Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-11-23 Adjourned Subsequent Town Meeting Minutes161 ADJOURNED SUBSEQUENT TOWN MEETING Reading Memorial High School November 23, 1987 The meeting was called to order by the Moderator, Paul C. Dustin at 7:40 P.M., there being a quorum present. The Invocation was given by Leslie H. York, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ARTICLE 21. Gerald A. Fiore moved that the sum of $150,000 be raised from "Free Cash" and that the sum of $1,800,000 be raised by borrowing as provided under Chapter 44, 'Section 7 & 8 of the General Laws, or any other enabling authority, and that said sums, totaling $1,950,000 be ap- propriated to the Municipal Space Building Committee for the purpose of remodeling, reconstructing, or making extraordinary repairs to the Town Hall and /or the Town Hall Annex (old Library Building), including the construction of any additions or connec- tors to said buildings, including site preparation, construction, originally equipping and furnishing said buildings and any addi- tions or connectors thereto, and all other costs incidental thereto, including architectural, engineering and construction fees and services, inspection fees, relocation costs, contin- gencies and costs of financing in connection therewith, and the Municipal Space Building Committee are authorized to proceed with the design and construction of said remodeling, reconstructing or making extraordinary repairs to said buildings and the additions or connectors thereto; and the Municipal Space Building Committee are authorized to enter into any and all contracts, agreements and grant applications necessary therefor, and incidental thereto, including, without limitation contracts for architec- tural, engineering and construction services and applications for a grant or grants to be used to defray all or any part of the costs of said remodeling, reconstructing or making extraordinary repairs to said buildings and the additions or connectors thereto, and to do all other acts and things necessary and proper for carrying out the purposes of this vote. This motion was voted in the negative. 76 voted in the affirmative 55 voted in the negative 2/3 vote required ARTICLE 24. On motion of Russell T. Graham, it was un- animously voted that the Town Authorize the Board of Selectmen to convey and /or abandon certain rights of easements in Reading, Middlesex County, Massachusetts situated on Lots D,E, F, and G as shown on a plan entitled "Definitive Plan Haystack Road (Revision) , Reading, Massachusetts" dated October 6, 1978 that were conveyed to the Town in a "Conveyance of Easements and Utilities - Hopkins Farm" document dated June 15, 1976 and re- corded in the Middlesex South District Registry of Deeds and Book 13005 Page 534; that the Town determine the minimum amount to be paid for such conveyance and or abandonment at $1.00, and that the Town authorize the Board of Selectmen to convey or abandon all or any part of said right of easement for such amount or larger amount and such other terms and conditions as Selectmen shall consider proper. 2/3 voted required ARTICLE 25. On motion of Robert P. Connor, it was voted that Article 25 be indefinitely postponed. ARTICLE 2. On motion of Douglass L. Barker, it was voted to take Article 2 from the table. 62, Adjourned Subsequent Town Meeting November 23, 1987 ARTICLE 2. On motion of Douglass L. Barker, it was voted that the Board of Selectmen instruct all Boards and Commissions to refrain from holding public hearings on Mondays and Thursdays when Town Meeting is in session. ARTICLE 2. On motion of Douglass L. Barker, it was voted that the Board of Selectmen, Town Manager, School Committee, and Town Clerk be instructed to take whatever actions are necessary to hold all sessions of future Annual and Subsequent Town Meeting at the Reading Memorial High School auditorium, 62 Oakland Road. ARTICLE 2. On motion of John H. Russell, it was voted that Article 2 be laid on the table. ARTICLE 1. On motion of John J. Russell, it was voted to take Article 1 from the table. ARTICLE 1. The following report of Allan E. Ames of the Reading Municipal Light Department was accepted as a Report of Progress: REPORT TO TOWN MEETING FROM MUNICIPAL LIGHT BOARD This is a brief report to Reading Town Meeting on matters pertaining to the Town °s Municipal Light Department. With reference once again to the old Chinese curse, "May you live in interesting times10, let me say that 1987 has been another very interesting year for the Department. Of the many topics that might be covered, I will select only two: the significance of the recent Massachusetts Department of Utilities (MDPU) Order, and the present status of relations with Wilmington. First the MDPU decision. The brief history is that some years ago both the Wilmington Chamber of Commerce (WCC), and the Town of Wilmington filed peti- tions with the MDPU for an investigation into the rates and prac- tices of the RMLD. Acting on its own motion, the MDPU con- solidated the proceedings, and started the investigation. After hearings, briefs, interrogatories, and investigations, on October 21, 1987 the MDPU issued a final order in this proceeding. Overall the final