Special Town Meeting Review: A United Front, de Tocqueville Speaks and Defending the Gauche

A united front, a call for shared sacrifice, a first-time "nuisance" bylaw and a new big rug for Belmont High School were the topics heard, debated and voted on by Belmont's Town Meeting as the town's legislative body voted on four major articles at a special assembly held at the Chenery Middle School Monday night, Nov. 4. 

And it appeared that each of the four articles – placing limitations on yard sales, cleaning snow from your sidewalk, delaying the demolition of historically important residential homes and a financing plan for a new synthetic "turf" surface at the high school's Harris Field – brought before the slightly more than 240 members (of a body of 290 representatives) had won approval.

But a math error in the counting of a standing vote resulted in a 20 vote swing and the yard sale citizen petition went down to defeat 98 to 94.

"See what happens when you stick around?" said Belmont Town Moderator Michael Widmer.

(An old timer in the auditorium wondered if the mistake will convince Town Meeting to approve "Ellen's countin' machine" referring to Town Clerk Ellen Cushman's request for an automated voting system for Town Meeting at the most recent annual Town Meeting.)

It was a night were the two most contentious articles – the demolition delay with seven amendments to the article and the snow shoveling bylaw – appeared to gain favor of the Town Meeting in what were their third visit before the representatives.

New rug for Belmont's athletes

Like most appetizers, the vote approving the financing for a new synthetic "turf" surface on Harris Field was quick and satisfying. The money – a line of credit used to pay for the univents at the High School – was in place and ready to be used. And for anyone who has seen the condition of the field recently – rips and ripples on the worn-out surface – the vote was a "no brainer" according to one representative who said she isn't even interested in town sports. And it wasn't as the financing deal passed on a unanimous vote.  

Demolition article no longer delayed

In the case of the demolition delay bylaw, the hard work to cobble together a compromise to meeting the requirements from four disparate bodies over the past two years since it was first introduced to Town Meeting – the article was removed from the warrant in the last two annual Town Meetings – appeared to satisfy many doubters of the need for a bylaw. 

And unlike in the past, the groups who created the bylaw – its sponsor the Historic District Commission, the Planning Board, the Bylaw Review Committee and the Board of Selectmen – stood as a unified force behind the passage of the legislation.

To each of the seven amendments, including a pair which supported an "opt-out" clause ("Those were non-starters," said the Commission's Lauren Meier who presented the article to Town Meeting) for property owners whose property was one of the 149 structures on the protected list, the four partners voiced a universal "recommends unfavorable action" as six were soundly defeated.

Only the amendment by Eric Smith – which would have made the Commission, rather then the homeowner, defend why a structure is on the list during the appeals process – came close to passage, being defeated 127 to 113 on a standing vote.

"We're delighted with the vote," said Meier after the vote. "The successful outcome reflects a long period of collaboration and hard work by several people in town, not just the Historic Commission."

The bylaw's passage also could have been due to the compromised nature of the regulations: with so many cooks in the regulatory kitchen, the bylaw soup presented before the body is rather "meek" in its protections, said supporter Adam Dash who is also a member of the Warrant Committee. He noted that it will take six months just to get all the necessary components – a design, financings, a contractor – in place to put up a new house so a homeowner can easily fill the 180 days he would need to keep the structure on the shelf. In addition, homeowners are not prevented under the bylaw to remodel their homes to the point that it losses its historical value.

But Meier said the article is what the representatives wanted. 

"Regardless of what other towns pass, Belmont passed a bylaw that works for Belmont," said Meier which meant including a "sunset" clause and reducing the number of structures on the protected list. 

"The people spoke through Town Meeting," said a dejected McGaw.

Viva la pelle à neige!

It took a Frenchman's view on civil society made more than 175 years ago to rally supporters and the undecided to pass a bylaw in Belmont many thought long dead the last time it came before Town Meeting.

The snow removal bylaw is just that; when it snows, residents or their designated representatives should shovel their walks. It's that simple. Many reps were concerned with details such as who shovels, liability issues and being forced to shovel those large mounds of snow plowed up onto the corner of intersections.

When Town Meeting member Donald Mercier said the proposed bylaw was "tremendously un-American" by forcing residents to clear public property, the measure's sponsor, outgoing Selectman Ralph Jones, rose to defend his proposal with a simple concept: shared self sacrifice.

Saying while discussing Alexis de Tocqueville’s great work of political science, “Democracy in America,” he noted that de Tocqueville was amazed how at town meetings citizens would come together "and impose burdens on each other for the public good" in areas of public education, police and other functions, which "is the essence of democracy" to the applause of many reps who were still around after 11 p.m.

"As a resident who came to New England from the Midwest in 1965, the New England Town Meeting has fascinated me," said Jones after the meeting. 

"For all of its faults, it has the virtue of allowing citizens to assemble peacefully and obligate themselves and their neighbors for a common good," he said.

Jones also said that he has finally come to agree with many long-time Town Meeting members that a proposed bylaw needs at least "three showings" before members before the language is perfected and intent of the regulations understood.

"This is about public safety, making sure that children can attend school. It isn't about picking on people," he said. 

Yard sale: It's still OK to be gauche in Belmont

By four votes, Stephen Ganak's attempt to bring some civility to yard sales went down to defeat. Not that Ganak was there to witness the proposed bylaw fail in its initial visit to Town Meeting. In fact, he left the auditorium soon after his citizen petition was "approved" 114 to 98 in a standing vote. And he was not present when Town Moderator Mike Widmer interrupt the meeting to admit to a "math" error; the article was actually defeated, 98 to 94. 

Oops.

The Ganak petition would place some common sense restrictions – hours of operation, twice a year – as well as a no cost license. While many surrounding towns – Arlington and Lexington to name a pair – have similar regulations on their books, some of the representatives explained that any limits on their ability to grab a bargain on some of their neighbors lawns was, as Sara Oaklander said, "over the top." 

Others believed that the licensing provision – in which residents would go online to obtain a free license that they could print at home – is just burdensome to the elderly, techno-phobes and procrastinators. 

And why shouldn't a neighbor be "gauche" by holding more than two garage sales, pondered Paul Roberts. He joined others like Rachel Berger who said the town has current regulations that should prevent a resident from setting up a "business" on their front lawn and needs to enforce the law. 

But others, led by David Alper, said that a yard sale bylaw would allow residents a vehicle to use town resources to confront those who are impacting their neighbor's piece of mind. The town's health code has a regulation on the height of grass, said Alper, and while it is used infrequently, it does gives them that governmental  mechanism to confront what Ganak calls "an unneighborly neighbor." 

Yet supporters could not convince a majority for the need to set limits on those residents who lack a sense of suburban awareness. But this is the bylaws first time at Town Meeting; if Jones is correct, expect a "yes" vote in a town meeting in 2015.