channel for that purpose.  It was kind of a wild card.  We reported back to the Board of Selectmen, the board agreed, and we signed the license with just the two channels in place.  We have the opportunity to use Channel 8 for whatever use we want to.

 

Mr. Sears:  But we just have 10.  Section 5.3, the education access channel. “The licensee shall provide one downstream channel to be used for educational access programming” – Channel 22 – “licensee shall also provide one upstream channel so that the programming may originate from the Tewksbury Center School and Tewksbury High School.  The issuing authority shall be responsible for the operations and programming of the educational access channel.”  Note that it does not say the school department shall be responsible for the operations and programming of the educational access channel, unless we, as the issuing authority, choose to delegate our authority and that would be the case.  On Section 5.6, System Design, it says, “the issuing authority” – the Selectmen – “ will be responsible for scheduling and playing of access programming on all these channels.”  Mr. Gill, what is your understanding of that?

 

Mr. Gill:  I don’t have that document; [reading] “…issuing authority however will be responsible for scheduling and playback of access programming on these channels.”

Mr. Sears:   Not just access programming on Channel 8, there’s Channel 10 and Channel 22 so we are responsible for scheduling which Mr. Dermody does, as well as the high school, at our direction and play backs any of the access issues.  I want to establish how do you schedule something for say, Channel 10.  What goes through your mind – the video.

Ms. Barbeau:  If we get a request to play a video, the video is given to me, given to Mr. Dermody to view for the appropriateness of the video.  If he okays it, it comes back to me and he schedules it on Channel 10 for whatever.  If there’s another program on, he schedules it around when that program currently on comes off, and will schedule it however many days that the person that requests it wants it on and a couple of times during the day.

 

Mr. Sears:  Mr. Dermody, what is your measure of the appropriateness of a program?

Mr. Dermody:  First and foremost, the informational content of the program and how it impacts the community.  Mr. Sears:  And what standards do you look…..?

Mr. Gill:  Mr. Chairman, I object to this form of questioning.  This is like a courtroom activity here.   Mr. Sears:  Your objection duly noted.

Chairman Coldwell requested Mr. Sears to get to his point.   Mr. Gill:  And without interrogating these people.  

Mr. Sears:  I am asking him some questions to understand his process.  The point is that we brought in a tape of this board which was recorded by a citizen of this town to be put on Channel 10.  She said she would check with Mr. Coldwell and Mr. Coldwell said no because the vote of this committee was not to do that.  I said I did not believe that to be true because I thought that the vote of the committee was not to have Mr. Dermody tape it, not the vote which we’ll see in the Minutes we’ll approve, that I’m correct.  Then what happened is that the matter was not put on TV and I am asking why this board does not tape Selectmen’s meetings and why it does not have them played.  I want to see what standards, not what we have but that Mr. Dermody has, to look at this and see whether this Selectmen’s meeting has the content that’s appropriate to the interest of the community.  That’s part of my point, Mr. Gill.

 

Mr. Selissen:  Mr. Sears made reference to the Minutes.  I’ve reviewed the November 18 Minutes in detail and I also had a couple of discussions with the meeting recorder.  From my vantage point, if we could please go to the Minutes of November 18, I’d like to clarify something to see if we can get this resolved.  Mr. Coldwell requested Mr. Selissen to continue if Mr. Sears would allow it.  Mr. Sears would.

Mr. Selissen continued that during the discussion about videotaping the Selectmen’s meeting, there were actually 3 Motions that were made.  One Motion made by Mr. Gill to not videotape the Selectmen’s meeting, seconded by Mr. Ryan, and approved 4 to 1.  There was another Motion by Mr. Sears as to how many people wanted to videotape the Selectmen’s meeting and there was no second to that Motion.  There was a third Motion that was in fact not voted on and I would like to see if we could vote on that this evening.  That Motion was made by myself, it says it was seconded by Mr. Gill but in a review of the audiotape, it was actually seconded by Mr. Ryan.  That Motion read as follows:  “…to go back to the summary minutes, continue with the audiotapes for now, and wait for the report and recommendation of the Town Meeting Review Committee and follow Town Counsel Zaroulis’ outline of how the minutes should be taken.”

 

What I’d like to do in view of the fact that was not voted on, I’d like to resubmit that Motion.  If I get a second for discussion, then I’d like to talk on it, please.  Mr. Gill seconded the Motion.

Discussion:  Mr. Selissen stated he was not on the board when this special town meeting review committee was put together but I believe all other members were but I firmly believe that committee has been working diligently to put an all-encompassing plan together that will include not only the school department.  It will include all committees, all subcommittees and Mr. Ryan can talk to it a lot better than I could.  I believe it is our responsibility as Selectmen to at least listen to what the town meeting review committee has to say as far as videotaping of the various meetings and subcommittee meetings.  I’d like to hear what they have to say before we take action on it and I think it’s important that we do that.  In addition, once we hear that, then we can make amendments as we deem appropriate.  These people have spent 9 or 10 months putting this together; there are a number of issues such as storage, security, a whole bunch of issues that need to be addressed and I for one would like to see that committee’s findings.  My understanding is that they are coming before us in the next month or so and I’d like to listen to what they have to say before we go forward.

 

Mr. Sears:  This is completely different than what we’re talking about here.  I just want to find out, to be able to have a citizen – nothing to do with storage, videotaping official records, town meetings or anything – the matter is if anyone is a citizen of this town and is going to vote for any of these people sitting up here or hire us to do anything, comes in and brings a meeting of the board of selectmen in to Mr. Dermody or to Ms. Barbeau and says, ‘….here please play this.  I couldn’t see the meeting at that particular time so I’d like to see it broadcast at another time.’  We’re saying no and that may be what you guys stand for but that’s not what I stand for.  We can have a perfectly good town meeting subcommittee come in any time in the future -- that’s completely irrelevant to this discussion.

Mr. Selissen:  I guess I don’t agree with you, Sir.  Mr. Sears:  And you don’t have to.

 

Mr. Gill moved Selectman Selissen’s question.  As a discussion on what Mr. Sears had to say about what the procedures are, first of all, the people should know you went and intimidated the Assistant to the Town Manager.  You told her, no videotapes on the air until you get your way.  Did you go in and do that?

