Town Meeting: Reference page, town report (with kids’ art) and an update on Warrant Articles

by beth on April 11, 2014

Post image for Town Meeting: Reference page, town report (with kids’ art) and an update on Warrant Articles

Above: Southborough elementary schoolers’ winning and the tied runner-up entries to the town art contest for “favorite places”. Larger renditions and details about the contest and winners are available in the Annual Report. (That’s one way to get parents to read it!)

With the Annual Town Meeting quickly approaching this Wednesday, I posted a new page under the menu “Town Meeting & Election”.

You can check the blog’s guide for easy reference all the information you need. It includes a link to an item I’ve been neglectful about sharing – the Town’s Annual Report.

Now an update on some items headed to Town Meeting.

Jim Hegarty, leader of the Citizen’s Petition to save 9-11 field, shared news on the initiative last night. He was happy to report that the 65 people showed up to the Recreation Commission Meeting this week. The commission voted unanimously to support the article.

Hegarty also wanted to answer a question raised in comments on the blog. He explained in a comment that the town will not obtain a loan before securing a long term lease of the field.

The article, if passed, would give selectmen the authority to obtain the bond if the lease is successfully granted. He said a bond can’t be granted for longer than the term of the lease. (Click here for his full comment.)

Two articles that may be pulled from the floor on Wednesday night are Planning Board articles for Site Plan Review and acceptance of Barn Hollow Open Space.

On Monday night, board member Paul Cimino moved to pull Site Plan Review bylaw revisions based on the delay posting public information comparing the draft to current zoning bylaw. The Planning Board voted to continue the hearing until absent member Kathy Bartolini could participate. (The courtesy was extended because Bartolini did much of the work on the bylaw comparisons.)

On Friday and Monday, Barn Hollow developer Kevin Giblin filed materials with the board and asked the board to pull the article to consider his filings. As of their Monday night meeting, the Board and Town Planner didn’t have the chance to properly review the documents.

The Planning Board will hold a meeting to prepare for Town Meeting at 6:00 pm on Wednesday. The continued Site Plan Review public hearing and decision on the Barn Hollow Warrant Article will be on that agenda.

Finally, David Parry has promised to share a possible “Local Plan” for the Main Street Reconstruction project, so stay tuned. You can read more about that in his recent comment(Note: He hopes to get me materials by tomorrow morning and is asking me to share them with readers this weekend. Since I don’t normally post over the weekend and haven’t seen the materials yet, I can’t make any promises. But since I know that the issue is of great concern to many readers, I will try.)

1 southsider April 14, 2014 at 1:31 PM

Removing the Barn Hollow article will shave 60 minutes or more off of TM!
There area few more that have the potential to really consume time, even though the voting outcome is pretty obvious.
Here’s hoping The Moderator recognizes when there’s a foregone conclusion and moves the article to vote quickly.
Three in particular that are generating a lot of discussion here but don’t need to be time consumers at TM, in my opinion, are:
1. Re-Surface 9/11… will pass overwhelmingly.
2. The Gulbankian article … will pass overwhelmingly.
3. The State funded Main Street re-engineering plan … will fail to receive 2/3 + 1.

Once you know your side is prevailing, close the deal! …

2 Al Hamilton April 14, 2014 at 4:42 PM


To be clear the 2 Main St articles that are on for this meeting each only require a simple majority. The 2/3+1 relates to the required easements which are not on the agenda at this meeting.

3 Tim Martel April 15, 2014 at 9:15 AM

Al’s point is important.

We are not deciding between Plans this week.

We are only deciding if we want an independent review committee, so that when we do decide we have information and options.

4 southsider April 15, 2014 at 1:25 PM

thanks for the clarification

Previous post:

Next post: