Live Blog Session 1: Wayland's 2013 Annual Town Meeting

Editor's Note: Wayland's 2013 Annual Town Meeting begins on Thursday, April 4 and continues, as necessary, on April 7, 9 and 10. Patch plans to attend each session and bring you live updates from the floor of town meeting. The live blog will be updated with time stamps, the most recent posts at the top.

Feel free to jump in with your own comments and questions in the comment section below.

10:14 p.m. - We're back to the line item by line item review of the budget.

Now we're voting on the amended budget, minus the WaylandCares dollars of $102,671.

Operating budget passes 190 yes, 30 no. The operating budget was reduced to $72,252,247 and the amount to be raised by taxation was reduced to $62,911,951.

And with that, we've adjourned for the night at 10:21 p.m. We'll resume on Sunday at 1 p.m. here at the Wayland High School Field House.

I'll be back to with a Session 2 live blog.

10:06 p.m. - We have a motion on the floor now (I missed who made the motion, but I think John Dyer) to direct the Board of Selectmen to return to a future town meeting with a plan for funding WaylandCares.

"That the Board of Selectmen bring an article to the next town meeting regarding the organization and responsibility of WaylandCares or something of that nature," Berry reads from the written out motion.

Ellen Grieco speaks in favor of the motion and no one stands to speak against it.

The motion passes by a vote of 169 yes, 64 no.

9:53 p.m. - Margo Melnicove steps to the mic and proposes amending the budget to delete Line Items 85, 86, and 87 -- all related to WaylandCares. It would reduce the budget by $!02,671.

Melnicove says that her chief concern was that WaylandCares intended to apply for federal funding, but wouldn't know whether it would receive that money until September. If that money did come though, Melnicove says, WaylandCares did not intend to give the town's money back.

"Why not?" Melnicove asks.

She also asks why WaylandCares wasn't included under the school budget or youth services department.

"Why do we need a new town department that operates under the town administrator?"

Heidi Heilman rises to speak in opposition to the amendment.

"If this budget proposal passes, WaylandCares will be hiring a new director," Heilman says. "I will be retiring."

Heilman goes on to explain what WaylandCares is and its general organization.

The timer cuts Heilman off.

Linda Segal is speaking in favor of the amendment. She says she doesn't understand why public records aren't available that she has requested. She stresses that she isn't against the program, but she wants some more details about it. She also questions why it can't be voted on at Wayland's typical fall town meeting.

Mike Lowery also speaks in favor of the amendment, saying he isn't against WaylandCares, but would prefer that it fall under an existing board.

Louis Jurist stands to speak against the amendment, saying that he sees great value in WaylandCares and knows that it has made an impact on substance abuse rates of Wayland's youth.

"I think it is very important, despite procedural differences about what may or may not have been done," to fund WaylandCares, Jurist says.

Lew Russell speaks next against the amendment, saying that these are "troubling times" for students. He says it is important for the schools and community to unite for WaylandCares.

Ed Collins speaks for the amendment and Joe Nolan speaks against it.

Melnicove speaks again to say she doesn't understand how a new town department can be created that has an executive committee who makes decisions about who is hired or fired and what to do with tax dollars.

With that we have a move the question motion ... debate terminated by a vote of 251 yes, 21 no.

Now the vote on the amendment to delete WaylandCares funding of $102,671 (Line Items 85, 86, 87).

The amendment passes by a vote of 150 yes, 122 no.

9:20 p.m. - School Committee Chairwoman Barb Fletcher presents her thoughts on Line Item 61 -- Total Schools' budget proposal of $33.4 million.

Fletcher says that enrollment prediction is lower for 2013-14, but there are some additional costs, including changing transportation needs.

Efficiencies and cost savings were found in staff attrition and efforts to keep the impact of reductions as far from students as possible.

Fletcher wraps up her presentation and we moved forward.

9:04 p.m. - On to the budget. Article 5, FY 2014 Omnibus Budget will feature four separate motions. Bill Steinberg is making the first two motions.

The first motion asks voters to accept the report of the Finance Committee as it relates to the FY 2014 budget. Steinberg goes on to outline some of the key points of the report.

Steinberg specifically wanted to address funding for the Wayland Middle School roof. He says that the Wayland High School project will be on target in terms of costs, so those funds cannot be used for WMS.

Before taking a vote on the motion, Berry stops to conduct the traditional "walk through the budget."

Anette Lewis asks what public buildings were included in the Line Item 41 "utilities" cost listed under Public Buildings, especially since there is also a utilities cost (Line Item 49) under the Joint Communications. There isn't an immediate answer, but when raised again when Berry gets to Line Item 49, it is says that the JCC has utilities cost outside the normal building utilities costs.

8:58 p.m. - The new motion under Article 4 asks the town to contribute $98,534 to OPEB funding, it's a $645,668 reduction from the original motion.

Voting the amended article now ... 218 yes, 69 no.

8:46 p.m. - A second amendment is now being offered by Margo Melnicove. She asked that the funding in the motion listed as "raising $645,668" be removed and the total appropriation being reduced by that amount, bringing the total appropriation to $98,534.

Melnicove says that she has no problem with the revolving funds going toward OPEB, but doesn't want any more tax dollars going to it when surplus money has already gone to it without voters or Finance Committee knowledge.

There's been some back an forth regarding whether the present or future taxpayers are responsible the OPEB funding at this point; Melnicove says the current taxpayers have already covered more than their fair share.

We have a move the question vote ... debate terminated by a vote of 266 yes, 24 no.

Now to a vote on Melnicove's amendment to appropriate $98,534 (deleting the "raising $645,668" in the original motion).

The amendment passes by a vote of 143 yes, 136 no.

8:26 p.m. - Richard Waack (spelling uncertain) offers the first amendment of the night.

Strike out the motion under Article 4 and replace it with:

"There be no additional transfer of funds to OPEB trust until the fund holdings are in accordance with the November 2008 plan as presented at special town meeting."

Gutschenritter is speaking against the amendment and explaining that his understanding is that it would require the amount already contributed to a point that it is already over.

George Harris replied that his understanding was that the amendment requested the town contribute annually the amount proposed in 2008.

Gordon Cliff speaks against the amendment to say that what was discussed in 2008 is not really relevant to what Wayland is facing today as much has changed since then.

Linda Segal says that she doesn't understand why the town still doesn't have trust documents and wants to have those documents before further funding is contributed.

Tom Greenaway is now speaking against the amendment, saying that the focus on a need for a trust document is a "red herring."

"The fact that there is or is not a trust has very little to do with the obligation that is real," Greenaway says.

Anette Lewis says that her understanding is that in the case of the OPEB funding, a "real trust fund" with "real management" is needed.

Mark Lanza says he would prefer not to speak because this is a complicated issue, but he would try to clarify, at the request of Gutschenritter and then the moderator, what the significance of a "trust" is in this case.

Lanza says that OPEB can only legally been used for one thing.

"Setting up a trust may be inconsistent with the law because the law requires that the town invest in this fund and use it for one purpose in the future," Lanza says. "There's no need to set up a trust and, in fact, doing so, in my opinion, would be inconsistent with the law."

Waack returned to further explain his amendment to explain that he wasn't suggesting OPEB not be funded, but that he wanted to stop funding it until what had already been contributed caught up with the $1 million per year discussion that was decided on in 2008.

Move the question vote is now being taken ... debate on the amendment has been terminated by a vote of 267 yes, 18 no.

We're now voting the amendment ... Amendment fails by a vote of 128 yes, 153 no.

8:21 p.m. - Clifford Lewis is offering the primary con statement relating to Article 4.

Lewis shows an empty folder to the town meeting floor and explains that it represents the paperwork for the OPEB trust fund ... which doesn't exist in actuality. He says OPEB is a line item for Wayland's ledger, but isn't a true trust fund.

"It is time to stop the insvestment and mismanagement of OPEB funds," Lewis says, adding that the OPEB funds are not invested in such a way as to earn the interest they should be earning. The OPEB funds need to be managed by a true fund manager.

Wayland has contributed more to its OPEB obligation than any town in the Commonwealth, Lewis says.

Gutschenritter replies that the town's website features the names of the two managers who are currently managing the OPEB fund.

8:05 p.m. - Dave Gutschenritter is offering the motion under Article 4: OPEB Funding.

