Michael Clark Deserves a Public Apology

At March 21 Longmeadow Select Board meeting, Michael Clark, clerk of the Longmeadow Finance Committee read an official statement during the public comments period regarding support of the formation of a Bonding and Investment Advisory committee.  At the end of the written statement, Mr. Clark offered his own "personal" remarks that were different from the official FC vote including a re-thinking and reversal of his original committee vote.  It was clear to me and probably to most viewers that these were his personal comments.  Below is a short clip (courtesy of LCTV) with Mr. Clark's remarks.



At the Finance Committee public meeting two days later, Peter Greenberg, the FC chair read a strongly worded message that was highly critical of Mr. Clark's personal remarks and threatened that similar future actions by any committee member would result in member expulsion.  Because this FC meeting was a public forum on the upcoming FY2012 budget, was being taped for broadcast on LCTV and attended by a large number of town employees and residents, the remarks were not simply a intra-committee discussion.  It was a very public reprimand.

Richard Liasse, the appointed FC to SB liaison was present at this March 21 SB meeting.  Why wasn't he asked to read the FC statement given that this is his assigned responsibility?  Also, it is interesting to note Mr. Liasse's biweekly SB comments as the FC representative usually contain both official and his personal remarks.  Below is a video clip (courtesy of LCTV) of Mr. Greenberg's remarks.



As readers of my Buzz posts know, I was highly critical of Mr. Clark's lack of experience when he was running for Select Board last June but I have been impressed with his participation in town government related business over the past 9 months by his membership on the Finance Committee.  His recent decision to run for School Committee to gain experience on school related business is also very noteworthy.  While I do not agree with many of his publicly expressed views, I do admire his willingness to commit his time and energy to town and now school related business.

What happened at the March 23 Finance Committee meeting was a "cheap shot" aimed at making sure that committee members "toe the line".  I'm sure that Mr. Clark is feeling similar to how I felt last year when I was fired as the "town webmaster" for expressing my "personal" opinion about the tactics of the School Building Committee. (N.B. My commentary was here on the Buzz blog and was in no way connected to my responsibilities as town webmaster.)  I suspect that Mr. Greenberg is working from the same playbook as our current SB chairman.

We need both public officials and town residents to be able to voice their opinions in public without fear of reprisal of any kind.

Michael Clark deserves an official public apology from Peter Greenberg.

Will the SBC Submit to Elections or Oversight?

The article posted below written by Alex Grant which appeared in this week's Longmeadow News is a continuation of a series (see below) which challenges the "self" empowerment of the Longmeadow School Building Committee.  Below are LongmeadowBuzz links to the original article as well as the recent official SBC rebuttal from co-chair Christine Swanson:

Who Put the SBC In-Charge? by Alex Grant, 3/03/11

Role of the School Building Committee Prescribed by Massachusetts Law- by Christine Swanson, 3/12/11

_______________________________________________________

Will the SBC Submit to Elections or Oversight?

Will the School Building Committee (SBC) submit to elections to select and replace its members?  If not, the members of the SBC will continue to serve indefinite terms.  If not, the SBC will continue to exercise an unwritten mandate that only it will define.

The SBC, through its co-chairperson, Christine Swanson, has responded to my question of "who put the SBC in charge?" by making essentially two arguments.  First, the SBC says that the voters of Longmeadow, by agreeing to fund the feasibility study and by agreeing to fund the construction of the new high school, also agreed to follow the state's rules, and therefore implicitly agreed to the creation of a school building committee.

There's just one catch: the votes for the feasibility study (November 2008) and for the new high school (June 2010) occurred AFTER the SBC was created in June/July 2008.  So those votes could not have given approval, even implicitly, for the creation of the School Building Committee.  Moreover, the town's voters were never asked to vote, even after the fact, on whether to create an unelected board with undefined powers and duties.

Second, the SBC says that the Select Board and School Committee exercised its power under section 4-4 of the Town Charter to create the SBC when it voted in June 2008 to select certain members for the SBC.  But look it up.  Look up the meeting minutes of the meetings that the SBC cites.  The minutes only indicate that certain members were selected.  The minutes say nothing about creating the SBC, and they say nothing about the scope of its responsibilities, its oversight, its term of service, its mission.  Nothing.  And I did a FOIA request to see whether there might be another document, not publicly available, that established the SBC.  Again, nothing.

