Canton, Massachusetts · Saved source text
November 01, 2023, Finance Committee Meeting. Minutes
Saved text from 11 source pages. Transcription and OCR may contain errors; verify figures and wording against the original. Retrieved 2026-10-15.
Source page 1
Canton Finance Committee Minutes Voted on: 12/4/23
801 Washington Street Vote: 6-0-1
Canton, MA 02021
Meeting Minutes
November 1, 2023
Finance Committee Members Present: Dan Cole, Dave Clough, Karen Foley, Emilio Mauro, Tim McKenna, Kristin
Mirliani, Reuki Schutt and Cindy Thomas.
Finance Committee Members Absent: Maureen Menconi.
Guests Present:
Ellen Jones, Finance Committee Recording Secretary
Peter Hennessey, Citizen
Kathleen Howley, Sponsor of STM Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8
Mike Loughran, Clerk, Select Board
Randy Scollins, Finance Director/Treasurer/Collector
Tom Theodore, Chair, Select Board
Call Meeting to Order: Ms. Thomas called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Review of the Agenda - Chair Cindy Thomas – Ms. Thomas reviewed the agenda items that included reviewing and
voting on remaining Special Town Meeting (STM) warrant articles submitted by citizen petitions and by the Select
Board, reviewing the Finance Committee Recommendations and discussions to STM and if time permitted an update
of the elected officials compensation.
Vote - STM Article 1 Motion 1 – Adopt The Rules to Govern Special Town Meeting – Ms. Thomas read the content
of the article submitted by the Select Board as follows: To see if the Town will vote to adopt certain procedures
to govern the conduct of the 2023 Special Town Meeting; or to take any other action related thereto.
Mr. Scollins clarified for the Committee members that some of the articles that were submitted by petitioners sometimes
included the words “Motion…Moved” and have the appearance of a motion. Per Town Counsel these articles submitted
by the petitioners have to be printed verbatim in the warrant, but are not actually the motion made by the Finance
Committee.
Ms. Thomas read Article 1 Motion 1 as follows: That this 2023 Special Town Meeting shall meet on Monday,
November 20, 2023, and if necessary on Tuesday, November 21, 2023, in the Morse Auditorium, on the grounds
of the Canton High School until the business of this Special Town Meeting has been concluded, each such
session to begin at 7:00 o’clock P.M. and to adjourn at 11:00 o’clock P.M., or as near that hour as may be
feasible, according to the nature of the business pending at the said hour. The intent of the motion is to allow for
the STM to continue for a second night if it is needed.
Mr. Scollins explained that he did not want the setting of the tax rate to hinder the will of the petitioners and the voters.
He does not see any harm putting the standard language in the motion “and if necessary the Monday and Wednesdays
thereafter. . .”. Mr. Clough inquired if something had changed regarding setting the tax rate since the Committee last
met on October 25th and that if STM was not concluded it would delay setting the tax rate after November 21. He stated
that in 2018 the Tax Recap (Tax Recapitulation) was filed with the Department of Revenue (DOR) and then an STM
was held after. Mr. Clough also thought the Town held its 2021 Town Meeting after DOR certified the tax rate. Mr.
Scollins explained that something did change from 2018 and 2021 in that the Commonwealth had declared a state of
emergency during COVID-19.
At a request by Ms. Thomas, Mr. Scollins explained that he followed up for clarity with the Director of the Division of
Local Services (DLS) Deb Wagner, who is the senior state official who presides over the state’s tax rate setting process.
Ms. Wagner confirmed to Mr. Scollins in writing that it is the “policy” of the Department of Revenue not to certify a tax
rate for a municipality if there is a scheduled town meeting with a financial article that has not dissolved. If the tax bills
are not mailed before the end of the calendar year the FY24 third-quarter payment is due at the time the FY24 fourth-
quarter payment is due which is May 1. Mr. Scollins further stated that the Town Administrator is aware of the disruption
of getting the tax bills out last year and Mr. Doody is committed to having the tax rate set before Thanksgiving.