Mr. Sears:  No, I did not.  I want to know why do they have something from Marty Meehan and you’re going to put that one on.  Why do you have something from Tewkesbury England and you’re going to put that one on.

Mr. Gill:  Did you say, “… do not put anything on the air?  I order you that…” -- you said, “ I order you.”

Mr. Sears:  I was a lot nicer than you are to me now, Mr. Gill.  [to] Mr. Coldwell, stop these side comments and Motions coming in.  I want to be able to know that when citizens come in, definitely that they may not be able to, politely, come to these people here and say, “… play a publicly recorded document, a selectmen’s meeting.”  I want to know for a fact that all 4 of you people here agree with that.

 

Mr. Gill:  The reason why we don’t accept outside tapes without looking at them is we had an incident many years ago of a political debate that took place in Wilmington with a State Representative.   The tape got delivered to the Town Hall the next day and it turned out to be a doctored tape.  We played it once and got in trouble over it and that’s when this whole cable advisory thing took place.  Somebody submitted a doctored tape and that’s what we’re afraid of.

Mr. Sears:  Mr. Dermody’s job, I understand, is to review these matters and he gets paid out of this $5,000 that comes in from this, and we can even have more if we want to, plus from the high school.  What standards do you look at when you go through them?  It’s his job to go through the Selectmen’s tape so just exactly what Mr. Gill is fearing will happen, is not going to happen and you should extend that to everything that comes in, everything up at the high school.  Look at a whole band concert or something like that -- you don’t want to have anything “untoward” put in, any veteran’s day program, don’t want anything put in.  Any of this stuff on 22, it needs to have the same standard of review as would be applied to the exclusion of selectmen’s meeting tapes.  People from this town should be able to bring something in, if it’s not in fact taped by the town, then selectmen’s meetings so people can watch this at different times depending upon their schedules.  You don’t have to agree with me but I think that’s the American way, and we can await this decision.  I think it’s totally unconscionable that we are mentioning this right now and I’m sure the town meeting review committee will have a top drawer, top flight recommendation but I don’t think we should put our civil liberties at bay until we have that report come in.

 

Mr. Ryan:  When the town meeting review committee does come in with its report, it will be an all-encompassing report and it will cover many of the things Mr. Sears has addressed here tonight but it probably won’t cover everything that everybody wants.  The report could go and become endless.  I agree we have to be careful what we put on but it is entirely unfair to ask Ms. Barbeau and Mr. Dermody to come in here and have to listen to that as after all, we’re not giving them specific directions and specific ways of operating.  If this board over the past many years since we’ve had cable has been somewhat remiss in terms of the direction as to what goes on and what doesn’t go on, we have to assume that our two people have had to take this.  I think in all honesty the debate or discussion are a little bit out of order in terms of the way Mr. Dermody has been addressed and how he has to make decisions.  If we’re asking him to do things that probably fall beyond his scope of responsibility, we should be careful about that, if we’re not totally clarifying it to make sure exactly what his responsibilities are.  We are getting far afield on that.  I know you are raising some issues you think are outside the realm of the town meeting review committee, some of them will be, many of them as to how we replay the tapes of this board and these meetings will be addressed in that report.  We will closely align with the Secretary of State’s guidelines and what have you when we get that report, will keep within the framework, provide for security, all kinds of items and down to the final phase.

 

The school department tomorrow will be joining us to review how it will impact them.  All boards and all commissions appointed by this board will be impacted by our report, not only this board or the school committee – it will be the planning board, the conservation committee,  the board of health, all appointed boards and commissions of this town that will have to follow the procedures that are eventually going to be voted by this town.  The appropriateness issue gets heavy on Mr. Dermody and is unfair.  I listened as he tried to defend this as to how he determines what’s appropriate or not.  I don’t ever recall when he first came on board many years ago, that anybody ever sat down and gave him a job description and said this is how you determine what’s appropriate and what’s not, a very difficult position to be sitting there tonight for him and Ms. Barbeau.  We have to go a little bit light in terms of that.  We never thought 20 years ago we’d get to this discussion tonight and to this format.  Everybody ought to take a step back here and wait another month or 6 weeks for the report to come out, take a look at it and see what it says, amend it in any version you want.  The one thing you’ll find is that it is very open, allows total citizen access, anybody at any time can come into this hall or any other board or place and view a meeting plus they’ll be replayed – all will be replayed. 

 

The question I hear Mr. Sears raise is if somebody goes out and videotapes something else outside of that realm, can they come in and use our access channels.  That becomes a much more difficult thing to get involved with.  I don’t know how far we’ll go with that and may be a discussion for another day.  Every board elected and appointed in this town and every commission both in the school side and this side, will be displaying their wares and displaying everything they have and will also be repeated.  Every citizen will have access to come in and also to get copies.  Is there a cost associated?  Yes, there will be.  There will be a town meeting to take care of it.  I suggest we wait for that report and concur with Mr. Selissen that the time is getting close when it will come forward.  Doug is going a little bit beyond that but it’s time we waited to see what part does go beyond it.  I am uncomfortable watching two people sitting here getting a little bit beaten up here tonight.  I’m sure that’s not your intent, Mr. Sears.

 

Mr. Sears:  If you’d let me speak, and I hope that wasn’t sarcastic.

Mr. Ryan:  Not at all, that wasn’t the intent.

Mr. Sears:  I first asked if they had a job description, the answer was no.  Also if what she had there constituted the guidelines, and at that point, asked Mr. Dermody as he said he distinguished when he got stuff, he looked for community content and interest.  At that point…

 

Chairman Coldwell interrupted with the statement that “…we all know what you did.”  When you tend to question people because of your profession, this is what you’ve been trained to do and it sounds like sometimes it isn’t what it is and I respect that and I understand and am not criticizing as that is what it is and I let you go on because I think you are sincere.

 

Mr. Sears:  Before I leave this meeting tonight, I want to find out what standards – you can ask him, Mr. Ryan can ask him or Mr. Gill can ask him – that he uses when a videotape is presented to him and he gets to apply and select whether he puts it on or not.

Mr. Coldwell replied that he hoped the answer would be common sense standards like both you and I would use but I’ll ask Joe.  Common sense standards, language.

Mr. Dermody:  I answered that the first time but Mr. Ryan hit the nail on the head.  I work for the Board of Selectmen and if they’re going to give me certain standards they want, I’m happy to follow them.

