Special Town Meeting Results

OK, so maybe it wasn't the next post, but now it's time to review the votes I cast at the Special Town Meeting. Like I said before, I hope you enjoy this, since I've yet to see any of the other selectman's candidates - or, for that matter, any town meeting member - publicize how they voted and why.

Note that most of these articles simply transfer money between accounts. It's a bookkeeping thing.

Article 1 was to approve bonding costs for the long term debt. I voted "aye"; it passes.

Article 2 was to transfer money ($40,000) for line of duty expenses incurred by the Fire & Police Departments that are not covered by insurance. I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 3 was to transfer money ($190,000) to fund operations at the West Falmouth sewer plant. I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 4 was to transfer money ($130,000) to fund legal expenses associated with the West Falmouth sewer plant.

An aside...

The Cape Cod Times reported on Saturday, April 7, that the town of Falmouth must pay the $30,000 in legal fees that the opponents of New Silver Beach incurred in defense of the town's absurd countersuit. Basically, the selectmen cost us $30,000 in a failed attempt to intimidate a few dozen people.

...now back to our regularly scheduled program...

I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 5 transferred $175,000 from the School Foundation Reserve Award Fund to the school department. I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 6 provided additional funds ($52,067.10) for bonding a HVAC project at the Upper Cape Regional Vocational Technical School. I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 7 was a disappointment. Like Article 54 during the regular town meeting, it basically asked town meeting to approve what the selectmen already have the authority to do. Next thing you know they'll be asking for permission to go to the bathroom.

Did I say that out loud?

Anyway, the selectmen wanted permission to explore the concept of putting an ice arena, pool and senior center on a 19+ acre parcel that abuts the high school property. We own the property, the problem is that the parcel has a deed restriction that only allows for playing fields, not buildings.

The answer is easy...put the buildings on the existing playing fields near the high school and build new playing fields here. Anything else will require an act of the legislature and a lot of legal work, i.e., more money for the lawyers.

The general site (at the high school) was the original first choice, but the school board didn't approve it the first time around. Not sure what changed their minds this time, but I like the location.

This was pretty much a no-brainer, and because of the way town meeting is scheduled, it actually came before Article 54 (I still had some patience for the selectmen's shenanigans), so I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 8 transferred money from the Waterways Fund ($19,500) to purchase security cameras. This is a homeland security thing for our ferries. I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 9 transferred money from the Waterways Fund ($7,500) to replace the Waquoit Bay west jetty light. Somehow someone (likely a sailboat) managed to destroy the previous light and it needs to be replaced. If anyone sees a boat with some red paint streaks on the boom and/or starboard side, let the harbormaster know.

I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 10 transferred money from the Waterways Fund ($50,000) for dredging. I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 11 rescinded a Community Preservation Act condition placed on Article 32 at last years Spring Annual Town Meeting. Basically, we didn't need the preservation restrictions that the article placed on the properties. I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 12 asks the state legislature to authorize the town install, finance and operate "wind energy facilities" at the West Falmouth Sewer plant. We approved the windmill last fall; now we need the state to approve it, since the town cannot sell excess electricity back to the utilities without their permission. This article did that. I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 13 was the Right to Farm bylaw.

In spite of the fact that the Right to Farm bylaw only reaffirms existing state law - it creates no new local regulations - some folks actually objected to it. One person, a former planning board member who's name slips me now, said it created exemptions in the nuisance bylaw (noise, odors, etc.) for farming. In fact, those exemptions exist at the state level - as they do in many state laws - because without them farmers couldn't farm. Vicky Lowell raised a similar concern.

There was also an attempt to amend the bylaw to include some wording about using ecologically friendly practices or something like that. The problem with this amendment is that it would have allowed certain groups and individuals to push their "organic only" agenda, which would put nearly every local farmer out of business.

Whether we like it or not, some use of pesticides is required in farming. Unlike the rest of us, farmers are trained and licensed by the state to use pesticides, so they are far more careful about them than the guy who buys a can of Raid in the local hardware store.

I voted "no" on the amendment; it failed. I voted "aye" on the bylaw; it passed.

Article 14 was a bookkeeping thing to handle the transfer of the funds in the other articles. I voted "aye"; it passed.