FINCOM 20231101 minutes WRS CT final.docx Page 1 of 11 11/11/23Source page 2
A motion made by Mr. Mauro that the Finance Committee recommend Article 1 Motion 1 as written in the warrant and that language be added to the motion “and if necessary the Monday and Wednesdays thereafter” was seconded by Ms. Schutt. Mr. Clough stated that the Finance Director provided inaccurate information at the last Finance Committee meeting that the Town has not opted in for electronic text messaging of the tax bills. He stated that he did not receive a paper copy of his tax bill and only a text message and that the Town had the ability to send out tax bills via text message to speed up the process. Ms. Thomas noted that a taxpayer has an option to opt-in to the process of receiving a tax bill via text message. Mr. Scollins confirmed that it is a taxpayer opt-in process, and not one which the Town requires or that many taxpayers take advantage of. Mr. Clough stated that information from the Division of Local Services recommended submitting the tax recap by November 15. He suggested putting a Town by-law in place to help accommodate the tax rate setting process and to prevent any future misses on the tax rate deadline. Mr. Scollins stated that November 15 is a “best practice” date recommended by the Division of Local Services but is not a mandate. Mr. Scollins would be thrilled if the Town could set or hold the tax classification hearing held by November 15th. Unfortunately the delay is in the valuation of property process which is not a reflection on the Assessor’s office but a reflection on the consultant that the Town uses to evaluate all the commercial properties and the fact that Canton is not the consultant’s only client. The Town is not the only town going through the tax rate setting process with the state nor the only customer of the print/mail company sending the bills out. Vote: 8-0-0. Vote - STM Article 1 Motion 2 – Adopt The Rules to Govern Special Town Meeting Ms. Thomas read Article 2 Motion 2 as follows: All voters at the time of the vote shall be in the auditorium and votes will be counted by a show of voter cards and if the Moderator is unable to determine the vote result then the votes will be counted by the standard teller process. This motion was proposed by the Moderator. Ms. Schutt spoke that given “the culture has been rather acrimonious in our community” and that the articles coming before the voters are very difficult, she is of the opinion that it will be very difficult for voters to raise their hand or their voter cards and inquired if the Moderator would entertain a ballot vote. Ms. Thomas followed up with the Moderator who informed her that the by-law states should a paper ballot be requested then the vote on that article is suspended for 36 hours and then the vote cannot be resumed for 36 hours or beyond. Ms. Thomas thought the Moderator was not inclined for the use of paper ballots. Mr. Scollins read Article IV Section 17 of the Town’s General By-Laws: Motion to Require the Use of Written Ballots – Written ballots may be used to determine a vote under any article in the warrant (1) in the discretion of the moderator made in advance of the meeting, or (2) if said use is directed by a majority vote of the Town Meeting in lieu of the procedures for voting set out in Article IV, Section 12. Notwithstanding the requirements of Article IV, Section 5 of these General By-Laws, whenever the Town Meeting votes to cause the vote under any article in the warrant to be taken by written ballots the vote shall be suspended for not less than thirty-six week-day hours in order to allow time for ballots to be prepared and procedures to be put in place for the conduct of said voting. The town moderator shall place said motion on the calendar for action as the first order of business at the next session of the town meeting held more than thirty-six weekday hours after the time the said motion has been voted. A few Committee members spoke in support of written ballots and inquired as to why the Select Board was not asking the Moderator for ballots. Mr. Scollins spoke with the Town Clerk that given all the suspicions and conspiracy with paper ballots it might raise additional concerns about the integrity of the votes. Mr. Clough suggested that the motion be amended to read “all voters at the time of the vote shall be in the auditorium and votes will be counted by a show of voter cards if paper ballots are unavailable”. Ms. Thomas stated that this would still be the decision of the Moderator whether or not to have paper ballots. Ms. Thomas stated that another option is to not move the motion and that language be added to the motion as follows: “all voters at the time of the vote shall be in the auditorium and votes will be counted by a show of voter cards with the exception of Articles 4, 5, 6 and 8 which shall be voted by paper ballot”. Any motion taken by the Finance Committee would still be subject to the Moderator’s recommendation but the Moderator would still have to respect the will of the majority. Ms. Kathleen Howley of 43 Sherman Avenue, who has received threatening letters, stated that some of these threatening letters included information against the family members including children of who the letters were sent to with a consequence of individuals losing their jobs. She is of the opinion that voters should not be afraid to vote their conscience and that if a motion were made to use paper ballots that it would not pass by the voters at STM. Ms. Mirliani spoke in support of the Finance Committee making the decision about written ballots be made ahead of time and not on the floor of STM as it could have financial impacts of setting the tax rate if the STM were moved to the following week. FINCOM 20231101 minutes WRS CT final.docx Page 2 of 11 11/11/23
Source page 3
Ms. Thomas proposed the following motion: All voters at the time of the vote shall be in the auditorium and votes
will be counted by a show of voter cards with the exception of Articles 4, 5, 6 and 8 which will be conducted
by written ballot if the Moderator is unable to determine the vote result of votes taken by voter cards then the
vote shall be counted by the standard teller process.
Mr. Peter Hennessey of 4 Sumner Street stated that the proposition of a paper ballot would cause the Town to go into
a 2-day 36 hour vote. Ms. Thomas stated it would not if the Finance Committee prepares for this in advance. He stated
that threats happen on both sides of issues. Ms. Thomas wants a fair opportunity for all of the citizens to vote and to
feel safe and to come to STM to vote their desires regardless of their position. Mr. Hennessey does not want to see
the Town get into a financial situation.