The motion, available as an insert at Town Meeting, outlines that the proposed funding of $744,202 come from eight areas. The amounts are detailed on the insert with the exception of the sixth area, BASE program account, and that amount has been changed to $24,574.

Gutschenritter is explaining why the number under Retiree Health Insurance FY14 (pg. 48 of the warrant) is different than the number for 2014 listed on page 38 under the Projected Benefit Payments.

The numbers aren't the same because the were calculated using different methods, but both are appropriate methods.

The budget number (pg. 48) is what the town expects to pay for retiree health benefits based on receipts it expects to receive during the fiscal year. It does not differentiate between retiree and active healthcare costs.

The other number (pg. 38) is for actuarial purposes, he says. The non-Medicare costs for retiree healthcare needs has been adjusted to reflect that retirees generally incur more health costs than active employees.

"The numbers are different but both are appropriate for their respective purposes," Gutschenritter says.

He says that he has to thinks this article comes down to two questions: "Why do we need to fund OPEB and why now."

The unfunded liability for OPEB is currently $28 million. Gutschenritter says that Wayland has an obligation to meet pay that.

Gutschenritter says not funding OPEB would be a decision to not pay people the full value of the work they do.

"We have a legal obligation to pay these benefits, we need to do it," Guschenritter says.

7:59 p.m. - Nancy Funkhouser presented the motion under Article 3: Current Year Transfers.

The motion increased the snow removal number printed in the budget from $150,000 to $165,000.

"Since the Warrant went to print, there have been more snow and ice events," Funkhouser says. "The snow removal expenses will be paid by a transfer from free cash."

Concerning the other expense, wastewater professional expense, the motion is as printed in the warrant.

Anette Lewis wants to speak to the motion. She says she isn't opposed to paying the wastewater expense, but wanted voters to understand what they were paying for. She says the work that must be paid for was completed in FY12.

Linda Segal is now speaking and says she requested that more info be provided during the Warrant hearing; she thanked the committee for providing that.

She says she wanted maps included because the public should be able to see that the plan they are playing for.

Funkhouser replied that this motion was a financial matter and that maps don't apply here.

There's no more discussion, so it's time to vote. There seems to be an electronic voting problem, so Berry asks for a voice vote.

Article 3 passes by a voice vote.

7:50 p.m. - Bladon asked that Article 2 be passed over.

An electronic vote was taken without any debate.

The article was passed over by a vote of 162 yes, 32 no.

7:47 p.m. - A motion under Article 1, as presented by John Bladon, to recognize citizens and employees for particular service to the town.

First motion recognized citizens "for their extensive service to the Town." It passed unanimously by voice vote.

Second motion recognized town and school employees who have retired since the 2012 ATM and served the town for more than 20 years. It passed unanimously by voice vote.

Third was a moment of silence for town volunteers and employees who have passed away.

7:36 p.m. -- Berry is running through some "preliminaries," which means he's explaining how to use the electronic voting handsets and how he will instruct people to vote.

There's a lightbulb that will glow during the 30-second voting period. The light will turn off, the votes will be counted and Berry will announce the results.

We seem to be having some audio issues. Seems too loud to some people and not loud enough to others.

People are continuing to trickle in, but there are definitely more empty chairs than full ones. Berry seems to be a bit frustrated with the sound situation, so he's called on a sound guy to help.

"The acoustics in this room are not that good," sound guy says. The speakers are either all on or all off. There's not a lot of minute control. "There's not much we can do about that."

He explained that different parts of the room will be better than others, so Berry is giving people the opportunity to shift seats a bit.

Berry says he can't allow the sound to completely derail the meeting, so he's going to conduct a couple of test votes and try to move forward.

"Should the Patriots have done more to keep Wes Welker?" is Berry's test vote question.

Voting light is on ... and the vote is in.

98 yes, 58 no.

Berry's next test question, "How many of you participated in the Town Meeting Attendance Survey on the town website?"

Voting light is on ... vote is in.

48 yes, 112 no.

7:29 p.m. -  The crowd is very thin here at that the Wayland High School Field House for the first session of Wayland's 2013 Annual Town Meeting.

Town Moderator Dennis Berry has called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Apparently we have a quorum, though I haven't heard a number yet.

We're working through some sound issues, but otherwise things seem to be getting underway.