But let's pretend for a moment that the Select Board and the School Committee did exercise their power under section 4-4.  Under that section, the newly created committee "shall be monitored and dissolved as appropriate" by the appointing authority.  In other words, the Charter requires such a committee to be overseen by the board that created it.  And, the "appointing authority" has the power to dissolve such a committee as it sees fit.  That means that a section 4-4 committee is subservient to the Select Board or School Committee.  In that way, the elected officials of the Select Board and the School Committee must answer for the actions taken by the committees they oversee.

But the SBC is overseen by nobody.  And since it was never given a mandate to follow, the SBC decides for itself the scope of its own authority.  In Ms. Swanson's response, she says that the SBC has "responsibility for shepherding the high school project through the MSBA and town approvals, as well as through the design and construction phases of the project."  There is no document and no decision of the Select Board or the School Committee that articulates the SBC's responsibility in that way, and the SBC points to none.  The SBC functions as a super board, a board of unlimited duration and unlimited discretion.

Under the state regulations the SBC cites, a town must create a school building committee to go through the state funding process.  The regulations require nothing else about the form and membership of the committee.  The regulations do not purport to override any local charters or local law.  Indeed, 963 CMR 2.10(3)(b) states that the school building committee "shall be formed in accordance with the provisions of the Eligible Applicant’s local charter and/or by-laws."  Beyond that, the regulations make "recommendations" about including certain people as members.

To the extent that the SBC leans on the state regulations to justify its self-defined powers, it is leaning on a pillar of sand.  The state regulations say nothing about the SBC deciding on its own which design to submit to the state, they say nothing about indefinite terms for members, they say nothing about requiring independence from the voters and the elected boards of a town.  All of those questions are a matter of town law.

The reality though is that whatever the Charter, the decisions of the Select Board, and the state regulations say, the SBC has exercised power; it has made important decisions, like the design of the high school.  No town official has challenged the SBC in its nearly three years of existence.  Unopposed, the SBC will continue to operate in its usual fashion unless its members decide that the entity should answer to the voters or their representatives.

So, the question becomes: will the members of the SBC voluntarily agree to submit to elections?  If they did, I am sure that many, if not all, would be elected.  Christine Swanson, for one, probably knows more about the state funding process and has worked harder for the new high school than any resident in town.  The members of the SBC are good people, but the committee must be accountable to the voters no matter how beneficent their decisions, and it must have clearly defined powers, just like every other town board and committee does.

reprinted with permission of the author

______________________________________________

Alex J. Grant is a lawyer living in Longmeadow.  His email address is alex.grant68@yahoo.com.

LCTV- A valued resource for our town...

Role of the School Building Committee Prescribed by Massachusetts Law

The answer to the question posed by Alex J. Grant in his March 3 editorial, "Who Put the SBC In Charge?" is actually quite simple. When the residents of the Town of Longmeadow voted overwhelmingly at two separate town meetings and at the ballot box to obtain funds from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for preparation of a feasibility study and then for construction of a new high school, we as a community agreed to comply with the terms and conditions of the Commonwealth's school building assistance program. All state funding of school building projects in Massachusetts is overseen by the Massachusetts School Building Authority (the "MSBA"), pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 70B. The MSBA was established by Chapter 70B to promote "the thoughtful planning and construction of school facility space in order to insure safe and adequate plant facilities for the public schools, and to assist towns in meeting the cost thereof." M.G.L. c.70B, §1. All cities and towns seeking funding for school projects from the school building assistance program are required to comply with regulations adopted by the MSBA at 963 CMR 2.00, which provide a clear legal and procedural framework for the design and construction of MSBA-funded projects. The MSBA regulations clearly require the establishment of a school building committee ("SBC") in each municipality seeking such funding, as well as set forth the responsibilities and the membership of a SBC. The regulations require the town to make "a reasonable effort" to include representatives from each of the Select Board and the School Committee, the Town Manager, the Superintendent of Schools, the manager with responsibility for maintenance of the new facility, the school principal of the facility, a local budget official, and community members with experience in architecture, engineering and/or construction, among others.

