[Rich, 01:20]
Session 2 notes.

• Called to order at 20:00.
• Mr. Hurd plugged the Fox Library fundraiser on 5 May from 18:30 to 20:30.
• Mr. Coletta announced his Town Meeting e-mail list.
• Mr. Judd plugged the Arlington Lions Eyemobile which will be in front of Town Hall on 29 April from 08:00 to 14:00.
• Voted that when we adjourn we adjourn to Monday, 2 May, at 20:00.
• Moderator declared the ATM in recess and opened the 27 April STM.
• STM - Article 1: Reports
  • BoS report to STM received.
  • Article tabled.
• STM - Article 2: Zoning Bylaw Amendment/MU
  • Mr. Tsoi moved to recess STM to 9 May, as ARB only had the hearing yesterday. Moderator asked why not deal with Articles 3-6? Mr. Tsoi said the Planning Department had been telling proponents of other articles that the STM would be recessed until then.
  • Mr. Fischer asked if it should be 9 May or 11 May. Mr. Tsoi while 11 May was originally considered, 9 May was chosen.
  • Mr. Abbott asked if the BoS would be changing its vote. Mr. Hurd said it would not but felt it was better to handle everthing at once.
  • Ms. Harrington said she and others were lead to believe the STM would be recessed to 9 May.
  • Mr. Quinn moved the previous question. Debate terminated.
  • Motion to recess STM to 9 May approved.
• Back to Annual Meeting.
• Article 2 removed from table.
• Article 2 - Reports
  • Received FinComm, BoS Supplemental, and Noise Abatement Study Committee (NASC) reports.
  • Mr. Ciano said NASC has been using its noise meter on Grey Street and Article 19 grew out of that. He said Mr. Fitzmaurice should be thanked for getting Article 19 together and that NASC will be giving a sound level demonstration to Town Meeting.
  • Mr. Tosti corrected a bunch of typos in the FinComm report. He said FinComm began work in October, that the Town is under high financial stress, and that the MMA is lobbying for more local aid. He reviewed the "5-year plan" noting that the BoS, FinComm, and SchoolComm all approved it. Mr. Tosti pointed out the "with override" and "without override" numbers are physically next to each other in the report for easy comparison and that while it will be very tough if the override does not pass, it will still be tough even if it does. He noted that bond rating agencies have noticed our use of reserves. He closed by introducing the FinComm members and noting vacancies for precincts 17 and 20.
  • Article tabled.
• Article 12 - Zoning Bylaw Amendment/Affordable Housing
  • ARB recommended a vote of no action.
  • Mr. Faulkner said the ARB already gives the maximum preferences allowed by state law and that what the proponents want will end up combining subsidies and not producing as many affordable units.
  • Mr. Abbott proposed a substitute motion mostly identical with the wording of the wattant article. He said he did not understand why the ARB was against exchanging a 1BR unit for a 2BR unit and that the AHA should not have been forced to use eminent domain to take the unit from the ARB. He believes there should be an official policy and application document explaining how affordable units under the ARB's control are distributed.
  • Ms. Worden said the Affordable Housing Task Force wants the ARB to make units available for purchase to non-profits to rent out.
  • Mr. Faulkner said 15% of the units in new developments are set aside for people making up to 80% of median income and that the by-law was not intended to solve all problems. He feels that when the AHA pulls a unit out of the affordable units the ARB controls it reduces the effectiveness of the by-law.
  • Mr. Reedy asked if the substitute motion was in order. Moderator said it was.
  • Ms. Harrington asked it to be re-read. Moderator did so.
  • Ms. LaCourt speaking as a TMM asked how a choice of preferences between local employees and government agencies would be made. Mr. Abbott replied that it is a hard decision but the current by-law does not allow agencies to even be considered. He said the ARB should decide how to make the choice and put it in its plan.
  • Mr. Fischer asked if the preference was legal. Mr. Maher said that while he originally had concerns, he now believes it is legal. Mr. Fischer asked what the substitute motion did. Mr. Abbott said it would require the process to be more visible, provide preferences for town employees and allow government agencies to purchase units. Mr. Fischer asked if the developer owns the units. Mr. Abbott said the developer almost always is not the ultimate owner and that it was not true that government agency purchases lower the number of available units.