Mr. Mauro made a motion that the Finance Committee recommend Article 1 Motion 2 as amended that all voters
at the time of the vote shall be in the auditorium and votes will be counted by a show of voter cards with the
exception of Articles 4, 5, 6 and 8 which shall be done by paper ballot. If the Moderator is unable to determine
the vote from the voter cards for the remaining articles then the votes will be counted by the standard teller
process was seconded by Mr. McKenna.
Mr. Clough inquired that no matter what motion is made by the Finance Committee that it is up to the discretion of the
Moderator. Ms. Thomas suggested that the Finance Committee be proactive with their motion and that the discussion
should address why the Finance Committee is making this motion.
Vote: 8-0-0.
STM Article 1 Motion 3 – Adopt The Rules to Govern Special Town Meeting
This is a standard motion made by the Finance Committee for a typical Town Meeting. Ms. Thomas stated that not all
of these individuals are needed on the list and the Committee can eliminate names. Mr. Scollins spoke with the
Superintendent of Schools, Mr. Folan, and spoke with department heads at a recent department head meeting
regarding the list of individuals. Mr. Folan suggested that all of the school individuals, including Blue Hills, be eliminated
from the list with the exception of his name. The Committee reviewed the list. Three names added to the list included
Patricia Sherill, Deputy Police Chief, Paul Gallagher, Lieutenant, Canton Police Department and Attorney Leonard
Kesten of Brody Hardeen Perkins & Kesten. If more names need to be added to the list a motion can be made at Town
Meeting to alter the list.
A motion made by Ms. Schutt that the Finance Committee recommend to Town Meeting that the following
individuals be granted all of the rights and privileges of participation in this Special Town Meeting, except
the right to vote, under any article of this warrant which affects matters within their jurisdiction:
Steve Choiniere, Supervisor of Facilities and Grounds
Paul R. DeRensis, Town Counsel, Brooks & DeRensis
Paul Feeney, State Senator
Derek Folan, Superintendent of Schools
Paul Gallagher, Lieutenant, Canton Police Department
Louis Jutras, Information Systems Manager
Leonard Kesten, Attorney, Brody Hardoon Perkins & Kesten, LLP
Arafat Knight, Veterans’ Agent
Karen Lawlor, Administrative Assistant, Canton Planning Board
Alfons Koka, Town Engineer
Brian Lynch, Director of Facilities and Grounds/Maintenance
Stephen Lynch, Representative in Congress
M. Regen Milani, Conservation Commission Agent
Tyler Radicioni, Parks & Recreation Director
Helena Rafferty, Police Chief
Barbara Reardon, Board of Health Director
E. Wendell Robery, Fire Chief
William Scollins, Finance Director
Patricia Sherrill, Deputy Police Chief
Taylor Torres, Town Planner
Michael Trotta, Superintendent of Public Works
Diane Tynan, Director of the Department of Elder & Human Services
was seconded by Mr. McKenna.
Vote: 8-0-0.
STM Article 4 – Accountability of Select Board and Police Department
Ms. Thomas read the article as follows: To have the five Select Board members and the senior management of the
Canton Police Department, including the chief of police and s enior leadership, respond to concerns from registered
FINCOM 20231101 minutes WRS CT final.docx Page 3 of 11 11/11/23Source page 4
Canton voters; or to take any other action related thereto. As per a conversation Ms. Thomas had with the Moderator, he is proposing to have a pre-STM forum to allow for discussion among the parties. Ms. Howley spoke about the intent of the article. The original intent was to have a response made at STM but agreed that a forum down the road would be better than what they asked for. Ms. Thomas stated that language may need to be added that “upon completion of the current legal matter . . .” and that an external, independent facilitator with expertise be present for the forum discussion to help the Town address concerns and move forward within a certain amount of time at the conclusion of the case. Ms. Howley stated that the petitioners were not expecting the current legal case be addressed at STM but that in the future they would like the whole process to be better. Ms. Schutt spoke in favor of the forum with a facilitator, much like the School forums that were conducted with facilitators when she served on the School Committee. Mr. Cole spoke in support of a community forum addressing a list of issues but he inquired if this was really a Finance Committee issue. Ms. Thomas received “push back” on Article 5 that the Committee voted to defer to STM. Article 4 does have financial implications for the Town such as the ability to hire new police officers, the ability to hire new leadership people in leadership roles in Town and that it would reflect poorly on the Town’s reputation. Even though the Committee may not know clearly the “dollars and cents” of an article Ms. Thomas was advised that the Finance Committee should take a leadership role in recommending articles. Mr. Scollins stated that the Executive Office has a contingency budget for instances like this, not that an appropriation is made under Article 4 but that the Committee could assume that funds would be available from the executive budget and if a deficit were to occur the deficit could be handled at year end for a Reserve Fund Transfer Request from the Finance Committee’s Reserve Fund budget. If under $50,000 it is a three-quote process and if it is over $50,000 it is a bid process to be advertised. Ms. Schutt spoke in favor of not having this recommendation tied with the ongoing case. Mr. Hennessey believes this Article is directly linked to the on-going case and that it is disingenuous to not have it linked to the ongoing case. Ms. Thomas