The establishment of the SBC in Longmeadow followed the letter of the law as set forth in Chapter 70B and in the accompanying MSBA regulations, and complied with our Town Charter. Section 4-4 of the Town Charter gives the Select Board and the School Committee the authority to establish new committees as necessary to conduct town business. The Select Board and the School Committee held joint open meetings on June 16, 2008 and June 23, 2008, to interview and then vote on the proposed community members of the SBC. Those members were thus vetted by publicly elected officials in open session. As noted above, the other members are specifically enumerated in the MSBA regulations. The July 21, 2008 letter from E. Jahn Hart, then-Superintendent of Longmeadow Public Schools, to the MSBA (erroneously cited by Mr. Grant as being sent by the Town Manager) requested approval of the SBC membership as required by the MSBA regulations. Upon such approval by the MSBA, the SBC became the local body with responsibility for shepherding the high school project through the MSBA and town approvals, as well as through the design and construction phases of the project. The SBC is simply a creature of state and local law organized pursuant to applicable regulations.

Lastly, we must take issue with Mr. Grant's assertion that there has been no public involvement or input in the design of new high school, and that no opportunity exists for such input. The SBC is an appointed public body subject to the Commonwealth's open meeting laws, and as such, all meetings are publicly posted in advance. Residents who would like to learn more about the project and offer feedback are always invited to attend. We also remind Mr. Grant of the well-advertised series of public forums held to discuss the design options for the high school project during the months leading up to the May 25, 2010 Town Meeting vote approving the project. In addition, the planning board and zoning board of appeals held publicly noticed hearings on the project in November and December of 2010, respectively. All these meetings and hearings have provided and will continue to provide a multitude of opportunities for public input on decisions still to be made by the SBC. The obligation of the SBC is to the residents of Longmeadow, who so strongly supported the high school project but who will also demand that the project be constructed in a transparent and fiscally responsible way. The members of the SBC promise to continue to work diligently on behalf of our community to plan and construct a high school in which our children can receive the highest quality 21st century education available anywhere.

Respectfully submitted by the Longmeadow School Building Committee, Christine Swanson

Report potholes to the Longmeadow DPW

At Monday night's Longmeadow Select Board meeting chairman Rob Aseltine asked all town residents to report potholes in town by calling the DPW at 567-3400 or emailing the information to publicworks@longmeadow.org . 

TM Robin Crosbie reported that the local asphalt plant has opened and that hot patch (vs. cold patch) compound will soon be available to fix these problems.

The town will likely concentrate initially on fixing the main streets like Converse St, Williams St which are in very poor condition before they will begin fixing the side streets. 

There are almost 100 miles of paved streets in the town of Longmeadow.  I suspect with our limited budget resources it is possible that we will run out of money before we fix all of the town's potholes. 

Within two blocks of my house I spotted a number of large potholes and road surface damage on a side street with significant local traffic that I will be reporting to the DPW.  Below is a photo showing the dismal conditions...

[click here to enlarge]

Who put the Longmeadow SBC in Charge?

Not to be impolite, but who put the Longmeadow School Building Committee (SBC) in charge?

It was not the voters of Longmeadow, either at the polls or at Town Meeting.  Was it the Select Board, or was it the School Committee, or was it the Town Manager?  The answer to this question is surprisingly opaque.

What is not opaque is the amount of power wielded by the SBC.  The SBC is running an $80 million project, and it is making hugely consequential decisions not just about the expenditure of taxpayer money, but also about the design and function of the new high school, a structure we should expect to last several decades.  For example, it has been deliberating on whether to include an artificial turf field as part of the project, a subject that had been before the elected School Committee and the residents of the town some three years ago.  Now, with heightened safety concerns over turf fields, the unelected SBC may make this controversial decision itself.

Over a year ago, I criticized the appropriateness of the SBC deciding on the design of the new high school while leaving the citizens with no voice in the design (or renovation) decision, except whether to kill the project entirely.  Left unaddressed was how the SBC had gained its position of preeminence in the first place.  After all, it seemed strange that a democratic form of government had produced an unelected entity with the authority to spend more money than the town entire annual budget.  The publicly available documents suggested that the SBC had suddenly materialized, vested with significant powers, much like Athena springing fully clothed from Zeus's head.  There had to be more.

