Brent's Town Meeting votes - Monday

We've already reviewed my votes for a few articles; we'll cover a big chunk of Monday's votes here in this post.

Articles 3 through 10, 13 through 15, 19, 21 through 29, and 33 passed on the blanket vote. We'll note here that we had to reconsider Article 6. In a moment of comic levity, Town Clerk Mike Palmer was the lone vote against reconsideration; we soon learned why...it had a typo. The Town Clerk's salary was listed in the warrant as $71,899, but it was supposed to be $69,735.

Article 1 was to accept the nominations for Finance Committee. I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 2 was to hear the reports of various committees, including, among others, the Finance Committee. The most notable was a question from Precinct 8 representative Mike Freeman to the High School Building Committee, "What guarantees do we have that there will be no more overrides needed?"

Precinct 6 representative and High School Building Committee member Robert Antonucci responded that, among other things, the constant questioning by people like Mr. Freeman will help keep the project on the straight and narrow.

I couldn't help but smile.

I voted "aye" to accept the reports.

Article 11 would have required registration for home based occupations. While I understand the reasons behind the ZBA's request for this amendment to the zoning bylaws, the more I heard the more concerned I became. A home occupation is a 'by right' use of a home - the town cannot prohibit it as long as it falls within the guidelines.

However, registration means records are kept, and no guarantees could be made that these records wouldn't be abused. For example, Mike Duffany raised questions about privacy. For my part, I was concerned about excise taxes. Businesses are taxed on their property, i.e., office equipment, furniture, etc. How would the town tax a home occupation? How could it distinguish between home furnishings and those meant for the business?

It was a little too much 'Big Brother' for me, and I think Precinct 8 representative Ron Smolowitz said it best when he said, "This is a slippery slope."

I voted "no"; it failed.

Article 12 was yet another proposal by the CLSV Associated Limited Partnership to rezone a 31-acre parcel which lies adjacent to Ballymeade, near the intersection of Route 28 and Route 151. CLSV has tried many times to rezone this parcel, which is currently zoned Agricultural A, to some other use. Previously it was some variation of business zoning, but this time it was for a Senior Care Retirement District (SCRD).

While we need senior care facilities, the proposal for a SCRD was absent any details. In the back of everyone's mind - mine included - was the very real possibility that CLSV would get the rezoning and then either sell the parcel or do something besides a SCRD.

You may be wondering...Why is this a problem?

The Town of Falmouth currently has right of first refusal. If CLSV wants to sell the parcel, we get first crack at it. As currently zoned, the parcel can support - at most - 18 house lots. If rezoned to a SCRD, it would allow a significant number of businesses (banks, restaurants, medical offices, etc.) in addition to a senior care retirement center, or one-acre zoning for houses, in which case CLSV could almost double the number of homesites. Either possibility would increase the value of the land, and, therefore, the cost Falmouth would have to pay should we want to exercise our right of first refusal.

Selectman Pat Flynn said it best with her example of Plymouth Rock Studios; the zoning change comes after the plans have been drawn and the community included in the process. CLSV would lose nothing if the zoning didn't change - they bought the parcel as Agricultural A - and Falmouth could lose a lot if it did, so I voted "no"; it failed.

Article 16 was to rescind Article 19 of the April 2003 Annual Town Meeting. That article approved expending $15,900 in Land Bank funds for a sliver of land along Great Pond. The 'owner' apparently didn't have authority to sell the property.

I voted "aye"; it passed.

Article 17 was to take by eminent domain temporary easements on either side of the Chapoquoit Bridge so it can be repaired.

I voted "aye"; it passed.

I previously discussed Article 18 in several posts. During the discussion of the library, Town Meeting decided to table 18 to pick it up again after the Special Town Meeting.