stated that she heard and respected the concerns of the citizen but that the goal of this article is to figure out how the Town can move forward with conversations that are civil and productive and help to envision a future for Canton. Mr. Mauro stated that because there are several cases that are ongoing and that many questions cannot be answered now because of individuals that might be connected to the cases and that the questions may have to be deferred to a time when it is legally permissible to answer them. Ms. Thomas listed some of the items discussed: forum group, stakeholder group appointed by the Moderator, define no more than a certain number of members including members from the petitioners group, members from the community, an external facilitator to be determined in partnership with the planning group and collaboration with the Finance Director to ensure compliance with procurement requirements with funding to be made from the Executive budget. Mr. Loughran of 258 Norfolk Street expressed his concern about the word “concerns” in the article and that the Moderator has reached out to the proponent of the article and has tried to get in advance what some of these questions and concerns are so that the Select Board might have an opportunity at STM to address the concerns. Ms. Thomas stated that the concerns would not be addressed at STM but the Finance Committee could have an alternative approach for moving forward and defer to a community forum to be addressed at a later date. In response to Ms. Howley inquiring if there would be an end date, Ms.Thomas suggested a “ to be done by or no later than . . . date”. September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024 were discussed. Mr. Clough made reference to a possible conflict of interest if Mr. Alberts were appointed to this forum as Mr. Alberts referred to himself as a witness to a crime. Ms. Mirliani spoke against this and that this forum is not connected to the case. Mr. Mauro stated that through the appointment process it could be determined if a conflict of interest existed and, therefore, that individual would not be eligible to serve on that committee. A motion made by Mr. Mauro that the Finance Committee recommend that in response to Article 4 a Community Forum be organized through the appointment of a stakeholder committee consisting of nine members appointed by the Moderator (two Select Board members, two members from the petitioners of the article, two members of the Police Department and three citizen members at large) and that the Community Forum be run by an independent Facilitator to be held no later than June 30, 2024 or a later date determined by the stakeholder committee through a request to the Moderator and that funds be made available through the Executive Budget to be procured by the Chief Procurement Officer to facilitate any other actions related thereto was seconded by Mr. McKenna. Ms. Mirliani inquired as to what the “charge” of the Forum would be because the motion did not clearly state what the Forum group is to do. Ms. Foley suggested the forum could respond to questions of registered voters. Vote: 8-0-0. FINCOM 20231101 minutes WRS CT final.docx Page 4 of 11 11/11/23
Source page 5
STM Article 5 – Whether the Town Will Proceed with Votes of No Confidence
At previous meeting the Finance Committee voted to defer Article 5 to the voters of Special Town Meeting because the
Committee felt it was up to the voters to act on the votes of no confidence.
Ms. Thomas received feedback with concerns that the article had broader implications for the community and that the
Finance Committee should take more responsibility of those concerns. Ms. Thomas shared some of the feedback she
received. There were two options the Finance could consider: 1) keep their vote to defer to STM as previously voted
and have a more robust discussion of why the Committee took that vote or 2) to reconsider their vote on Article 5 and
revote it.
The concerns that were brought to Ms. Thomas’ attention included the following:
• Is this the proper type of forum to address issues with Town employees and elected officials and is it an
appropriate procedure to publicly admonish people?
• Is the procedure the same for committee members, employees and departments as it is for the Select
Board?
• Should there be any kind of a citizen complaint process about a person or a Committee and a review
process to go forward with such a public vote and should the accused be allowed to respond or defend their
position before a public vote?
• Should a by-law be established to address such moves as a no confidence vote?
• What are the financial/legal implications of holding a public vote before the person or Committee has been
given the opportunity to respond?
• A concern of the Town is the Moderator is going to take the articles in order and the article that comes after
this relative to investigations and audits would not have been done. Is it appropriate that this article be
moved forward when in fact the Committee is suggesting that there are audits and investigations to happen
that might actually help citizens understand the Police Department and the Select Board?
Ms. Thomas made it clear that these comments were brought to her attention and are not necessarily her opinion.
• This article does have financial implications in the Town’s ability to hire new employees in that it creates a
climate around Town about our community.
• What are the implications for getting people to volunteer for committees and run for elected office if they are
going to be publicly admonished?
Ms. Thomas stated that there are conversations going on about individuals being added to this no confidence vote.
• Is it appropriate to vote Article 5 Motion 2 before the results of the audit?
