Tisbury voters managed to wrap up a special town meeting Tuesday night, but completed only four articles at the annual meeting that followed before adjourning at 10:50 pm.
Town moderator Deborah Medders asked voters to return to the Tisbury School gym Wednesday night at 7 pm to take up the 34 remaining annual meeting articles.
Issues still to be addressed included a $24,286,835 operating budget for fiscal year 2016 (FY16), capital appropriations and new equipment requests, and embarkation-fund expenditures. Voters were left with articles tied to overrides, including debt exclusions to fund Tisbury’s share of the Dukes County purchase of the former VNA building for use by the Center for Living and construction of a new Martha’s Vineyard Public Schools (MVPS) administration building.
The Boy Scouts presented the colors and led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance at 7 pm. Five minutes later, Ms. Medders announced the meeting had a quorum of 121 voters present.
In keeping with Tisbury’s lottery system for determining the order of articles, Ms. Medders drew numbers from a ceramic antique pitcher. Voters slogged their way through the 16 articles on the special town warrant in a two-and-a-half hour session.
DPW restructuring approved
The lengthiest and most contentious debate of the night concerned a request that voters approve a home-rule petition to allow selectmen to put the Department of Public Works (DPW) and its functions under their control. In addition, the selectmen would replace the elected Board of Public Works with an advisory board of public works that they would appoint.
The home rule petition is the first step in the process. Town administrator Jay Grande gave a lengthy explanation of the legislative process and the thinking behind the change, using a PowerPoint presentation.
Mr. Grande said many people are surprised by the fact that the DPW is independent. Personnel issues are particularly challenging, he noted, because the DPW staff is employed by the selectmen, yet answers directly to an elected board, the Board of Public Works. That creates certain problems in applying personnel policies, and particularly union agreements, according to Mr. Grande.
“It’s important for the town to align its policies, and that all departments are following the same set of policy guidelines that are set by the personnel director, which is the town administrator,” Mr. Grande said.
Harriet Barrow noted that the BPW includes some highly qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable members.
“The idea of stripping these commissioners of any kind of influence or involvement and making them only voluntary seems to be cutting them off at the knees,” she said.
Peter Goodale said that as he recalled, the reason for making the DPW independent years ago was because the selectmen had been micromanaging it.
Lack of process?
BPW Chairman Leo DeSorcy, a commissioner for 15 years, and John Thayer, a commissioner for 23 years, said they had no prior notification or discussion with the selectmen regarding the DPW article, and learned of it when a reporter called, asking them for comment.
Mr. DeSorcy said he agreed there is room for improvement in the DPW, and that restructuring certainly could be done. However, he questioned why the selectmen had not held discussions with the BPW before the article was put on the warrant.
“If you separate the DPW and put it back under the selectmen, you’re dismantling it,” Mr. Thayer said. “It operates the way that it is because we trust in the people we hire to do a professional job. I think this article should be tabled until there’s a lot more discussion.”
Selectman Chairman Jonathan Snyder responded. He said the idea of restructuring the DPW was proposed to the board by consultants, and had been under the board’s consideration for years.
“I don’t disagree with the selectmen; I have a problem with the process,” John Packer said. “I don’t like hearing that the commissioners found out by hearing it from a newspaper. I think you ought to table this — you’re moving too fast.”
His motion to table the article failed to achieve a two-thirds majority vote, with 62 for and 130 against.
Ms. Medders ended the almost hour-long discussion with a call for a vote. The article was approved 124-67.
The next article that came up called for establishing a new position for a human resource coordinator/administrative secretary to the selectmen.
“Considering the action we just took on the previous article, I think this is a good idea,” Mr. Goodale quipped. It passed unanimously.
Another layer of review
A request from the planning board to amend a zoning bylaw for special permits also generated significant discussion. Planning Board chairman Dan Seidman and member Ben Robinson said the purpose was to give the planning board more input through town participation in its decision-making process regarding large-scale development downtown.
“We had a large project here in town and had no process to deal with it,” Selectman Tristan Israel said, without specifically referring to Stop and Shop Supermarket’s proposal to expand its Vineyard Haven store.
Stop and Shop officials checked out of the permitting process at the Martha’s Vineyard Commission (MVC) last May, following a final hearing where the Tisbury selectmen and planning board spoke unanimously in opposition to the size of the project.
Clarence “Trip” Barnes and Joshua Goldstein, two of the town’s MVC representatives, disagreed.
“The normal process is anything over 2,000 square feet gets sent to the MVC by our building inspector, and then it gets sent back,” Mr. Barnes said. “I think that’s keeping it simple.”
“This adds another layer, which will make the review process take that much longer,” Mr. Goldstein said, adding that it would drive up expenses for applicants. “Everybody can attend MVC meetings and have a voice. And we’re already paying for it through our tax dollars.”
Harold Chapdelaine, the town’s newest MVC commissioner and a member of the Tisbury Historical Commission, took the opposite stance. “I hope you will recognize this as a response to a rather large development,” he said. “We didn’t have the tools in town to effectively address a project of that scale.”
The article required a two-thirds majority, and was approved in standing vote 158-25.
In other business, voters agreed to establish a new paramedic and a new information technology administrator; fund a study to place utilities underground; establish Lagoon Pond watershed boundaries and a nitrogen management district; add property at 92 Main Street to the sewer system; increase the number of elected constables from two to three; and elect a fish committee.
Annual meeting, part one
The special town meeting adjourned at 9:25 pm, followed a few minutes later by the annual town meeting. Voters addressed four articles. The most significant and time-consuming was Article 20, concerning requests for funds for 20 projects from Community Preservation Act (CPA) funds. The money comes from a 3 percent surtax on property taxes and matching funds from the state.
Voters approved all of the requests. Recommended projects from the town Community Preservation Committee included $150,000 for the Island Housing Trust to fund the first half of costs to build an affordable apartment building on Water Street, $50,000 to update and restore Katharine Cornell Theatre lighting equipment; $80,000 for the Owen Park gazebo’s restoration; and $50,000 to develop a pocket park at the former fire station site on Beach Street.
The annual meeting was adjourned at 10:50 pm. The 222 attendees represented about 7 percent of the town’s 3,156 voters.