order is a triumph for Reading in par- ticular, but the order may turn out to be a challenge for the municipal utilities in general. More on this shortly. Of the issues over which Reading had any control, the MDPU found in favor of Reading. These issues included: rate structures allocation of costs within customer classes right to depreciation other than 3% street lighting rates the right to transfer earnings to the Town the right to choose when and how refunds of capitol projects are to be refunded. Essentially, Reading was judged to be a well -run utility. We will make available a copy of the order to anyone who requests it. And I cannot resist noting that this order seems to be talk- ing about a completely different utility from that which was described to the press by WCC in 1984 and 1985. Turning to the changes which will affect all municipals, in- cluding Reading: 163 Adjourned Subsequent Town Meeting November 23, 1987 In the State of Massachusetts, municipal utilities are regu- lated to a much lesser extent than they are in most other states. "Regulations" means control over how rates are set. One con - straint in Ch 164 on the operation of a municipal utility is that it can earn no more than 8% of "plant ". The MDPU has ordered that henceforth, the definition of "plant" against which the 8% earning limitation must apply is to mean "original cost minus depreciation ", rather than "original cost ". Reading and all other municipal utilities have previously understood the 8% limitation to apply to original cost, not depreciated cost. The MDPU order acknowledges that the new rule is "different from what had been accepted practice ". The new rule makes municipal utility accounting closer to private utility accounting. The order would seem to have several effects on Reading, but please accept these as a personal judgment, because there has not been time to study the matter completely. 1) Allowable earnings will be cut dramatically, from approx. 2.2. million to approx. 1.2 million. While the RMLD will be able to sustain its present level of payments of 1.2 million per year, the rate of growth of these payments may not be what it was in the past. 2) The order does not necessarily mean lower electric rates, except for 1987, until well into the future. Higher depreciation will be allowed in order to cover construction costs, and con- struction of new facilities is where earnings have gone in the past which were not given to the Town. 3) It will probably turn out that a much higher level of debt is appropriate for municipal utilities that we are accus- tomed to. In summary, running a municipal utility is definitely a less profitable business at the same level of risk than it was before. We do not pretend to understand the full impact of the order, but trust we will have to before the end of the year. Now for the Wilmington situation. Reading is authorized to run a municipal utility under Ch 164 of the Laws of the Commonwealth, but apparently serves Wil- mington under both Ch 164 and special legislation passed in 1908. Ch. 164 sets out procedures by which a community can form it 's own utility by separation from the utility serving it. Acting under Ch. 164, last April Wilmington Town Meeting passed the second of two required votes to initiate the separation process and form its own utility. The process beings with a 150 day period for negotiation, followed by a 30 day period during which either party may appeal to the MDPU for a determination of the amount of money that must change hands to effect the separation. Reading would have no right to reject a determination by the MDPU, although Wilmington would. The 150 day period passed with but occasional communication between the RMLB and the Wilmington Selectmen. Both sides wrote letters to each other, and Wilmington issued several information requests, but, there was no substantive negotiation. In large part this was because Wilmington did not begin to acquire the in- formation it needed until half way through the period supposedly for negotiation. Toward the end of the appeal period, Wilmington made an of- fer to Reading of $4.7 million dollars for Reading's distribution plant in Wilmington, but with no further commitments of any kind. Without waiting for an answer from Reading, Wilmington filed a request for determination of costs with the MDPU. MIA Adjourned Subsequent Town Meeting November 23, 1987 On Thursday, November 5, Reading filed a reply to Wilmington's MDPU request, which stated that on a basis com- parable to that of Wilmington's offer, the proper amount is as high as $52 million, not Wilmington's $4.7. Reading believes that Wilmington is obligated to help pay for distribution system investments and power supply contracts that were undertaken in part to supply Wilmington, in addition to a much higher evalua- tion for Reading's plant in Wilmington. If Wilmington were to form its own utility but stay as a customer of Reading, the cost to Wilmington would be approximately $14 million. None of these figures convey the amount of money that might be turned over to the Town of Reading, which is itself a complex calculation. i So where are we? Wilmington clearly has a legal right to form its own utility. But Reading