Fisherman's and a Quarry

Here's a rundown of the first night of Swampscott's Town Meeting. Tune in for tomorrow's installments here as well.

• First up, the moderated opened Town Meeting. New members (including me) were sworn in. A reverend from one of Swampscott's churches lead us in prayer (why we need to ask Jesus to bless us, I don't know, but I found the whole "tradition" offensive). Representative Lori Ehrlich came to thank the town, as well as quickly discuss some of the things she's done while in office (including $350,000 for Humphrey Street - if it gets through the Senate). Various town committees reported on their year's work, some details below.
• The K-8 Master Plan. Quick run through by the Committee's chair. Readers will note I recently discussed the Master Plan on this website. The only news is that the committee suggested the Grade-Level 1 option, which would turn Clark into a Pre-K/K building and house grades 1-4 at Stanley. Editorialized Comments: They're selling it as a means to increase "parity," which is silly given the overall quality of Swampscott's elementary schools (among the best in the state - all of them). "Parity" is really a creative disguise to save money, at the cost of Swampscott's K-4 educational quality.
  
  Ultimately, all of Swampscott's elementary schools excel at teaching kids - the only disparity that exists are the kids who get the teachers who are right for them, versus the ones who don't - and that kind of disparity would continue to exist at whatever new schools we build. Smaller schools have been proven just as important as smaller class sizes in the K-4 age group, which makes a lot of sense when looking at Swampscott's MCAS scores. With Swampscott's elementary education system among the best in the state, why destroy the neighborhood-school model? It can only dampen the educational standards, whether or not the buildings our kids use are shiny and new.
  
• Bylaws. The town's committee on updating the bylaws attempted to do two things: fix what they suggested were 'inconsistencies' and 'typos' in the town's bylaws, as well as offering a motion to change the bylaws to insert a clause that would force town citizens to shovel sidewalks.
  
• The first amendment - which promised to be a quick exercise - proved to be much more daunting than it looked. Yes, the committee fixed typos and inconsistencies in the bylaws, but they also changed certain aspects of the bylaws that went above and beyond the committee's purview. The worst offender was a change in fees for violating certain town codes - which originally were to be 'no more than $50,' but would have become 'no less than $50' - for each offense. Under state law, that would mean that the town could penalize people up to $300 for each offense if those codes were violated. An amendment passed which would make each violation be exactly $50 per offense.
  
• The second amendment, on snow removal, was effectively killed. Proponents wanted to make sure town sidewalks were properly shoveled, opponents said that the change was unfair because not everyone is physically equipped to shovel and can't afford the unfunded mandate of paying for the walkways to be cleared. The Committee Chair also said that the town technically owns the sidewalks and referenced the fact that in other towns, the town itself pays to clear major sidewalks, especially those on busy streets and streets used by kids walking to and from school.
  
• Buildings. The committee reporting on what to do with the town's many properties gave focused on several buildings: the Phillips Beach Fire Station (currently used as the town's ambulance service), the Humphrey Street pumping station and the current police station. Its suggestion was to sell the Phillips Beach Fire Station, use the Humphrey Street property for a new police station and to lease out the current police station as the new town ambulance service, conveniently located next to the fire department. Additionally, it was recommended that the old middle school be sold.
  
• The Night's Wrap Up. On the whole, there was little contention over the sale and reuse of the town's buildings, but the night ended on a heated exchange when the building committee suggested the creation of a new committee to have oversight of how the buildings could be sold - including the creation of new town bylaws that would be up for approval by Town Meeting, likely in the fall.
  
  Several Selectman came out against the proposal, insisting they retain the oversight of those matters. Instead, they offered an amendment to create an advisory committee instead. Multiple people spoke out in favor of both options and the crowd went back and forth, however momentum in the crowd seemed to shift when one of the building committee members came out and said their process was necessary to avoid another Temple scenario - where the town purchased only a part of the old Temple property, when members of Town Meeting thought the entirety was purchased. Given the applause in the crowd, it seemed Selectmen's amendment would fail and an Oversight committee would be created, but the Town Selectmen were given a reprieve because, as the clock turned to 10:46, people were anxious to leave and voted to table the decision for Tuesday Night.
  
• My Final Comments: There was some dispute as to whether or not the Selectmen must come back to Town Meeting before a sale could be finalized, but it makes more sense to create an independent authority to come up with suggestions for town meeting (read: the Oversight Committee). The Selectmen would still be given great weight in the process, since they'd be the people selecting who would serve on that committee, but ultimately they wouldn't be able to steamroll a decision on the town.
  
  Given the language in the Town Meeting Warrant of the sections on actually selling the buildings in question, there was nothing to assure that the Selectmen be forced to come back to Town Meeting before a sale was finalized - as they tried to say there was. Furthermore, even if they did come back, what's to prevent them from still steamrolling their wishes since they could essentially suggest Town Meeting sell the buildings as they see fit, or else they'll lose the deal negotiated by the Selectmen. It's better to set the conditions to those deals first, so that tactic can't work, because these significant properties ultimately impact the character of Swampscott.
  
  This could be especially important for the Old Middle School, which is well over a hundred years old and represents the highest point of town. Residents can easily see it from as far away as the hills by the old Machon. Elected leaders, professional athletes, actors and CEOs have come out of that building in its 100+ years of existence, so it's only right that the citizens of this town have some more say in how it - and all of the other town property in question - can be sold.

Finally, if Town Meeting is extended to Wednesday (even though we were repeatedly told we'd finish by Tuesday night, that's not going to happen), I won't be able to go given the fact that I previously agreed to a job interview, meaning I won't be able to give a report. If any Town Meeting members will give their own rundown on Wednesday's happenings, let me know. I'll be delighted to post it! Town Meeting is exceptionally important - and rarely covered in the Reporter - so it takes true Citizen Journalism to make sure people have access to what's really going on.

Labels: bylaws, lori erhlich, schools, Swampscott, town meeting, town politics