Saturday, September 24, 2005

Select Board Meeting for September 13 was cancelled. The meeting for September 20 was held with Rita Pierce and Emile Mazur present. Both Chad Wagenknecht and John D'Alesandro attended the meeting. The highlights of the meeting are noted below:

A letter relating to the work done on the ditch on Bernie Malloy’s property was read into the minutes. Mr. Malloy signed off that the work was completed September 8, 2005 in the amount of $6,152.34. (Note: At the August 30 meeting, Mr. Malloy asked about the work to be done on his property. Erosion started on Mr. Malloy's property after the highway department started a 'ditch project' last year. Mr. LaBonte went to the Select Board in the Spring to see if there was enough money available to fix Mr. Malloy's property. After a heated disagreement, Rita Pierce asked for the Select Board to go into Executive Session to resolve this issue. When the Executive Session was over, Mr. Mazur said the Select Board had agreed to fix Mr. Malloy's property.) Mr. Mazur stated these monies would come out of highway department funds. Mr. Mazur wanted the townspeople to know how much the work cost. When there are requests for road work, there won't be money.

A letter has been received from the District Attorney, David Capeless, informing the select board all the police departments in the county will be receiving state-of-the-art digital audio-visual recording equipment. Professional installation of the equipment is also being provided.
This donation by Mr. Capeless’s office is made possible through the use of funds forfeited from drug dealers as a result of investigations by the Berkshire Drug Task Force.

Mr. Capeless writes ‘this recording equipment will be used for documenting the interviews of suspects in criminal investigations, in compliance with the mandates of the case of Commonwealth v DiGiambattista, 442 Mass 423 (2004).’

Mr. Don Phinney, Park Commission, attended the meeting to request the Select Board permit Ray Labonte to cut steel beams and drag them over by the picnic tables. These beams will be placed across the river. The Select Board agreed Ray could do the work.

To be in compliance with the DEP, the Select Board will have a sign posted at the ‘dump’ with the name of the facility and hours of operation.

There will be a Tax Classification meeting September 27 at 7:30 pm to set the tax rate for Savoy, and to decided whether to keep the current “residential classification”.

Select Board Chair Mazur said all town committees must keep minutes of their meeting. Minutes of meetings are also available to any town’s person who wants to review them. Mr. Mazur recommended the committees use a loose-leaf binder. A copy of the minutes is to be provided to the Town Clerk and the Select Board.

Susan McGrath provided the following from the ‘Municipal Advocate, Vol. 22, No. 1. What are the requirements for minutes of a public meeting?

“ The Open Meeting Law (M.G.L. Ch. 39, Sec 23B) as well as the Public Records Law, requires every governmental body to maintain accurate minutes of all its meetings. At a minimum, minutes must set forth the date, time and place of the meeting, the identity of the members present or absent, and all “action taken.” Action taken includes not only votes and other formal decisions made at a meeting, but also discussion or consideration of issues for which no vote taken or final determination is made. Each discussion held at the meeting must be identified; in most cases this is accomplished by setting forth a summary of each discussion. A verbatim record of discussions is not required.
The Open Meeting Law contains no provisions regarding the form in which minutes of meetings must be maintained. The longevity requirements for record preservation under the Public Records Law, however, require that a governmental body eventually put its minutes into a written form. Such a requirement is also consistent with the Open Meeting Law’s intent of providing ready access to legible minutes. For the same reason, typed minutes, though not required, are preferable.” by Brenda Smith

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Comments from former Selectman, Peter Kelleher:
What Mr. Mazur failed to disclose is the over $18,000 savings to the town this recent $6,000 action provided. A $24,000 repair bill was submitted to the Town for the damage Mr. Mazur's decision caused. The $6,000 correction mentioned in this article saved the Town $18,000 (plus attorney's fees and court costs). Due to Mr. Mazur's independent decision to construct a drainage system over Mr. Malloy's property, erosion caused considerable damage to Mr. Malloy's property. Throughout this current year, Mr. Mazur refused to take responsibility for his actions. This created a situation that escalated to a demand from Mr. Malloy to have the Town choose one of the following three options:
1. Hire an outside landscape firm to repair the damage to the property for an estimate of over $24,000
2. Turn the matter over to the courts through a lawsuit action
3. Do the right thing and correct the drainage problem and restore Mr. Malloy's land to the original condition prior to the damaging erosion, at a cost of $6,000
After an executive session was called during a recent Select Board meeting, Mr. Mazur emerged with a better understanding of "the right thing to do". His comments regarding the $6,000 repair limiting future roadwork seem irrational.