Mr. Sears:   The standard in this instance was not to play the selectmen’s meeting, is that true?

Ms. Barbeau:  Mr. Chairman, this particular tape that Mr. Sears is talking about never reached Mr. Dermody.  The tape came to me.  I was told that the board voted not to tape and playback Selectmen’s meetings.  To me, him giving me that tape was circumventing what the board voted.  I checked with the Chairman and you told me no, it wasn’t to be played.  I didn’t use the policies that Mr. Dermody and I have been using since 1997 because it was a totally separate issue.

Mr. Sears:  Getting back to the meeting, it said, “Motion by Mr. Gill to not videotape the selectmen’s meetings, seconded by Mr. Ryan, approved 4 to 1, opposed Mr. Sears.”  That is what I remember it, the vote not to videotape.  It wasn’t not to replay.  That’s all I was saying to you, Ms. Barbeau, you could check with the Chairman of the Board, people who have it did not remember that point at the time.

Mr. Gill:  There’s a Motion on the floor and I want to move the question.

 

Mr. Coldwell:  In my response to Ms. Barbeau, my understanding of the Motion was just that, that if the board did not want to videotape at this point in time, you certainly didn’t wish to show the videotape because you have to videotape before you can show something.  That was my interpretation.  I did check with other board members to be sure but I’ll take the responsibility for having said that and that’s how I interpreted that Motion and I still interpret it the same way.  I have said before and will say again that I have no objection to videotaping the selectmen’s meetings or playing them back to the people.  I also said to Doug today that there wasn’t a major outcry at least in the past few years for this but evidently, if there’s interest, it should be done.  My suggestion is Mr. Ryan’s.  They’re going to come in with a report and if it isn’t all encompassing, then the board can amend the policy and start that process if they so desire.  Right now we’re going to play them, how many times, what times of the day, what days are we going to play them, who’s responsible for playing them, who’s going to store the tapes – we don’t have any of those answers and we have to have some format by which we can work with.  Mr. Ryan’s committee evidently is going to at least give us some idea as to what we should do, all encompassing, and then if the board looks at their piece, and say we don’t agree with Part A, we’ll amend that and put it into the policy, then move on with it.  It’s the intent to get you where you want to be.   Mr. Ryan’s suggestion is we just wait for the report.

 

Mr. Sears:  With all due respect, if you agree with taping and replaying the videos of this meeting in the future, you would certainly agree with doing it in general now and I don’t see why we have to wait for any report.  I’m saying that the fact is that this has nothing to do with any future meetings.  You put a tape in that machine up there so the result of the tape, the tape won’t be looked at, is something done by some foreign agent when it’s presented to the office over there to be replayed according to our contract here with the cable company.  I feel this discussion to some people may think this is the most profound piece of political whatever that has ever taken place in Tewksbury.  I’m ashamed that we’re having it; we should have tapes of the highest deliberative body in town, should make it available to all people, and they should be replayed, and any attempt to do anything other than that is very short sighted.

Mr. Coldwell:  Not without some guidelines.

 

Mr. Coldwell:  We have a Motion on the floor that has been seconded.  Please repeat the Motion, Mr. Selissen.

 

Mr. Selissen noted that the original vote was taken on November 18, 2003, seconded by Mr. Ryan.

Motion by Mr. Selissen, seconded by Mr. Gill, to go back to the summary minutes, continue with the audiotapes for now, and wait for the report and recommendation of the town meeting review committee and also to follow Town Counsel Zaroulis’ outline for how Minutes should be recorded.  Vote in favor 4 -- 1 opposed, Mr. Sears.

 

Mr. Sears requested to continue with questions for Mr. Dermody and Ms. Barbeau.  Since the beginning of this program, what monies has the town received?

Ms. Barbeau:  Since we’ve had cable -- whatever the subscriber rate was for the number of subscribers that we had in any given year since the town has had cable.

Mr. Sears:  That would be about $5,000?  Ms. Barbeau:  This past year, it was just under $5,000.

Mr. Sears:  How many years approximately have we had this?  Ms. Barbeau:   How long have we had cable in town?  15 or 20 years.

Mr. Sears:  And where does that money go?  Ms. Barbeau:  To the general treasury.

Mr. Sears:  Do you know what it pays for?  You’ll find that $2,500 goes to Mr. Dermody’s salary and $2,500 goes for fixing equipment.  Ms. Barbeau:  I think that’s incorrect.

Mr. Sears:  I asked you for these figures and I wish you would get them to me so I can ascertain…

Ms. Barbeau:  I think I gave them to you.  You asked for the amount of money we got from cable per year for subscribers.  I gave you that figure.  You asked me where the money went -- it goes to the general fund.  Those funds are dispersed in some manner that I have no idea, maybe the town manager could tell you.  We have a separate budget for Mr. Dermody that is raised and appropriated at town meeting, that’s roughly $12,560.  That money is used to pay part-time help, part of Mr. Dermody’s salary, and the rest is for repairs and maintenance to the equipment.

Mr. Sears:  Is it possible we could receive more money from Comcast?  Could somebody address that issue?  Ms. Barbeau:  I have no idea.

 

Mr. Gill:  You shouldn’t be asking those questions at all to them, you should be asking me.    Again I object to your form of interrogation of town employees.  What’s your question?  You should have been at the cable hearing we had a few months ago.

Mr. Sears:  Thank you, I’ve read the transcript.  Can you tell me how much money we could be receiving from the cable company but are not and why it is we are not? 

Mr. Gill:  I don’t know what the question is, Doug. 

Mr. Sears:  We can be getting more money than we’re getting from…

Mr. Gill:  Tell me how.  We could raise the rates and then get more money.

Mr. Sears:  Okay, that is the answer to the question.  We could be receiving more money to do this and if I need to tell you how, I will go in and I will read it in here but I thought you were familiar with the contract and we could cut to the chase and let people here know this.

Mr. Gill:  Is this a meeting about the cable contract or a meeting about the informational channel?  If it’s about the cable contract, we have cable meetings.  We had a meeting in July and Mr. Sears didn’t come, it was a public hearing and our first hearing for the renegotiation.  Those are questions that should take place at the cable hearing, not at the Selectmen’s hearing where they brought in two town employees who have nothing to do with these negotiations.  And I’m not going to sit here and get interrogated by you.