The Committee could reconsider their vote to defer to STM or write a more robust discussion for Article 5. Ms. Thomas
stated that Article clearly states that the article does not require the Select Board to take action. Mr. Clough used the
Town of Uxbridge as an example of a no confidence article and spoke in support of leaving this article up to the
residents. Mr. Scollins stated that the implications of a vote of no confidence at STM would certainly send a red flag to
potential employees. The employment market is very competitive and potential candidates would see that this
community would bring people forward to humiliate them with a vote such as no confidence without due process. It
could have an impact on Canton’s ability to hire and is this the kind of community that we want to have by putting forth
an article such as this? Mr. Mauro stated that the real no confidence vote is made at an election.
Ms. Thomas stated the Committee has three options: 1) leave it as is, 2) keep the vote as is and beef up the discussion
or 3) take a vote of reconsideration and revote the article.
Ms. Howley stated that Article 5 was intended as a vote, if voters approve it because we are a democracy, to give
people an opportunity to say “not in my name, yes with my tax dollars, but my leaders are doing things that I do not
agree with, but not in my name" and as a way of getting back some self-respect. There are things being done in our
name that embarrass us, that disappoint us, that we want no part of and is a way to say you are our leaders but not in
my name.”
Mr. Mauro inquired of Ms. Howley if some of the suggestions being made under Article 4 were satisfying some of the
petitioners concerns and would she and the petitioners consider indefinitely postponing Article 5 of no confidence based
upon the other articles. Ms. Howley responded that she and the other petitioners would like to get answers from the
Town’s leaders, not necessarily one on one, but in a public forum that citizens could ask questions and they would be
provided with answers.
Ms. Thomas stated that the consensus among the Committee was to not reconsider Article 5 but to do a more robust
discussion which she would take responsibility for.
FINCOM 20231101 minutes WRS CT final.docx Page 5 of 11 11/11/23Source page 6
Ms. Schutt had a problem with the original article language of “our standard of good and ethical governance” in the article in that the phrase is subjective. STM Article 6 – Independent Investigations into its Select Board and Police Department Ms. Thomas read Article 6 as follows: To see if the Town wishes to authorize an independent investigation into and audit of its government including the Select Board and Police Department; or to take any other action related thereto. She reviewed the three suggested motions in the Article. Ms. Thomas informed the Committee that at the last Select Board meeting there was discussion by the Board for securing a national search for a company that would do these kinds of audits and investigations. There was a commitment made by the Select Board to move forward with an investigation. Her understanding is the investigation will not happen until the close of the investigation and legal matters that currently impact the Police Department. The securing of a consultant would have to go through the Finance Director who is the Chief Procurement Officer of the Town. The process of hiring the consultant would have to go through the procurement process because the cost would most likely be greater than $50,000. Auditing and investigating the Select Board – What does that actually look like and what are the investigatory issues, what does the audit look like. There are mechanisms in place if there are problems with the Select Board such as recall petitions that are allowed, ethics violations that could be addressed, mechanisms by which citizens have been clearly expressing their dissatisfactions. Ms. Thomas further stated that a suggestion has come forward that the Town needs not an investigation of the tasks but a way to look forward on how to modernize town government in Canton. Should the Town move to a Town Manager instead of a Town Administrator form of government. Why should it take two weeks for the Recreation Department to hire summer help to work on the playground with appointments happening only when the Select Board meets? Ms. Thomas stated that a suggestion has been made to her that the Moderator appoint a Modernization Committee for Canton that would work with the Moderator for specifications on that and it would be expected to come forward at the May 2025 Town Meeting with recommendations for by-law changes and structural changes to our Town government. The Modernization Committee could address things such as term limits, compensation for elected officials, policies and by-laws that make sense for the Town and how to move forward with governance that makes sense for Canton in the future. Ms. Thomas read from her phone a statement that was made at a recent Select Board’s meeting as follows: “We have conveyed to our Police Chief that a thorough and holistic administrative review of policies and procedures of the Canton Police Department is appropriate under the direction of the Town Administrator who has begun the process of researching national firms that have the compacity to conduct this work .” Ms. Howley said this was the most important article that they were collecting signatures for from citizens who were brave enough to sign their names. She stated that there have been several cases that have shown them the adherence to policies and procedures has been lacking. The Town receives accreditation but the Town’s adherence to the procedures is via a self-examination and it is the Police Department that decides how well they have adhered to those procedures. She is in support of Ms. Thomas’ suggestion about a Modernization Committee. Ms. Thomas clarified for Ms. Howley that the Modernization is about the Select Board and not the Police Department. Ms. Howley explained that Article 6 was written a few months ago