  • Mr. Jamieson asked if the agencies' purchase price would be the same as eligible individuals and asked if agency purchase would extend affordability restrictions. Mr. Abbott replied "yes" to both.
  • Mr. Lavalle complained that the substitute was not handed out and moved to postpone to 2 May.
  • Motion to postpone approved on voice vote but doubted.
  • Motion to postpone approved 127-50.
• Article 4 - Election of Asst Moderator: Leone wins, 121-62.
• Article 13 - Zoning Bylaw Amendment/New Zoning Districts - REL
  • ARB recommended a vote of no action.
  • Mr. Faulkner said the proponenents idea was to reduce the amount of developable land to make it easier to reach a 40B target. He said taking out those few acres of land will not accomplish much and that the proposed language is constitutionally flawed.
  • Mr. Abbott attempted to offer a substitute motion mostly following the words of the article. Moderator shot Mr. Abbott down saying that in his view it was not proper for a zoning article. Mr. Abbott changed it to a resolution that the ARB propose a REL district next year.
  • Mr. Bernardin asked what other municipalities have done. Mr. O'Brien said he did not know since single-use zones are illegal. Mr. Abbott said he knew of no judicial or legislative cite to that effect.
  • Mr. Faulkner said the SJC has held that at least one use must be offered by right in every zoning district, that at least one economically viable use must be allowed, and that a REL district would be an unconstitutional promotion of religion and that such a district would fail all three test.
  • Mr. Ruderman moved the previous question. Debate terminated.
  • Abbott resolution defeated.
  • No action approved.
• Article 14 - Zoning Bylaw Amendment/New Zoning Districts - MUN
  • ARB recommended no action.
  • Mr. Faulkner said the proposal had the same flaws as the previous once, except for the religion aspect.
  • No action approved.
• Article 15 - Zoning Bylaw Amendment/New Zoning Districts - CEM
  • ARB recommended no action.
  • Mr. Faulkner said the proposal had the same flaws as the previous once, except for the religion aspect.
  • Mr. Belskis and the Moderator had a confusing back-and-forth about making a motion or not making a motion or making a resolution or not making a resolution that ended up with nothing happening.
  • No action approved.
• Article 16 - Zoning Bylaw Amendment/Zoning Districts - Reversion
  • ARB recommended no action.
  • Mr. Faulkner said it was related to articles 13-15 and that the proponents wanted a REL/MUN/CEM property to revert to its prior zoning if the REL/MUN/CEM use ceased. He said this conflicts with state law saying only Town Meeting can change zoning district boundaries.
  • No action approved.
• Article 17 - Bylaw Amendment/Outdoor Lighting
  • BoS recommended no action.
  • Mr. Gilligan moved to postpone to 4 May as the proponent was not present.
  • Postponed.
• Article 18 - Bylaw Amendment/Noise Abatement: BoS recommended no action, which was approved because this was a duplicate of Article 19.
• Article 19 - Bylaw Amendment/Noise Abagtement
  • BoS recommended a vote as set forth in its report.
  • Mr. Fitzmaurice said the current by-law only deals with hours, not sound levels. He said that since it hard to understand what a given sound level is, the NASC will provide a demonstration for Town Meeting and then moved to postpone the article to 2 May to allow for that demonstration.
  • Postponed.
• Article 20 - Bylaw Amendment/Demolition Notification
  • BoS recommended a vote as set forth in its report.
  • Mr. Hurd said BoS agrees with the requirement abutters be notified of demolitions.
  • Mr. Abbott asked why the fine is only $200 instead of being linked to added value. Mr. Hurd said that is a typical fine and the Moderator said $200 is the maximum fine the Town can impose, plus when getting the permit one has to affirm under threat of perjury that notification was made.
  • Ms. Meyer asked if this applied to demolition of Town-owned structures. Moderator said yes.