 

Mr. Sears:  Capital Facilities Grants, 5.5 – “(a)  To further the development and use of Access programming, licensee shall provide to the issuing authority upon the effective date of the license, an initial capital grant of $50,000 to be utilized for the purchase of equipment to produce public educational and government access programming.  (b)  During the term of the license, licensee shall provide to the issuing authority within 60 days of written request from the issuing authority, an additional $50,000 capital grant to be utilized to purchase equipment when needed to produce public educational and government access programming.  (c)  Upon 60 days written request but no sooner than the fifth year of this license, licensee shall provide to the issuing authority, an additional $35,000 for replacement and repair of television production equipment for public educational and government programming.  (d)  If requested, licensee shall provide free consultation to the issuing authority concerning appropriate makes and models of equipment subject to availability within three months of receiving a request from the same issuing authority.”  That being said, would you like to say something about why we don’t get those monies?

Mr. Gill:  No, we do get them.  If you knew half of what you’re asking … this has been the way the cable has been run since we got it.  Those monies are used for upgrades of the system – where do you think these monitors and TV cameras come from and the speakers?

Mr. Sears:  I’m asking the question.  You’re telling me from where, from here?  I want to know what money comes in, is it from the $5,000 Ms. Barbeau mentioned or is it from the $135,000 that’s mentioned in here?

Ms. Barbeau:  The $135,000 has already been received by the town.  That money has been used to update equipment both in the Town Hall and in the school department.

Mr. Sears:  So we’ve received $135,000 and we still don’t want to broadcast Selectmen’s meetings.   Mr. Barbeau:  That’s not my call.

Mr. Coldwell:  There’s no correlation between the two.

Mr. Sears:  Mr. Gill stated that rates will go up if we asked for more than $135,000?

Mr. Gill:  Exactly, we get nothing from them.

Mr. Sears:  But we’ve gotten $135,000 plus $5,000 a year.

Ms. Barbeau:  No, not a year.  That’s a lump sum figure for the $135,000 over the 10 year term of the contract.

Mr. Sears:  $135,000 over the term of the contract and $5,000 a year relative to the number of cable subscribers in the town of Tewksbury.

Mr. Gill:  As memory serves me correctly, it’s 50¢ a head and that’s how it works.  That 50¢ doesn’t come from the cable company, it comes from the people who pay the bill.

Mr. Sears:  And that’s mandated by the contract.

Mr. Gill:  It’s in the contract.   It’s a contract, not mandated.

Mr. Sears:  It’s in the contract and I believe is a requirement of the contract that you negotiated.

Mr. Gill:  I will not answer any more questions by Mr. Sears.  This should take place at a cable hearing.   Mr. Sears:  I am fine with this.  Thank you.

 

The Chairman thanked Mr. Dermody and Ms. Barbeau for appearing this evening.

Mr. Gill stated that on behalf of the board, he would like to apologize to Mr. Dermody and Ms. Barbeau for the actions affecting them tonight.

 

Mr. Sears stated to the Chairman that from the fact that we were not able to provide them with a job description and an updated list of guidelines, and as there appear to be some uncertainties in some of these things, that we will provide them with the resources as the issuing authority,  to have something in writing so that they won’t be subject to these uncertainties which have apparently caused some people to feel they were upset this evening.

 

Residents

Larry Knight, 17 David Street:  Regard taping the meetings, appreciates the fact there is a review committee going forward to study the issue and hopefully put what seems to be confusion as to how we’re going to address public meetings in a public forum going forward.  As a Viet Nam veteran, struggles with the fact that participation in local community activities, particular government, town meetings -- where we have 200-300 residents typically show up, voter turnout of roughly 17% -- that we’re now taking another step of excluding the public from the opportunity to view their highest authority make decisions regarding the town.  Understands the logistics in determining a policy for storage of tapes, how long to hold them, etc. but can’t understand why anybody would object to the taping of a meeting which the person responsible for putting it on channel 10, can simply put a tape in there, record it himself, forget the review process that was discussed earlier, and simply play it back multiple times during the week and give others the opportunity to see you guys in action.  It doesn’t make sense.  If you want to take the tape and burn it afterwards, fine but show it 4 or 5 times, give the person at that doesn’t fit the schedule of 7:30PM on a Tuesday night, an opportunity to see these guys in action.  Show it on Saturday morning, show it on Tuesday morning, the guy who works the night shift, the person who can’t get down here, etc.  I didn’t see the meeting where this decision was made and was surprised to see that it was voted 4 to 1. Would like to know and hear why you would not want to show a tape of this body in the course of multiple times during the week.  Mr. Chairman, you tell me whether or not everybody wants to restate their reason.

 

Mr. Coldwell:  I’ll state my reason:  Let me ask you the question:  What days and what times --  my call?   So I choose the times and next week somebody else will stand here any say, gee we didn’t know the times, they weren’t convenient.  I have no objection to doing it but I want a procedure that everybody knows and that is sensible.  The committee that is coming in with some recommendations will probably fit the needs of the procedure.  We’re going to do it.  Mr. Ryan said that they’re coming in about a month’s time to try to give us something.  If indeed it doesn’t fit everything, we can amend the policy and get it going.  I don’t want to start something that’s going to have to be changed; we don’t have any procedure to put them on the TV right now.  I could walk in tomorrow with a tape of Mr. Rogers and put it on – it’s okay – play it 5 times a week.  I’m suggesting that it has to have some semblance of order and that’s my reason.  When Mr. Ryan’s committee comes in and it fits the need, I’ll vote to do it.

 

Mr. Knight:  I already stated that I appreciate the fact that it’s being reviewed but I can’t understand why this portion of it can’t be implemented immediately.  Is there a policy for showing the Christmas Tree Lighting multiple times – do we have a policy  for that and who determined what times those would be played.  I’ve seen it quite a few times and it was played at times appropriate where the whole viewing audience could participate and see it, not just those who were able to come.  How was that determined?
Mr. Coldwell:  That’s been going on for years and I have nothing to do with that piece.  This is a new procedure and I agree with you that it’s important enough to let the people know the times, the days, it won’t fit everybody’s schedule and you know that, but that’s what I want to do and that’s my reasoning.  I won’t speak for other members of the board.

Mr. Knight:  I would say that however you determined to play the Christmas tree lighting, follow that schedule, and you’ll pretty much capture most of the people wanting to see it.