and new information has come to them having to do with the article. Ms. Howley authored Article 6 to give the members of STM the opportunity to consider issues that might be at the time of STM. Ms. Thomas suggested that the Select Board’s administrative review could include a compliance review. Ms. Howley stated that there are extreme cases of conflicts of interest by the Select Board and to have the Select Board choose an independent investigator of the Police Department would not be well received. Currently there are two members of the Select Board that have relatives on the Police force. Ms. Thomas summarized that there are two items she is hearing: 1) that the study of the Police Department should be an independent audit and should not be done under the direction of the Select Board and 2) that it needs to be more than an administrative review but also address compliance. Mr. McKenna spoke in support of the Select Board being able to hire an independent consultant to perform a review of the Police Department without there being a conflict of interest similar to the Select Board choosing an auditor to review the Town’s finances. Ms. Schutt agree with Mr. McKenna but questioned as to why the Town should do it that way when there is already a sense that it will be “tainted”. In response to Mr. Theodore’s statement that the process would follow the procurement process and be awarded to the lowest bidder, Mr. Scollins explained that it depends on the type of firm. It they are specialists such as attorneys and accounting firms they are excluded from the procurement process. He further explained that because this consultant would be a service the Town can manage the service under Ch. 30B sections 5 and 6. Section 5 FINCOM 20231101 minutes WRS CT final.docx Page 6 of 11 11/11/23
Source page 7
procurement bid is sealed but awarded to the lowest bidder. Section 6 would follow a 2-envelope procurement with the proposer’s submitting a price proposal in one sealed envelope and their qualifications and response to the RFP (Request for Proposal) in another sealed envelope. The procurement group reviewing the proposals would rank the qualifications of the proposers collectively. The bid is not necessarily awarded to the lowest bidder but the one that is most responsive for the proposal. Mr. Scollins is an agreement with Ms. Thomas for having a procurement group but there still is no clear definition or goal for the review. Ms. Thomas stated that the administrative review suggested by the Select Board could include a compliance review and the procurement group would have to be selected by someone other than the Select Board in order to have more independence. Mr. Mauro suggested that if a committee were chosen by Town Meeting and not accountable to the Select Board they could report to the Town Meeting and could not be modified beyond the guidelines established by Town Meeting. Ms. Thomas suggested the Committee could motion that there be a review that addresses both administrative and compliance and is managed by an independent body. Mr. Clough suggested a committee of 3-4 citizens at large plus the Chief Procurement Officer of the Town and possibly members that brought the petition to the Town. A suggestion was made of the possibility that the Modernization Committee could be further defined with the role of the committee to review the Police Department. Ms. Thomas suggested a former Select Board member who has been familiar with contracts, a petitioner and a community member at large being on the procurement committee. While not opposed to a Select Board member on the procurement committee Mr. Mauro suggested it could be comprised of the Chief Procurement Officer and two citizens at large which could include a petitioner thus allowing independence. If a former Select Board member were selected it could inadvertently include a Select Board Member that served during the time which is being investigated. Since the Select Board are the Police Commissioners for the Town it was concluded not to have a Select Board member on the committee to avoid any perceptions matters. Ms. Thomas suggested that a motion could be the Finance Committee recommends the Town of Canton proceed with an administrative, procedural and compliance audit/review of the Police Department to be conducted by an independent firm to be selected under the direction of the Town’s Chief Procurement Officer in conjunction with a committee of three to five members who have relevant experience and to be appointed at the May Annual Town Meeting with relevant experience in the desired procurement. Ms. Thomas suggested that the Finance Committee’s discussion could include that the Committee sees this as an expansion of the committee and recommend that it steps away from the Select Board to ensure that there are no perceptions and no conflicts of interest. Mr. Scollins inquired if it is the Finance Committee’s intention that the Town Administrator still manage the procurement. Mr. Loughran confirmed that the Town Administrator has been given direction to find a third party independent auditor/consultant to look at the Police Department. The Police Department’s evidence room has already been audited by an independent third party. The Police Department is accredited but the Town Administrator has been given the direction to go the extra step. Mr. Loughran agrees with the Finance Director and the perception is key. The firm that the Town Administrator has selected is a national firm that is going to be awarded this contract. They have been looking for firms that perform these audits. It has been brought to their attention that there is a firm in New Hampshire that has experience in performing reviews of this type. Ms. Thomas did not see anything wrong with a firm already being identified by the Town Administrator but that it would go forward with the Chief Procurement Officer and the final procurement would be reviewed by a committee. The Committee decided that the May Annual Town Meeting would be too late to choose a committee and that it should be recommended at the