And so I submitted FOIA requests to the town relating to the creation of the SBC and the selection of its members.  The documents provided by the town show that there was no action taken by the Select Board to create the SBC; rather, it proceeded directly in June 2008 to the selection of its members, as if the SBC's existence was a foregone conclusion. 

The town posted a notice soliciting applications from town residents to fill a few of the positions.  In the end, three town residents were selected by the Select Board and School Committee.  The Select Board decided to name two of its members, Paul Santaniello and Robert Barkett to the SBC.  The School Committee named Christine Swanson.

On July 21, 2008, the Town Manager sent a letter to the state identifying the members of Longmeadow's SBC, which also included six town employees, some of whom are not Longmeadow residents.  The letter said that the "Committee was formed in accordance with the provisions of all applicable statutes, local charters, by-laws and agreements of the Town of Longmeadow."

But was it so formed?  The Town Charter makes no reference to a School Building Committee.  In fact, the Charter says that the legislative (law-making) powers are vested in the town's voters at Town Meeting.  The Select Board is vested with executive powers, i.e., not to make laws but to see that the laws are carried out.  The Charter delineates the powers and limitation of other committees.  Section 4-4 does provide for the formation of other committees by by-law or vote at the Town Meeting.  Or, committees may be otherwise established by the Select Board or School Committee.  In which case, the committees shall be monitored by their appointing authorities.

No by-law or vote at Town Meeting created the SBC.  If the Select Board established the SBC, there is no record of it having done so, aside from selecting some of the members, which presupposes that the SBC already existed.  The most definitive action in creating the SBC was the Town Manager's July 21, 2008 letter.  From the existing documents, it appears that the Town Manager selected all of the town employee members, including herself. 

                                                           

So, who or what is the "appointing authority" that is supposed to monitor the SBC?  The reality is that nobody exercises oversight over the SBC.  The SBC is not answerable to the voters.  It does not submit its decisions for approval to an elected board that is answerable to the voters.  The SBC is a self-perpetuating entity, deciding itself who will fill any vacancies.  For example, the SBC recently decided that Robert Barkett would remain on the SBC after his term on the Select Board ends.

This is not to say that the members of the SBC have not done good work.  They have devoted many hours of unpaid service to the town, no doubt with the best interests of the town in mind.  But that is not the point.  What exactly distinguishes the SBC from some other group of well-meaning people purporting to speak for the town?  And that is exactly what the SBC has done and continues to do.  It speaks for the town.

The SBC is a power unto itself, with no one ever having prescribed any limitations on its authority.  Its creation, whether a product of the Select Board, School Committee, or the Town Manager, was outside the form of government prescribed by the Town Charter.  There is no reason that an SBC cannot function as an entity answerable to the voters.  If our town officials are willing to endorse this undemocratic entity because the current arrangement seems to be working, then shame on them.  If the voters are willing to tolerate town officials who endorse the existence of a powerful, unelected board, then shame on us.

Alex J. Grant is a lawyer living in Longmeadow.  His email address is alex.grant68@yahoo.com

Reprinted with permission of the author.

Part I- Longmeadow Property Taxes Since 1990

Below is a chart showing average property taxes for Longmeadow homeowners as compared to three other surrounding towns (Wilbraham, East Longmeadow and Hampden) as well as the state average from FY1990 --> FY 2011.

Figure 1- Average Property Tax Comparisons
click here to enlarge chart

[Data obtained from Massachusetts Dept of Local Services, www.mass.gov]

The majority of year-to-year increases during the past 22 years in Longmeadow have been greater than the Proposition 2½ guideline of 2.5% (see Table I below).

 Table I- Annual Average Property Tax Increases for Longmeadow

[click here to enlarge table]

Over the past 22 years, Longmeadow average property taxes have increased at an average annual compound rate of ~ 4.5%- well in excess of the Proposition 2½ guideline.  This difference is a result of the eight Proposition 2½ overrides (3 operational + 5 debt exclusion overrides) which have occurred during this time frame.  Given the current economic environment and the recent voter debt exclusion override approval for the new high school project, it is likely that Longmeadow property taxes are going to continue to increase at a rate significantly greater than 2.5%.