Mr. Coldwell:   Okay, we’ll do that.

 

David Silva, 1223 Shawsheen Street:   I don’t have cable, have satellite TV so I can’t get this.  As a citizen, we should be doing everything possible to get the Selectmen’s meeting, the Planning Board meeting, etc. -- replayed 5 times or more a week and you can choose to play them all at 3:00AM for 5 days in a row.  Use your judgment and spread it out so it’s in the early evening, late evening.  Bottom line is that we should not be discussing this.  It is something that should be happening.  There is a committee going on that is addressing this currently.  Is it specifically for all public meetings and is it for public access as there is the other issue as people pay their premiums, they’re paying part of their premiums going to the ability to have public access to the cable company in their community.  I’m assuming that part of my premiums to the people who pay for it goes to cover the access.  You even said so, it’s 50¢ ahead coming from the consumer.  Two subjects:  All public meetings should be replayed at least 5 times or more a week and also we should have public access.

Mr. Gill:    I don’t disagree with you – 10 times a week is fine with me.  I want to wait for the report from Mr. Ryan’s committee.  The access channel is channel 8, hasn’t been activated and will come up during this contract whether or not we want to burden the people with a rate increase to start up the access channel.  It’s up to the recommendations we’ll make to the Board of Selectmen for renewal process.

Mr. Silva:  So the new contract coming up, we’ll renew it for another so many years?

Mr. Gill:  You tell me what choice we have?  We have one company, Comcast.  I would just as soon throw them out.

Mr. Silva:   I heard the $135,000 that supposedly was paid to this town, I’m being seen on TV right now.  I don’t know if this is being taped but we have the technology I’m assuming to tape this meeting and somebody go and stick a tape in and have it refeed and replay – not rocket science.  It’s there and tape it and replay it.  A public meeting not doctored because you guys are taping it up there, not a big issue.  For our Selectmen on a 4-1 vote not to replay a public meeting, is a shame.

Mr. Selissen:  I don’t disagree with you and we should move forward on this, however, a for instance.  Which meetings do we tape?  Selectmen’s meetings?  Board of Appeals?  Conservation, Planning Board?  All the other subcommittees, water subcommittee, sewer advisory subcommittee, finance committee – the finance committee is very important.  Most of their meetings are not even on TV but it’s a meeting that I think needs to be seriously put on TV.  There are so many committees and so many subcommittees, it’s next to impossible to get them all, tape them all, costs a lot of money.  To make a decision -- that’s why I think we need to wait to see what the review committee comes forward with, which Mr. Ryan has indicated will probably be a month out, see what they have to say and go forward.  I don’t disagree with you but at some point we have to pick and choose what we will and will not videotape.

Mr. Silva:  One way to start is to start with the committee meetings that are with our elected officials.  These are people that we vote for and are supposedly answering to us.  I’ve been on several committees in the year past and we have them at the police station, where they are not taped.  All of our meetings with elected officials are presumably videotaped, on TV, the Planning Board, Conservation Commission, etc.  Mr. Selissen:   I don’t think they’re videotaped.

Mr. Silva:   Start with the elected officials that are answering to the citizens of Tewksbury.  If I have an issue with the Finance Committee or some appointed committee, I can either take it up with that committee, go to that meeting, or I can take it up with my Selectmen who ultimately answer to the residents.  Mr. Selissen:  Again, there’s a cost associated with that which is not being incurred now, but is going to be incurred with that.

Mr. Silva:  Then again we’ll have to address that when we get to it.  I have to say as a citizen I resent very much that the Selectmen would flatly refuse to videotape and replay.

Mr. Selissen:  I don’t think we’re doing that at all.   We’re waiting for the committee to come forward and then we’ll make a decision.  Mr. Silva:  Again, when is that timeframe? 

Mr. Selissen:  I can’t speak to it.

 

Susan Duffy,  67 Catamount Road:  Questions for clarification.  Right now the Selectmen’s meeting is being audio taped.  Any resident can request a copy of an audiotape through the town manager’s office and I’ve done that before.  So how hard would it be to replay the audio instead of the music when Channel 10 is running?  I understand you have to decide on a day and a time to run this but I agree with Mr. Silva that it’s not rocket science.  You pick a weekend day, a weekend night, a week night and go from there.  Is the audiotape also done of the Planning Board and Conservation Commission meetings?  I know it’s done with your Board.
Mr. Cressman stated he believed they are.

Ms. Duffy:  If we wanted an audiotape of Planning board or any other?  I’m glad to hear there’s a committee looking at this and reviewing this but I’m not sure how that recommendation will be made.  Brought before the Board of Selectmen and just by a vote of you all or does it have to be a town meeting action, part of our town charter?  When is that next town meeting review committee session and is it public?
Mr. Coldwell:  They’re meeting tomorrow morning, at 9AM here in the town hall auditorium and is public.  Ms. Duffy:  I can’t make it but would you be able to take input from the residents regarding this issue?  Mr. Ryan:  We post all of our meetings and if anybody does come, we have had on occasion some visitors, and they’re welcome to stay for the meeting.

Mr. Selissen:  I don’t personally have any problem with the audiotapes.  If the members would like to go forward with that, I don’t have a problem and have a good name for it:  Grumpier Old Men.

 

Priscilla Harcourt, 1304 South Street:  Two issues:  (1)  Filming of meetings of public officials and whether you like it or not, you’re role models for our kids.  And what a wonderful educational opportunity for a high school student or junior high student to take primary materials to study how our town government is run.  That’s in favor of taking and retaining tapes.  (2) The second issue is my opposition to the Mills Mall proposal.  Seeing a $2 to $4 Million tax windfall doesn’t represent the losses to the community.  With a Mall comes urban sprawl which over time, our neighborhoods are in danger of being swallowed up.  Some residential areas will be retained but the lifestyle of those people will be greatly marginalized.  Exhaust, particulate matter, noise, light pollution and more crime.  Where should people live, in other communities?  This community?  Should we move?  If you grow up in a place that nurtures your well being, you become a productive member of society.

Mr. Coldwell left the meeting to provide water for Ms. Harcourt.

Vice-Chairman Gill declared a 2 minute recess at 9:10P.M.