STM. A motion made by Mr. Mauro that the Finance Committee recommend that the Town establish a procurement committee made of 3-5 members to work with the . . . Ms. Thomas suggested that the Finance Committee recommends a review of administrative and compliance review of the Police Department that is procured through the Town’s Procurement Office through consultation from a Procurement Committee comprised of 3-5 citizens who are expected to have relevant experience and background to support this particular bid. The discussion could include that this is intended to compliment what was already proposed and that the Town Administrator would bring forth any potential information about potential bidders and would move forward to the procurement process. Mr. Scollins clarified that the Request for Proposal (RFP) would have to be prepared and potential firms identified but that it would still have to be a public procurement. FINCOM 20231101 minutes WRS CT final.docx Page 7 of 11 11/11/23
Source page 8
A motion made by Mr. Mauro that the Finance Committee recommends that there be an independent review of the Canton Police Department regarding administrative, procedural and compliance matters through a committee created by Town Meeting that will consist of three to five members that will develop a request for proposal to address the stated intent and participate in the bid review in compliance with Chapter 30B Section 6 of the MGL procurement laws for which the committee members will be chosen at the November 20, 2023 Special Town Meeting and that the sum of $200,000 be transferred from Free Cash for the purpose of funding this review was seconded by Mr. McKenna. Mr. Scollins inquired if the Finance Committee had intentions of including the Select Board in the review. Ms. Thomas stated the Select Board would not be included. Vote: 8-0-0. This was the vote taken for an independent review of the Police Department and not the Select Board. With regard to the Select Board portion of Article 6 Ms. Howley stated that part of the intent of this article was about a concern that the Select Board’s role and oversight of the Police Department be addressed. The petitioners are very concerned with the silence of four members in the face of one member’s behavior in a public parking lot. Ms. Howley found it a bit difficult to explain what residents want. Ms. Thomas commented that not every town has its Select Board as the Police Commissioner and that this could be addressed through the Modernization process. A motion made by Mr. Clough that the Finance Committee recommend that the Select Board require a public comment period at public meetings for a certain amount of time or until all the speakers are done. Ms. Schutt stated that she did not think the Finance Committee had the authority to make that recommendation at Town Meeting. Ms. Mirliani stated that this motion would be beyond the scope of the article and would also be beyond the scope under a Modernization Committee. Mr. Scollins recalled that during his public interview with the Select Board he asked the Board if they had ever considered a Town Manager form of government which is the type of government that he came from in Foxboro. Mr. Hennessey thought it was unthinkable that one person out of 17,000 was asked to give their interpretation of this article for everyone. A motion made by Mr. Clough that the Finance Committee require the public comment period at Select Board meetings. There was no second to this motion. Ms. Thomas did not think this motion was within the scope of the Finance Committee’s authority. Ms. Mirliani referred to recent case law that public comment period could be withdrawn as long as it was not discriminatory in its implementation. She does not know if it is incompliance with the law to exist and that the motion may or may not be illegal. Ms. Thomas suggested the following motion: The Finance Committee recommend that the establishment of a Governance Modernization Committee to be appointed at the May 23, 2024 Annual Town Meeting to conduct a thorough review of Canton’s governance structure and bring forth recommendations for by-law and other changes to update Canton’s governance structure. The discussion should speak specifically to things that might be in consideration, for example, a change from a Town Administrator to a Town Manager structure, a change in the role of the Select Board from an operating function to a more policy leadership role. Mr. Scollins stated that the community that he came from had an Advisory Committee that had a broader scope than Canton’s Finance Committee. The governance review might find that Canton’s Finance Committee is really performing in the role of an advisory committee making decisions on finances and policies. In his former town the modernization committee formed the structure of the Finance Department, which brought elements of the Finance Department under “one roof”. In Canton the Assessing Department is separate from the Finance Department. While Mr. Scollins is not looking for any more responsibility he stated that having the Assessing Department under the Finance Department made things a bit more whole with the structure being more accountable to the Town Manager. Unlike Canton, the Water and Sewer Commissioners in Foxboro were separate from the Select Board. Ms. Thomas added to the motion that the Governance Modernization Committee would be appointed by the Moderator, not necessarily the people included in the modernization but the people for the composition of the Modernization Committee. Mr. Hennessey stated that the Finance Committee’s motion was not what the article was about and that it is the Finance Committee reinterpretation of the intent of the petitioner and the Committee’s way to fix it because the original article is so broad the Finance Committee could not vote on it. Ms. Thomas explained that the Finance Committee is charged with reviewing the warrant and coming forth with a recommendation. Ms. Thomas did not think that Mr. Hennessey’s position on the article was relevant on what the Finance Committee needed to develop for a motion as a Finance Committee. FINCOM 20231101 minutes WRS CT final.docx Page 8 of 11 11/11/23
