News

Doing diligence or dissing the Manager?
Council firm on requiring preparation
By Elizabeth Prata

Gray--The Gray Town Council tabled one item and rejected another at their January 3rd meeting, citing lack of preparation time. Citizens who spoke said that the Council should trust the staff more and more quickly pass what they present, while Council said they will not pass any item that the Manager has not presented to them in a timely manner.

One item was the award for the purchase of fire truck to replace the one ton Squad #6. The total price was $126,909. Council voted to table it, saying the Manager had failed to provide them the requested bid package in time for them to review it prior to the vote.

That action got citizen Jack Goosetrey's attention, charging that the Council would know nothing of the specifications for a complicated vehicle such as a fire truck and they should trust the Chief. Brad Fogg stated the same.
Vice-Chair Upham said that he would not be doing diligence to the people of the Town of Gray if he simply signed away nearly $127,000 without even having read the package.

The remaining Councilors agreed and voted to table the item until the package was presented to them by the Manager.

The Council also rejected an amendment to the agritourism ordinance given to Council by the Manager for the first time at the evening meeting. This amendment to the regular zoning ordinance had been in development for eighteen months, It had been through all the normal filters of discussion, including the Council, Ordinance Review Committee, and Planning Board.

On Tuesday, the draft was ready for the first of two votes that would finally enact it. In between the final Public Hearing at Planning Board and the vote to accept first reading, the manager and Code Enforcement officer had written an addition to the ordinance. Manager Mitchell A. Berkowitz said that the change was minor and would not require being sent back to the Planning Board.

Major changes to drafts are sent back to the beginning of the process while minor changes, such as comma, spelling, or other more typographical changes are allowed to pass without another public hearing.
The Council stated that they would reject any late presentations out of hand, and said that any and all material must be given to Council at least five days prior to the meeting. They voted 5-0 to pass the agritourism draft as is, without considering the late-coming amendment.

That got Code Enforcement Officer Paul White's attention. He said that he had waited for four hours, and that perhaps the Council could move the agenda items for ordinances toward the beginning of the meeting. "That would work better for me," Mr. White said. Asked why the amendment to the agritourism came so late in the process, the day of the meeting, Mr. White said, "Prior to the council meeting on Feb. 3rd the Council Chair had requested the Manager to look at the uses in the RRA and how they would be affected by the addition of the Agritourism provisions."

Chair Gary Foster said, however, that he had not asked the Manager to do that.

Mr. White continued, "The emphasis would be on clarity, specifically with regards to commercial recreational activities. As far as a major change, well initially my thoughts were it could be but in cases like this I refer to the Town Attorney. Both the Manager and I on separate occasions consulted with attorney N[atalie] Burns and sought an opinion. Her response was she felt it was a minor change and if the Council agreed they could accept the changes without further hearings."

Manager Berkowitz was not available for comment.

Q&A

The Monument Newspaper asked each Councilor about their decision to deal with matters presented to them by the Manager only if he has sent them with enough time for proper review.

Monument: Why didn't Council accept the Manager and Fire Chief's recommendations?

Chair Gary Foster: "Council was not convinced that the manager's proposed amendments to Agritourism were not a substantive change. Similar amendments to Order #99 were considered substantive and triggered Planning Board review. Furthermore, considering the extensive work in drafting this proposal, the staff amendments were viewed as unnecessary. Additionally, reference to the Building Code with regards to an Agritourism Facility could require an applicant to retrofit an existing building to meet current codes which could be expensive, inconsistent with the architecture of an historic building, and cost prohibitive for many citizens."

Vice-Chair Andy Upham: "The Town manager has been advised that matters such as this require that information be provided to Council well in advance to allow the Council to review and be prepared to ask questions and make informed decisions."

Monument: Staff are individuals with subject matter expertise, hired to research matters and present information to council for your consideration. Are you micro-managing?

Foster: No, we are not micromanaging. The problem is a failure to provide materials in a timely fashion. We are uncomfortable signing off on documents without having first reviewed them. In no way does this suggest a lack of confidence in staff.

Upham: No. I am simply doing the job of town councilor, representing the interests of Gray Citizens. You cannot represent their best interests if you do not seek the knowledge and understanding of what you are being asked to vote upon or approve, like a $126,909 fire truck.

Skip Crane: My answer to not moving forward on both the Fire Dept bid and Agritourism amendment is the timing of the information provided to council ....again. I was in the town office on 12-28 (I registered my car) and despite what was said at the last meeting by the manager, nothing from the bid package was in my box. The agritourism amendment was emailed to us however I still question whether it was a substantial change ( I have not seen anything from our lawyer saying this could go forward without the process starting over, as happened once already) and did not want to hold up this order again.

Denise Duda: The first issue (the bid information for the fire truck) was tabled until the next Council meeting in order to have time to read the specifics on it that were just received. It may be that it had been in our mailbox that afternoon or a bit earlier but I had not received it prior to the meeting. As Andy has stated and I have supported, voting on a matter without the documentation necessary is not wise and we will wait to act. The Chief said there was no real problem with waiting the two weeks for the next official meeting when we will have had the opportunity to read the information."

Ms. Duda continued, "For myself I liken it to signing a legal document with a lot of small print. Everyone can tell you that it is just standard stuff and that you don't need to read it but, in the end, you'd better read it because your name is on it and you will be held responsible for everything in it. The second issue was concerning Agritourism. It has been through multiple rewrites and updates and committees and has already gone through public notice and the Planning Board hearing. Both the CEO and the Manager had had opportunity for input during the process and this ordinance was finally due to come to a vote. The suggested change was (again) last minute and was not critical to the ordinance itself. It was time to act on it as it had been presented."

John Welch: We gave the council more time to study the truck specs...With no objection from the Fire Chief. (Agritourism) We wanted to approve the ordinance and are willing to incorporate the suggested change when next placed on the agenda.