  • Mr. Judd asked what a building is. Mr. Maher said the Building Inspector had discretion in that area and that it is not feasible for legislation to specify every possibility. Mr. Judd asked if an above-ground pool was a building. Mr. Maher said he did not think that was a building.
  • BoS recommendation approved.
• Article 21 - Bylaw Amendment/Handicapped Parking
  • BoS recommended a vote as set forth in its report.
  • Mr. Jamieson noting the proposed fine is $25 asked what the equivalent fine on a public way was. Chief Ryan said $200. Mr. Jamieson asked why only $25 for this. Mr. Maher said state law allows a $200 fine on public ways but the lesser fine on private land.
  • Mr. Burke asked why this is bring brought up when the Town does not enforce existing rules.
  • Mr. Logan asked who does the towing. Chief Ryan said it is done with the permission of the property owner.
  • Mr. Ruderman questioned whether this was the best use of scarce Town resources and said he opposed the motion.
  • Mr. Hurd said the BoS believed this was a proper use of Town resources.
  • Mr. Chaput asked if officers would be asked to patrol lots. Chief Ryan said it would empower the police to act if someone called them.
  • Mr. Gilligan moved the previous question. Debate terminated.
  • BoS recommended approved unanimously.
• Article 22 - Bylaw Amendment/Newsracks
  • BoS recommended a vote as set forth in its report.
  • Mr. Hurd said Mr. Maher was prepared to speak but that a postponement would be OK.
  • Mr. Maher said this would set up a pilot program and allow the Newsrack Study Committee to have some credibility when trying to get newpapers to participate. Based on the pilot, a more permanent by-law and an appropriation would be proposed next year.
  • The Moderator said he had some problems with where in the by-laws the change should actually go.
  • Ms. Worden moved to postpone the article to 2 May.
  • Postponed.
• Article 23 - Expansion of Pleasant Street Historic District
  • BoS recommended a vote as set forth in its report.
  • Mr. Gilligan moved to postpone the article to 2 May because the HistComm chair was absent.
  • Postponed.
• Article 24 - Home Rule Petition/FinComm Membership
  • BoS recommended a vote as set forth in its report.
  • Mr. Tosti said he would like to have FinComm at full strength and this would accomplish that by giving the appointing authority some flexibility. He also said he supported the Carreiro amendment.
  • Mr. Carreiro proposed an amendment to require that substitute and at-large members' terms expire every 31 October and that the appointing authority would have to wait until 15 December to appoint a substitute or at-large member. He said this would codify what the appointing authority plans to do.
  • Mr. Foskett said he was against the original motion and the amendment as they would reduce the pressure and incentive for FinComm to fill vacancies with actual precinct residents. He said precint representation was important and that FinComm was big enough that a few vacancies would not hurt it.
  • Mr. Loreti asked about the interpretation of "three at-large members" and asked if there have ever been three vacancies. Mr. Tosti said there had not been in his memory. Mr. Loreti asked what the longest time a seat has been vacant. Mr. Tosti said four or five years. Mr. Loreti said he was against the amendment and for the original motion.
  • Mr. Berkowitz said it was sad things have come to this and that regardless of what passes or does not pass, Town Meeting Members should actively solicit FinComm applicants from vacant precints.
  • Ms. Harrington asked what FinComm qualifications are. Mr. Tosti said it is basically being a citizen and a resident of the precinct, and also that the person want to participate and not have an agenda. Ms. Harrington asked if anyone has ever been rejected. Mr. Tosti said that has not happened in at least 15 years. Ms. Harrington said she was inclined to leave things alone.
  • Mr. Chaput said he was worried about timing. Mr. Tosti said he does not aggressively begin searching until Labor Day and that he does not appoint people after December.
  • Mr. Judd moved to adjourn. Defeated. He said it would be good to have a full FinComm and this was worth a try.
  • Mr. Gilligan moved the previous question. Debate terminated.
  • Carreiro amendment approved.
  • BoS recommended vote as amended approved.
  • But since Legislature likes to see actual a numbers, a counted vote was done and again approved 96-31.
• Motion to adjourn made and approved at 23:05.
• Meeting adjourned to 2 May at 20:00.