[Rich, 00:49]
Business...

• The Moderator announced that instead of going right into the STM, we would stick with the ATM for a bit, as the SAC, ARB, AHA, and BOS were working on a compromise.
• ATM - Article 2 - Reports: Removed from the table to receive the FinComm report, then tabled again.
• ATM - Article 26 - Gibbs: A slightly re-drafted motion was presented to fix the problem with the original motion where the language left a months-long gap where the ARB would not have jurisdiction over the property. Approved on a voice vote.
• ATM - Article 27 - Sale of Town Property: FinComm and BoS votes of no action approved on a voice vote. The Moderator noted that he believed no substantive vote could have had a legal effect because the article's wording was so broad that it did not sufficiently warn the town about what was to be discussed.
• ATM - Article 28 - Town Manager Requirements: The BoS proposed a home rule petition to ask the legislature to amend the Town Manager Act (essentially Arlington's town charter) to change the requirement that a prospective Town Manager have three years of city/town management experience to three years of that or of "substantial municipal management or administrative experience." Mr. Tosti, speaking as a TMM, offered an amendment to the BoS motion that would additionally strike the residency requirement, saying that he was disappointed in the number of applicants to fill the previous vacancy and believes people not wanting to uproot their families to take the job plays a significant role in that. Mr. Cleinman expressed concern about our ability to begin a search before the petition is acted on. Mr. Greeley said it was an uncontroversial (to the legislature) petition and should pass easily. Ms. Harrington offered an amendment that would increase the needed years of experience to five when the "significant municipal..." experience was being used to meet the requirement. After that, speakers split fairly evenly on the residency issue. Mr. Greeley, in addition to pointing out that he would not want to hire a Town Manager unwilling to live in Arlington also pointed out that in Arlington the Town Manager has more power over the Fire and Police Departments and therefore it is even more important that the Manager live in Arlington. The Harrington amendment was defeated 47-133, the Tosti amendment was defeated 70-117, and the (thus unscathed by any amendments) original motion of the BoS was approved 171-8.
• ATM - Article 29 - Tree Committee: Ms. Thomas offered a substitute motion to correct "misunderstandings" that she felt crept in to the BoS recommended vote. The differences are to make the Moderator the appointing authority, to give the DPW director to appoint any person instead of being restricted to the Tree Warden, and to make it clear the focus is on all trees, not just trees on private land. Mr. Greeley announced that the BoS endorsed the substitute motion. A couple of people expressed concerns about private property being under consideration and were worried about red tape being imposed when wanting to remove a tree on their own land. A number of other people expressed support for the motion, relating incidents where they felt trees had been too quickly removed. Mr. Fiore pointed out that the committee was not being given any power by the vote and that its job would be to make recommendations to a future TM. The substitute motion passed on a voice vote.
• Annual Town Meeting recessed.
• STM - Article 2 - AHA Proposal: The Moderator announced that under the sponsorship of the BoS, the AHA, ARB, and SAC had reached a compromise. Mr. Greeley said the BoS unanimously endorsed it and urged TM to approve it. Mr. Foskett presented the deal. It would significantly weaken the AHA's demands but would require that the ARB work "in good faith" with the AHA and involve the AHA prior to the development of RFPs. The (long) debate split into two streams. One stream was in favor of the amended proposal and supported the AHA's goals. The other side was against it on the grounds that it would be an end run around the SAC process and would create a precedent for interested town bodies to try to carve off parts of the site for their own desires and destroy the balance that SAC had worked out. Mr. Taber objected to the ARB being singled out and offered an amendment stating that the ARB, AHA, and SAC would work in good faith together. Ms. Fiore pointed out that the AHA has the power of eminent domain but had said it would not uses it because it wanted to be seen as co-operative. Mr. Starr suggested that if the AHA wanted to take anything by eminent domain, it should take the Osco lot. The Taber amendment was defeated on a voice vote. The amendment to the original AHA substitute motion effecting the compromise was approved 116-47. The AHA substitute motion as amended was defeated 55-107, and the BoS original motion of no action was approved on a near-unanimous voice vote.
• Meeting adjourned to 20:00 on Monday, 12 May.