Source page 9
Ms. Thomas read the proposed motion again which Mr. Mauro moved: A motion made by Mr. Mauro that the Finance Committee recommends the establishment of a Government Modernization Committee to do a thorough review of Canton’s government structure and bring forth recommendations for modifications including by-law changes to the May 2025 Annual Town Meeting and that the committee be appointed at the May 2024 Annual Town Meeting to be appointed by the Moderator with the composition to be recommended by the Finance Committee was seconded by Mr. McKenna. Ms. Schutt voiced her concerns with the Finance Committee “fabricating” a new article. Mr. Clough concurred. While she stated that the Finance Committee should be praised for trying to do things right for the Town in trying to help get transparency going, she wonders if the Committee has reached beyond the scope of their duties. Ms. Schutt suggested that Article 6 be voted down. Ms. Thomas explained that the Committee had to take a fairly complex article, seek advice from Town Counsel, and decide whether their motion would address the original article was fully intended. Ms. Thomas asked the Committee to take the original intent of the petitioners and “fix” our government and move things forward. Mr. Clough suggested that the motion was not the intent of the article and suggested holding the motion to an Annual Town Meeting. Ms. Thomas suggested to Mr. Clough to include in his write-up for the discussion that the Finance Committee decided not to act on the Select Board part of the investigation in Article 6 and that it would be better if it were brought up at the next May Annual Town Meeting. Mr. Hennessey stated if the petition was so broad in scope and ambiguous that the Finance Committee had to reinterpret and create committees to reinterpret the Finance Committee’s interpretation of the interpretation, then it is beyond the scope of the Finance Committee and it is placing too much pressure on the Finance Committee. Mr. Mauro withdrew his motion for Article 6 which the Finance Committee agreed with his withdrawal. Article 8 – Term Limits for Select Board Members Ms. Thomas read the article as follows: To see if the Town will direct the Select Board to file, within ninety (90) days of a favorable vote by Special Town Meeting, a petition with the General Court for special legislation allowing Canton to impose a lifetime limit of 15 years for a person to serve on the Select Board for the Town of Canton, permitting any person who may be impacted by this limit to serve out his or her term, or to take any action related thereto. Ms. Schutt inquired as to why the article did not include all elected positions. She also inquired if the article should be grandfathering people and is the intent of this article a way to “oust” people now that are in office? She suggested that this could be for newly elected officials. Ms. Thomas made the Committee aware that the article as written had broader implications for several other elected boards, such as Library Trustees. Mr. Mauro stated that if the Committee were to broaden the scope of Article 8 there would not be enough time for the Committee to receive sufficient feedback or to deliberate on the other committees. He also stated that by limiting the number of years served you might be limiting the experience an individual might have and that because local elections could result in vacancy if an official were not allowed to continue to serve. Mr. Mauro spoke in favor of the motion being applied to newly elected officials. Mr. Clough suggested Article 8 be deferred to Town Meeting. Ms. Thomas stated that the Committee could vote on the motion as stated in the warrant but that the article specifically applied to one individual and that this was not the way to make a policy. A policy needs to be made for what is right for the Town in a more global way and in her opinion is that to have an article like this targeting one individual feels not like the personal direction to go. A motion made by Mr. Mauro that the Finance Committee recommend Article 8 regarding term limits for Select Board members provided that all of the current elected members are grandfathered. The motion was not seconded and Mr. Mauro withdrew his motion. The other option was for the Finance Committee to indefinitely postpone Article 8. A motion made by Mr. Mauro that the Finance Committee recommend the subject matter of Article 8 be indefinitely postponed. The motion was not seconded. Mr. Clough spoke in favor of allowing the petitioner to bring this article forward at STM and the Committee should not postpone Article 8. A motion made by Mr. Clough that the subject matter of Article 8 be deferred to Special Town Meeting was seconded by Ms. Foley. Vote: 8-0-0. Ms. Thomas suggested that the discussion should explain why the Committee voted to defer to STM. The final document will be sent to the printer on Monday morning. Karen volunteered to write the discussion for Article 8. FINCOM 20231101 minutes WRS CT final.docx Page 9 of 11 11/11/23
Source page 10
Approval of Minutes - There was no motion made to approve the minutes for October 25, 2023. Next Meeting Date: The Committee did not make a formal motion to adjourn the meeting. The meeting ended at 10:52 p.m. Minutes reviewed by: Reuki Schutt Respectfully submitted, Cindy Thomas Chair, Canton Finance Committee and Sub-Committee to Review Compensation of Elected Officials FINCOM 20231101 minutes WRS CT final.docx Page 10 of 11 11/11/23
Source page 11
Finance Committee
Meeting Documents
November 1, 2023
Please note: Some meeting documents may be found on the Town’s website under the Posted Minutes
section (Laser Fiche).
Agenda for November 1, 2023
Draft Recommendations of the Finance Committee to the Voters of Canton, Massachusetts – Special Town Meeting,
Monday, November 20, 2023 at 7:00 pm., Articles 1-8 (7 pages).
FINCOM 20231101 minutes WRS CT final.docx Page 11 of 11 11/11/23