It is also interesting to note the large difference in average homeowner property taxes between Longmeadow and three other towns in the surrounding area.  Longmeadow property taxes for FY2011 are 39% higher than the average taxes for Hampden, East Longmeadow and Wilbraham which is very close to the historical average over the past 22 years.

Come back to read Part II- Longmeadow Taxes which will show estimated future property tax increases that will result from the new high school project.

Where is the new Longmeadow website?

At the SB meeting last November 1 Rob Aseltine announced that the Town Manager's Website Task Force had decided to use the WordPress "open source" Content Management System (CMS) platform for the town's revamped website. He also announced that the new Longmeadow.org website would be at least partially operational by January 1 with some additional components being rolled out at a later date. At the SB meeting on February 7, he announced a 2-3 month delay because more time was needed to transfer the archived meeting minutes to the new website format.

A recent look back at the July 26 meeting last year during which the Longmeadow Select Board discussed the forward plan for development of a new town website was pretty interesting.  Mr. Barkett called it right.... he didn't want the plan to fall into the category of "analysis- paralysis".  Below is a short video clip from this meeting with Mr. Barkett's insightful remarks...



At the SB meeting this week there was a short discussion of the need to create a website masthead that was more reflective of Longmeadow.  I'm not surprised that the new "free" Wordpress website "right out of the box" will require some modifications.  A typical theme for Word Press is shown below...

After a little Google searching (I simply searched for "Longmeadow + fiscal year + 2011"- click here to view results) I was able to find the new Longmeadow.org website and was surprised to see a masthead almost identical to the WordPress theme shown above.

I'm sure that there are creative people in Longmeadow who can provide a more imaginative masthead for the new improved Longmeadow website and which would be more reflective of our town.  Perhaps the Select Board should sponsor a contest!

Mr. Barkett had it right... we don't need "analysis-paralysis".... we need a functioning town website with updated information.  It shouldn't be that difficult!

A Gem in Our Valley

Have you visited the Springfield Museums lately?  Have you ever visited?  Just a few miles away is a gem in our Pioneer Valley.  The five-museum complex located behind the Springfield Public Library is on Edwards Street in Springfield.  All too often when a place of interest is located nearby, we do not take the time to learn more and visit.

The five museums contain a wealth of History, Science, Art and definitely knowledge.  School groups in Southern New England visit on Field Trips and learn about specific topics while taking Docent led tours.  This week the Springfield Museums' talented staff has created a wonderful program, "Rockin' Reptiles Week" designed for children.  Vacation Week Schedule.

"Robots:  The Interactive Exhibition" and Reptiles:  The Beautiful and the Deadly" are special exhibits now on view (fee not included with General Admission).

The Dr. Seuss (Theodor Seuss Geisel) birthday celebration with special activities will be on Saturday, March 5.

Have you viewed the Chinese Jade Burial Suit?  Learned about a Samurai's suit of armor?  Admired the permanent collection of Currier & Ives prints?  The Rolls Royce?  Monet's "Haystack"?  These are only a few of the beautiful objects on display in addition to the very large murals that depict life long ago in the Wood Museum of Springfield History.

Visit their website, Like them on Facebook or Follow them on Twitter to learn about weekly events.  School vacation week is a wonderful opportunity to visit this gem in our Pioneer Valley.

Judy Moran
Longmeadow, MA

 

Winter "Snowscaping"

Because of the large amount of snow that has fallen in the last 6 weeks our town streets and crosswalks have become very difficult to navigate.  Driving as well as on-street parking in almost any part of town has become very hazardous.  Car owners are subject to personal and/or vehicle damage because the streets have become so narrow.



Given that the weather has not cooperated until recently the DPW has become more proactive.  In addition to reducing the levels of snowbanks at intersections, the DPW is now currently widening streets in town via the use of privately contracted equipment (see photo below).

I applaud these efforts and am always appreciative of our Dept of Public Works... they are an important element in determining the quality of life in our town.

Select Board: Please take notice of these efforts and their importance to town residents when finalizing the FY2012 budgets!