Arlington Town Meeting

We started at 21:17.

The BoS recommended a vote to impose a $20/day fine on people violating the DPW’s rules and regulations on what can be put in the trash. Ms. LaCourt said enforcement would be “gentle, not punitive”.

Mr. Jamieson thanked Town Counsel for suggesting the rules and regulations be incorporated by reference instead of being set in the by-law. He said that if trash were cut by one pound per person per day, the Town would save $500,000 in tip fees.

Mr. Foskett said that while he supported recycling, the incorporation by reference prevents people from knowing what is disallowed and attacks the authority of Town Meeting.

Mr. Judd agreed with Mr. Foskett and said he did not like the “trash police” he believed this would create. He also wanted a Town Meeting “override” provision in the proposal and moved to postpone to 7 May.

Mr. Lavalle asked if there’s currently a fine for the violation. Town Counsel said there was, due to a catch-all clause in the by-laws providing a $20 fine for any violation that doesn’t have an explicit fine. Mr. Lavalle asked who the DPW enforcer would be. Town Counsel said it could be any DPW employee. Mr. Lavalle asked if this would create a new position. Ms. LaCourt said the Town will be hiring the recycling manager regardless of the outcome of this article.

Mr. Deyst had Mr. Jamieson say the recycling manager’s position is already funded (from the white goods disposal fees).

Mid-session break was from 21:37 to 21:49.

Mr. Kaplan said the proposal has a good intent but doesn’t want Town employees rifling through our trash.

Ms. King said this is needed to make sure our recycling efforts aren’t in vain.

Mr. McCabe asked if the fine was in the scope of the article. The Acting Moderator ruled it was. Mr. McCabe disagreed with incorporating the rules by reference. Town Counsel said legislative bodies often do that.

Mr. Carreiro asked if other parts of the by-laws incorporate by reference the regulations of another Town body. Town Counsel said there are, giving ConComm as an example. Mr. Carreiro said an override provision was not needed since Town Meeting could change the by-law in a future session and therefore postponement to add override language was not needed.

Mr. Schlichtman asked who the Board of Public Works was and was told by the Actiing Moderator it was the BoS. Mr. Schlichtman said that if people didn’t like the regulations and any lack of notices, they could take it out on the BoS, so there was no need to postpone. He said the Town does not manage to enforce anything strictly and so wouldn’t enforce this strictly, either.

Mr. Leonard asked if this only applies to WMI. The Town Manager said it applies to all haulers. Mr. Leonard then got confused between the article and the proposed vote, attempting to amend the article. The Acting Moderator explained the difference between the articles and the proposed votes again.

Mr. Bloom said that despite the statements of the proponents, the proposal was about punishment, not education.

Mr. May moved to strike the fine, since the catch-all provision already covers it.

Mr. Daly moved the previous question, which carried.

The Judd motion to postpone was defeated on a voice vote. The May amendment was defeated 43-102. The BoS recommendation carried 95-45.

The article was dispatched at 22:29, for a total of 60 minutes.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 23:21 and is filed under notes. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.