The meeting reconvened at 9:15P.M. with all members present.  Ms. Harcourt relayed some history of families in the South Street neighborhood and the reasons some have stayed or wanted to return including the history of a family’s return to this community.  In Summary:  Mall proposal severs the connection between where you grow up and the community you decide to serve.

 

Town Manager

Police Officer Intermittent Appointments

Mr. Cressman announced the following Intermittent Police Officer Appointments based on interviewing over twenty candidates and his agreement with Chiefs Mackey and Donovan that these are the best candidates.  These appointments are subject to the completion of medical and psychological evaluations:  Joseph Kelley, Michael Newcomb, Brian O’Neill, Alysia Bramanti, Brian Farnum, David Godin, Douglas Pratt, Jr., Mark Harrington, Sonia Newton, and Dennis Peterson.

 

Mr. Sears asked what the Intermittent Police Officer List is.  Mr. Cressman stated that it is a Civil Service list that is the current Civil Service list and we make appointments of candidates onto that and eventually we make them regular permanent police officers.   One can be appointed from outside of this list to a position but he is not sure of any minorities on the list. 

Mr. Sears asked how we meet our hiring obligations in the public service area, particularly Police

and Fire.   Mr. Cressman responded that first of all, minorities would have to indicate an interest in being hired in the town of Tewksbury.  When he first came here, Tewksbury was under a consent decree in terms of hiring minority applicants as many other communities were within Massachusetts.  We went through a process about 10-15 years ago where we did hire a number of minority candidates and we then were exempted from the consent decree.

Mr. Sears:  So you feel that because we’re exempted from a consent decree that we have no need to consider hiring a minority candidate unless a minority candidate comes to us.

Mr. Cressman stated that our general policy is to follow the list that has been given to us by the  Civil Service of who are the highest ranked candidates and score the highest by the Commonwealth and express an interest in the town.

 

Firefighter Appointments

Mr. Cressman announced the appointment of John Fowler as a permanent Firefighter and Michael Merrill as a temporary Firefighter effective January 25, 2004.

 

Executive Session  -  None

 

Approval of the Minutes of November 18, 2003 (reg. & exec. Session), December 2, 2003 (reg. & exec. Session).

 

Motion by Mr. Selissen, seconded by Mr. Gill, to approve the regular Minutes of November 18, 2003 as amended earlier this evening and the November 18, 2003 Executive Session as submitted.  Unanimous vote.

 

The Minutes for December 2, 2003, regular and executive session, were not voted on this evening as they are in transit.

 

Reports

a.          Board Members

        Mr. Selissen asked to read a statement and commented later and directed it to Mr. Sears.  A quote from the Lowell Sun dated Dec. 24, 2003 as follows:  “…Selectman Sears said discipline at the DPW has been too lax for too long adding that other employees of the department have been charged with indiscretions including theft in the past that were not appropriately punished.  He said he is concerned about the overall spending of taxpayer money and attitudes of entitlement among town employees who already earn substantial salaries and enjoy perks including free use of town vehicles.”  He continued that he wasn’t sure if Mr. Sears was quoted correctly or not but we as Selectmen not only have a responsibility to the people who elect us but also to the people who work for the town.  This was an unfortunate statement and one that has already impacted the morale of the men and women who work for the town.  We have a lot of excellent employees that work for Tewksbury and asked that Mr. Sears and his fellow colleagues in the future before any statements like this are made, think long and hard about the impact such statements will have against all of the town employees.  I believe in positive reinforcement and not negative reinforcement so with that, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the Town Manager to look into doing quarterly awards for the town employees.  I envision that to be that all of the town managers would review their employees on a quarterly basis and make a recommendation for those individuals within the various departments who would be nominated and there would be a subsequent award.  I’d like to look into the feasibility of doing this.

 

        Motion by Mr. Selissen, seconded by Mr. Gill, to ask the Town Manager to put together a recommendation for the quarterly awards process and then come forward with that for the board’s recommendation. Unanimous vote.  

 

Mr. Coldwell stated that on the Motion from Mr. Selissen, he would be happy to work with the Town Manager on that as he has experience in employee rewards programs.

 

Mr. Sears asked Mr. Selissen to pass over the issues he referred to so he could have an opportunity to address them when it’s his turn.

 

        Mr. Ryan:  (a)  The recent Tax Bills included the town’s Elderly and Disabled Taxation Fund request and he requested the public take a look at it as any contribution large or small would help those people who are having difficulty in paying their taxes.  (b)  He asked the Town Manager to look into Article 13 of the special town meeting relative to the establishing of the committees dealing with the educational program and setting up the committees to deal with scholarships and related educational expenses.  He requested that item be put on the next Selectmen’s meeting in January so it can get underway so the next time the tax bills come out, something will be included relative to that program.  Mr. Coldwell stated it would be put under the Town Manager’s items.

 

        Mr. Sears:  (a) Stated that Jerry sent over the wrong thing as he wanted the article from The Sun.  [Mr. Selissen provided The Sun materials.]  He stated he doesn’t remember exactly what it was but the Department of Public Works [DPW] has a history of discipline problems and isn’t new.  He stated that comments about Mr. Duhani’s appointment were interrupted during his remarks earlier but if he is the person who has gone through the screening process, and is the man of integrity the screening process has chosen him to be, hopes he was told about the town’s difficulties as the DPW is a difficult place to work;  hopes discipline is brought back into that organization and responded to some of the quotes:  “…discipline has been too lax for too long…” -- no problem with that;  “…other members of the department are charged with indiscretions including theft in the past…” -- also true;  “…and were not appropriately punished…” -- I think there have been promotions; “…concern about overall spending of taxpayers money…” -- there are 14 people who have town cars and also have salaries.  Of those 14 people, if you take their salaries and then add 25% of them for benefits, that salary equals $112,500 each according to last year’s June 3, 2002 report.  There may be some sense of entitlement which is not available to everybody.  If you have a car and have a good salary and you get the car taken care of by the town, insured by the town and gassed by the town, that’s pretty darn good and I certainly wish I had that in my life and maybe I’m jealous and that’s why I’m taking the position I am in this paper.  (b)  Had asked Mr. Cressman about some of the Perkins issues and wants to know why we didn’t take the opportunity the Superior Court provided us in June of 1998 to have Perkins pay for our going to land court to find out exactly what those parcels in question had for boundaries.  Mr. Cressman replied that the direction of the committee was that he was to work with Town Counsel on that matter.  On December 9, he sent a memo to Town Counsel concerning that matter and subsequent to that, was on vacation.   Since his return, they have discussed it and he is now going to set up a meeting to go over that, particularly with Attorney James E. Coppola, Jr.  Mr. Sears asked when he could see a draft of this.  Town Counsel stated that whatever is done will be in final form from my office.  Mr. Cressman estimated some time in February.   (c)  Mr. Sears asked what is the hourly rate of labor counsel?  Mr. Cressman responded $150 which was provided in the books.  (d)  Mr. Sears asked about internal control procedures in the office of the treasurer:  do we have any in place or do we need any concerning releasing tax title property?  Mr. Cressman stated he would have to review that with the finance director and has not been intimately involved in the releasing of tax title property.  Mr. Sears asked if when tax title property is released, do they routinely not notify you?  Mr. Cressman responded that generally, I’m not notified when somebody within a period of time that a property is going into tax title, that they have paid off their tax title.  Mr. Sears asked, when Mr. Carey released that Perkins deed we spoke about back several meetings ago as Treasurer that was signed by his wife as department head as a Justice of the Peace, that you had no knowledge of that?  Mr. Cressman responded that yes, that’s a point I did not know.  (e)  Mr. Sears asked whatever happened to that survey that Ray Shaw was going to be developing on Mills, some sort of a polling we discussed, regarding questions – did that ever get….

