Select Board, Charter Com Disagree On Proposed Changes

 HARWICH – Members of the select board made it clear in a meeting with the charter commission last week that they are not fans of some of the concepts being discussed by the charter review commission, including establishing a charter review, arbitration and compliance commission and mandatory fall town meetings.
The two groups met on May 21 for the first time since the commission began its review of the town charter last June. The commission has held 45 meetings reviewing the document, meeting with town officials and members of the public, and has set as its primary goal to clarify charter language to reduce misinterpretation.
 Neither the select board nor the charter commission have taken formal votes on any of the proposals. But the commission has developed a consensus position on a number of amendments on which they are seeking public input. Charter Commission Chair Linda Cebula said the commission wants to hear from the public in a planned June 18 hearing before a vote on amendments is taken.
The commission must have a draft version of the document prepared to send to the state by Sept. 26 and a final version for review by November. Town Meeting would vote on adopting a revised charter in May 2027. 
The proposed elected charter compliance commission drew the most comment from the select board. The five-member commission would serve as an arbitration board in disputes over interpretation of the charter in which its decision would be binding. 
 Cebula said the commission would act on complaints filed by at least 10 registered voters or by a couple of committee members and would determine if a violation exists. The commission sees the new body as an educational tool for the charter.
 “The concept of the bylaw/charter review is to act on citizen complaints, and not be a charter police,” commission member Sandra Hall said.
“I’ve thought a lot about this and most issues are based on interpretation. By cleaning up the charter language there should be a lot less charter issues,” said Select Board member Jeffrey Handler.
Select Board member Mark Kelleher said the compliance commission might be a bit of an overreach for a small town like Harwich. He cautioned the provision could result in defeat of the revised charter, which is likely to contain many necessary amendments.
Commission member Richard Waystack said the charter needs guardrails, and the review process is a needed educational tool. He said if 10 signatures on a complaint is too few, it can be raised to 25 or 50 signatures.
Hall said the review commission was also a way of keeping town counsel expenses down.
Handler wanted to know how many municipalities in the state have such a review commission. The charter commission’s consultant, Anthony Wilson of the Collins Center at UMass Boston, said Bourne and Provincetown are the only towns with review commissions.
“It’s safe to say I do not support this one bit,” said Handler.
 Cebula said a mandatory fall special town meeting has been discussed but not voted on. The idea, she said, is to have financial articles addressed in the spring and zoning and bylaw issues in the fall. Hall pointed out that the initial charter had both spring and fall town meeting sessions, adding that other business could also be conducted in the fall. The fall town meeting was later removed from the charter by an amendment.
Kelleher raised issues of cost for a second mandated town meeting in the fall, noting that it costs between $20,000 to $40,000 with the use of rented electronic voting devices.
“I don’t like the idea of required,” Kelleher said. “If we have a need for a special town meeting, we can call one.”
“The select board should be the sole arbiter of a fall town meeting,” Handler said. “The town moderator doesn’t think this is a good idea.”
There were a number of issues raised about staffing work adjustments to address a fall town meeting and the potential for conflict with state and federal election cycles. Commission members said the pressure of one annual town meeting is a bit of a heavy load and the fall town meeting would provide a better opportunity to educate voters on important zoning and bylaw proposals. 
The idea of changing the town administrator title to town manager drew discussion. Wilson said there is no definition of town manager in Massachusetts General Laws, but the title has been incorporated into charters, usually giving a manager more authority and responsibility. It's usually based on job description, but the terms are used interchangeably, Wilson said. 
“I was a town manager under strong authority,” Town Administrator Jay McGrail said, but he has more appointing authority in Harwich than he did in Middleborough. “I’ll take the town manager title, it’s really just a title.”
The capital outlay and the capital planning language in the charter also drew discussion. The main focus was when a two-third town meeting vote should be required for a project that is being bumped up to an earlier year or placed into the first year of the plan if not previously listed in the plan.
There seemed to be a general consensus that when a project is moved from the back of the plan to the first year for funding it should require a two-thirds vote of town meeting, but internal changes in the plan for years two to five in the five-year plan should be done by a majority vote. 
Wilson said very few communities in the state provide for a detailed capital planning process within the charter. It is usually an administrative document which is used to inform voters. 
“I’ve never worked in a community where town meeting voted on a capital plan,” said McGrail. “It is a Harwich unique thing.”
“Residents have said they want to vote on a capital plan,” Cebula responded.
There was also discussion about providing the select board with a provision to remove appointed committee members not attending meetings or following bylaws. The language was an issue, focusing on if such appointees should be removed for “cause” or should the select board be allowed to “appoint and remove” members with no cause.  
Select board members urged the commission to establish a set of conceptual documents for charter amendments that the public will be able to clearly follow during the public hearing scheduled for June 18.