and its consultants cannot find any way that Wilmington can financially do so, that is, meet its obliga- tions to Reading, and still provide lower cost power to its cus- tomers than Reading can. RMLB has taken - and believes in - the position that separa- tion is not in the interest of any of the ratepayers in the sys- tem and that the matter should be dropped as soon as possible. The RMLB has made this position public, along with the data sup- porting the position. We hope that by making the information available we can persuade either the Wilmington Selectmen, or someone in Wilmington to stop this massive expenditure of money on nothing constructive. Thus far Wilmington for its taxpayers, and RMLD for the ratepayers have spent nearly $300,000. We are told this is just a good beginning for such cases. Since there is every reason to think that the MDPU will have little interest in this case, it seems likely that there will be ample time for further discussions with Wilmington before any- thing of substance happens. ARTICLE 1. A verbal suggestion of Maria E. Silvaggi that presentations to Town Meeting be given earlier in the evening. ARTICLE 1. The following report of Margaret W. Russell of the Budget Format Review Committee, was accepted as a Report of Progresso BUDGET FORMAT REVIEW COMMITTEE Report of Progress - November 23, 1987 The Budget Format Review Committee was appointed as a result of an instructional motion passed at the Spring, 1987 Annual Town Meeting. Appointed to the committee were Town Meeting members John Silvaggi, Lawrence Mabius, Raymond Betts, Frank Gorgone, and Margaret Russell. Representing the School Committee is Carol Lyons, from the Finance Committee, Brian McMenimen, from the By- law Committee, Philip Pacino, and from the Selectmen, Mollie Ziegler. Town Accountant Richard Foley has been attending meet- ings as a liaison with Town Mall. To date, we have held six meetings. In order to understand clearly the separate roles and responsibilities of the Town Manager, the Finance Committee, and Town Meeting in the budget process, we have reviewed the Charter and By -laws. We have also looked at the report of a previous study committee formed in 1976, and thanks to Richard Foley, we have looked at a number of other town's warrants and Town Meeting budget materials. We are still in the process of finalizing our recommenda- tions. However, it is evident that the Town Manager anticipated Adjourned Subsequent Town Meeting November 23, 1987 a couple.of our recommendations in preparing the Warrant for this current Town Meeting. The Committee was pleased to see the brief background explanations accompanying each article, and in the fu- ture, we hope to see a brief statement on the FinCom's rationale for its position included as well. We look forward.to working with the FinCom and the Town Manager in the next few months. Out next meeting will be on Tuesday,; December 1st at 7:30 in the Employees' Lounge at Town Hall. Our meetings are usually included in the calendar pub - lished each week in the Chronicle, and we would welcome your sug- gestions either in person or by phone call to any of the members mentioned above. Respectfully submitted, Margaret W. Russell, Chairman ARTICLE 1. The following Report of H. Theodore Cohen was accepted as a Report of Progress: FURTHER REPORT TO TOWN MEETING RE: MODIFICATION OF HOSPITAL TRUSTS As a supplement to the Report to Town Meeting regarding the modification of Hospital Trusts given on November 9, 1987, this is to advise Town Meeting that the allegations of the Complaint to modify the terms of the Anne S. Grouard Trust Fund, the Stephen S. Foster Trust Fund and the Gilman L. Parker Trust Fund have all,been admitted by the Attorney General, and the Attorney General has joined in the Town's request that the Probate Court grant the relief sought by the Town of Reading. ARTICLE 1. On motion of John H. Russell, it was voted that Article 1 be laid on the table. ARTICLE 2. On motion of John H. Russell, it was voted to take Article 2 from the table. ARTICLE 2. On motion of Benjamin E. Nichols, it was voted that the Selectmen instruct Town Counsel to consider if Ar- ticle 8 was legally voted since under Reading Charter Section 6 -1 Town Meeting may not vote to amend or alter the Administrative Code, and under Section 4 -10 an alteration was made because no Insurance Committee was voted according to Chart shown on the screen. ARTICLE 2. On motion of Deane B. Haskell, it was voted that all elected and appointed Boards, Commission, and Town Employees be instructed that all materials to be considered by Town Meeting be provided at least one session or three days in advance of their consideration on Town Meeting floor, and further that when any financial and /or money figures are to be presented, the figures presented to Town Meeting be the same as what has been presented to the Finance Committee for its deliberations. ARTICLE 2. On motion of John H. Russell, it was voted that Article 2 be laid on the table. On motion of John H. Russell, it was voted that this meeting stand adjourned sine die. Meeting adjourned at 10:38 P.M. 99 Town Meeting members were present. ` A true copy. Attest: 1 • v���1Ct Doris M. Fantasia Town Clerk