Mr. Cressman replied that was referred to the Mills Study Committee by the Board.  Mr. Sears continued, … and it just didn’t go anywhere I guess; maybe it will go somewhere. 

 

        Mr. Gill:  (a)  I agree with Mr. Selissen.  Mr. Sears has painted our town employees with a broad brush they didn’t deserve.  Mr. Sears:  Which ones?  Mr. Gill:  I don’t need any inane comments, Mr. Sears.  You painted our employees with a broad brush and they don’t deserve it.   The vast majority of our employees are fine, proud workers of this town.  Mr. Sears:  I was talking about 14 people, we’ll discuss that; they’re proud too and have been treated well by the board.  Mr. Sears was reminded by Mr. Coldwell that Mr. Gill had the floor.  Mr. Gill continued that he agrees with the criticisms that Mr. Selissen had about Mr. Sears painting our employees with such a broad brush and disagrees with the way you treat them.  (b)  I’ve been reading in the Lowell Sun about the new Senior Center and recently found out that it’s a lease purchase.  They didn’t buy that thing -- they’re going to pay it off in 20 years through a lease purchase.  Could Mr. Cressman check on how that is done and if that’s something we want to do with our Senior Center.  It seems like a very innovative way of doing something.  Mr. Cressman responded that we had a discussion recently of that committee about that type of subject but the individual who provided some information about it, did not provide as much information in much detail and at this point in time, we did not see that was a direction we were going in right away.  We wanted to explore some other options which is what we’re going to do next Tuesday night in terms of the scope of the building, design, and things like that.  Mr. Zaroulis stated you would need to have a special act of legislature to get past a 10-year lease which is your maximum provided by statute right now.  You’re looking at a special Act.  Mr. Gill:  Just seemed like a very unusual process similar to the Rte. 3 expansion where a private individual built the place and is leasing it back to the community for x amount of years.  Mr. Zaroulis continued that  communities have explored this -- you’re dealing with that particular issue with the public bidding law; that’s an avoidance of it.  Right now the statute limits the Selectmen to enter into leases for not more than 10 years and that’s your basic problem unless you have a change in the statute or you have a Special Act addressing this specific issue.  Mr. Cressman also pointed out that one of the things that some people forget about on Rte. 3 is that project was done in a way to skirt the state’s overall borrowing cap and in our case, that’s not directly a problem of having a borrowing cap except what we have in a sense of 2 ½.   If you are going to go down that route, you would still have to come back to a 2 ½ issue just as you would in a build situation. 

 

        Mr. Coldwell:  Town employees issue:  if there is anything that is going wrong in the organization that people know about or feel they know about and they want to give us the information, we will follow up on anything we have to follow up on.  We have hidden nothing this year and will not hide anything in the future.  If you look at the organization overall, it runs quite well.  No matter the business you’re in, private or public, from time to time you’re going to have things happen of a negative nature.  It just works out that way and nothing we can do to stop it.  There’s no perfect organization in the country.  When those matters occur, we deal with them and we try to act appropriately.  Since I’ve been around this town government since 1972,  I’d measure our town employees up to anybody in the country.  These people that drive the cruisers, answer ambulance calls, plow your streets, do all these things, do a fine job.  Are they paid – yes, I don’t know of anyone working for nothing.  Some of the vehicles Doug eluded to are trucks, pickup vehicles that the foreman take home in case they have to answer a specific call rather than drive all the way back to the DPW building, they leave their driveway and go to the call, i.e. water breaks, emergencies, whatever.  I’m proud of the town employees.  If I’d be a betting man, I’d bet on them and go along with them.  Midnight to 8, riding a cruiser by yourself going to a call -- it’s easy to knock somebody for making a few bucks.  I guess at 18 degrees or 10 degrees below zero tomorrow night, they don’t get into a warm bed – they’re out there.  The ambulances are needed, they go.  If they call somebody out for ice, they go.  These tax bills and everything else don’t get out into your property, into your homes unless somebody does it.  It’s easy to make snowballs and throw them but sometimes you’d better make sure what you’re saying.  If there’s anything that anybody knows about of wrong doing, you bring it forward and we’ll look into it.  We have a track record.  As far as something happening 10 years ago, somebody had a 10-year sentence, they’re out and they’re allowed to try to build their life again.  Somebody made a mistake, fine and this individual paid for it.   If he was promoted later on, he earned that.

 

Mr. Sears:  I don’t want to be painted as being down on town employees at all.  I’m just saying there are 14 people who we have done very well with and if I were averaging $112,500 a year, I would be out there feeling very good and on top of that, getting a town car or truck and on top of that having the gas and the insurance paid and the mechanical work done – those folks have done very well by us and I’m not saying that’s wrong.  Town employees do very well in comparison to many of the people who are paying the taxes and that is something we can be proud of that we pay our people so well.  But the management situation we come into is how can we keep paying those people that well when we have to get money coming in from the taxpayers.  As Chair and as members of this board, we need to know how to do that and that is why I mention these car perks because that’s a good deal for whoever’s got them but it would be certainly more easy for the average person, average town employee, if some of this wealth was spread around and for the people in the town to be able to not have to scrape as deep to pay the taxes.

 

Mr. Coldwell:  You requested a report about the town vehicles and it was provided to all of us.  When you say town vehicles, town cars, some of them are pickup trucks – some were brand new because when I came back on the board, the DPW was down 20% of their work force and were driving vehicles that some dated back to 1958.  I felt that was not the right thing to happen.  Along with Mr. Ryan and Mr. Gill, we founded a subcommittee and we worked with the DPW to try without impacting the taxes of the people too greatly, to put some newer vehicles on the road and to try to upgrade some of the services.  We were fortunate enough to be able to bring the work force back up to full strength.  Unfortunately, because of some of the declines that we’ve experienced in the economy, they’re down workers again.  If you look at it, that may explain some of the overtime.  Maybe you should hire more people but when you do the numbers, it may be better that we do this for the time being until the administration in Boston can provide us with a few more bucks.  We need to get the vehicles out to get the kids to school by school bus during a snowstorm, get the people out to get them to go to work so they can earn a few bucks themselves; we’ve got to plow the streets, particularly in an overnight storm.  To try and do it with some of the vehicles that we had plowing the streets that may not get out there due to their getting so old, was a good investment and the payback came very quickly and the program continues to some extent to the ability that we can pay.   We’ve done things quietly, and tried to make town government more effective but the people have to realize some of the vehicles are the trucks that the foreman drive. Mr.  Sears:  Four  of them have that and also a deputy chief who’s now a retired chief, had a car that was expensive, commuted back and forth to Andover.  Mr. Coldwell:  You also spoke about looking into an unmarked, undercover police vehicle – which this town didn’t pay for by the way.  Undercover vehicles are a necessary part of any police department and we investigated that vehicle.  We have people who are specialists in police work, specialists in fire prevention, and specialists in public works issues, and we have to rely on those people.  If they’re not good enough, then we replace them.  We have a good track record.

 

b.         Town Counsel:      None.

 

c.     Secretary:     Happy new year.  If you haven’t recycled, please start now at least by reusing.  Post your house numbers on your houses in case of emergency.       

 

Unfinished Business

Mills Study Committee – Appointments to be made

There were two openings on the Mills Study Committee with two applicants.

 

            Motion by Mr. Ryan, seconded by Mr. Gill, to appoint Wilfred Lambert, 16 Babicz Road, to the Mills Study Committee.  Unanimous vote.

 

            Motion by Mr. Ryan, seconded by Mr. Gill, to appoint George Donovan, 8 Randolph Drive, to the Mills Study Committee.  Unanimous vote.

 

Resident Maria Damian Fishlin, 120 Jennies Way:  (a) Questioned if there were 3 openings.  Mr. Coldwell replied that the posting was for two.  (b) Questioned if Chief Donovan will be replacing former Chief Mackey on the committee.  Mr. Coldwell responded that he does not know that yet and is trying to see if Chief Mackey will stay as a representative from the police department or not and will also speak with Chief Donovan.  (c) Questioned if these people appointed attended any of the Mills meetings as she hadn’t seen them but had seen both Messrs.  Donovan and Mackey, record of 50/50 attendance, and reminded the board they had set the criteria.  Mr. Ryan responded that George Donovan was a member of the Tewksbury Planning Board for 15-20 years.  Wil Lambert was also the Chairman and member of the Planning Board for the same period of time and both have an extensive background in this area.  Ms. Damien Fishlin stated she understands but she has been to every meeting and doesn’t recognize the names of either of them and was curious if they were asked if they at least watched them on television since most of them were televised.  It is an important part of the criteria so they don’t need to be brought up to speed.  Mr. Selissen agreed and had asked Mr. Donovan and he has watched them on TV.  He cannot speak for Mr. Lambert.  Mr. Ryan confirmed that he has also, known for a fact.  Mr. Gill added that as you know, there was a concern about putting members on so late and we are lucky to have two members who have former Planning Board experience come on the board at this late stage.

 

Conservation Commission – Appointment to be made

Mr. Coldwell read aloud a January 5 written communication from Mr. Sadwick regarding the Chairman of the Conservation Commission’s request that the Board of Selectmen table any appointment until the next Selectmen’s meeting as the Conservation Commission will be discussing a possible reduction from 7 to 5 members at its meeting on January 7, 2004. 

 

Under discussion, Mr. Selissen has no problem with tabling this but should the Conservation Commission look to reduce from 7 to 5, he would like someone to come before us and explain why they want to do it. 

Mr. Coldwell will send out a memo asking them to do that with no Motion needed.

 

            Motion by Mr. Ryan, seconded by Mr. Gill, to table the Conservation Commission appointment until the next meeting.  Unanimous vote.

 

Sewer Advisory Committee – Appointment to be made

Mr. Selissen stated we have one application from Mr. Deackoff, have already talked with him, and unfortunately due to the untimely death of Mr. Synan, we now have a second opening on the Sewer Advisory Committee. 

 

            Motion by Mr. Selissen, seconded by Mr. Sears, to re-advertise the position, leaving Mr. Deackoff’s application in, and get more applications in for the Sewer Advisory Committee.  Unanimous vote.

 

Mr. Coldwell will ask Sandy to post the position opening.

 

New Business

Common Victuallers License – To be Approved

 

            Motion by Mr. Gill, seconded by Mr. Sears, to grant the Common Victualler License to Hunan Wok, Inc., d/b/a Hunan Wok Restaurant of 2290B Main Street, Tewksbury, MA, Chong-Keng Chen of 63 Greenleaf Street, Malden, MA, Corporate Officer.  Unanimous vote.

 

 

The Chairman reminded all that the next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, January 20, 2004 at 7:30P.M. with a very aggressive agenda planned.

 

Seeing no further business before them, Motion by Mr. Selissen, seconded by Mr. Sears, unanimous vote to adjourn at 9:55P.M.   On a roll call vote, Mr. Selissen, Mr. Sears, Mr. Gill, Mr. Ryan, Chairman Coldwell all in favor. 

 

                       

                       

                        ___________________________

         Jerome E. Selissen, Clerk