Working on it – looks like the first week in June
From: Kathy Cook [mailto:kcook@fusiongroupinc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 7:51 AM
To: 'John Butler'; 'advisory posting site'; 'Brian Shea'; 'claire reynolds'; 'Jim Heggerty'; 'john boiardi'; 'John Wood'; 'Karen Muggeridge'; 'Tim Langella'
Subject: RE: Scheduling Advisory Deliberation on the ZAC material
To all,
I agree with John about the need to start working on the review of the proposed re-write now. I would also recommend that we schedule the needed meetings this week but I am hoping we can have the meetings in June rather than May.
Also going forward I am hopeful that we can start a regular calendar of meetings so that we have more notice as to when we are generally going to meet. I realize that as TM approaches that the schedule will need to be modified. I personally have a hard time getting to meetings where I don’t have them on a calendar at least two weeks (but preferably a month) in advance. And I know that many of you have the same problem.
I would also like to see us start meeting in September on a regular basis so that we can accomplish more than we have in the past couple of years including re-starting our work on analyzing the school budget. I would recommend that we discuss our meeting calendar at our next meeting.
Kathy
Kathryn M. Cook
The Fusion Group, Inc.
132 Turnpike Road, #100
Southborough, MA 01772
508-787-1000 x 226
508-787-1059 (Fax)
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: We are required to advise you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used by any taxpayer (i) for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) in promoting, marketing or recommending any entity, investment plan or arrangement, or any other transaction or matter discussed herein to any taxpayer other than the intended recipient hereof.
From: johnbbutlerjr@gmail.com [mailto:johnbbutlerjr@gmail.com] On Behalf Of John Butler
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 10:49 AM
To: advisory posting site; Brian Shea; claire reynolds; Jim Heggerty; john boiardi; John Butler; John Wood; Karen Muggeridge; Kathy Cook; Tim Langella
Subject: Scheduling Advisory Deliberation on the ZAC material
Advisory Committee Members:
As I understand it, the ZAC committee has drafted a re-write of the entire zoning code and will be proposing the new draft in the Fall. Last time I checked, it was over 100 pages long and, of course, rather technical. The village groups and the open space groups have also been active, at least sometimes, in following the creation of the draft text. I have been to one or two meetings only, have not yet read it, and so, at this time, know almost nothing about it, except its size and complexity.
I think we need to have a first meeting on this topic before the summer to hear viewpoints and focus our reading of it, which I assume may take some time. This also might give ZAC time to prepare answers to questions we might have that might take some research. I am concerned that, at this time, ZAC may not have documented answers to such questions as "How is this different?" and "What is the full build out population of this compared to what we have?" If we need answers to such questions, the questions should be posed soon.
I suggest that we schedule a meeting sometime in the next 3 weeks to which we invite ZAC, some representatives of the village groups and some open space representatives and give each of them time to brief us on their views of this. Personally, I would prefer that this meeting not be in the format of "a Selectmen's meeting which we attend" because I don't think it helps our deliberation of complex issues to use that form. After that first meeting, we can decide whether we want another meeting before July on this topic. Then, I assume we will need a series of meetings beginning 6-8 weeks before the Fall Town Meeting.
John
To all,
I agree with John about the need to start working on the review of the proposed re-write now. I would also recommend that we schedule the needed meetings this week but I am hoping we can have the meetings in June rather than May.
Also going forward I am hopeful that we can start a regular calendar of meetings so that we have more notice as to when we are generally going to meet. I realize that as TM approaches that the schedule will need to be modified. I personally have a hard time getting to meetings where I don’t have them on a calendar at least two weeks (but preferably a month) in advance. And I know that many of you have the same problem.
I would also like to see us start meeting in September on a regular basis so that we can accomplish more than we have in the past couple of years including re-starting our work on analyzing the school budget. I would recommend that we discuss our meeting calendar at our next meeting.
Kathy
Kathryn M. Cook
The Fusion Group, Inc.
132 Turnpike Road, #100
Southborough, MA 01772
508-787-1000 x 226
508-787-1059 (Fax)
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: We are required to advise you that any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used by any taxpayer (i) for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) in promoting, marketing or recommending any entity, investment plan or arrangement, or any other transaction or matter discussed herein to any taxpayer other than the intended recipient hereof.
From: johnbbutlerjr@gmail.com [mailto:johnbbutlerjr@gmail.com] On Behalf Of John Butler
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 10:49 AM
To: advisory posting site; Brian Shea; claire reynolds; Jim Heggerty; john boiardi; John Butler; John Wood; Karen Muggeridge; Kathy Cook; Tim Langella
Subject: Scheduling Advisory Deliberation on the ZAC material
Advisory Committee Members:
As I understand it, the ZAC committee has drafted a re-write of the entire zoning code and will be proposing the new draft in the Fall. Last time I checked, it was over 100 pages long and, of course, rather technical. The village groups and the open space groups have also been active, at least sometimes, in following the creation of the draft text. I have been to one or two meetings only, have not yet read it, and so, at this time, know almost nothing about it, except its size and complexity.
I think we need to have a first meeting on this topic before the summer to hear viewpoints and focus our reading of it, which I assume may take some time. This also might give ZAC time to prepare answers to questions we might have that might take some research. I am concerned that, at this time, ZAC may not have documented answers to such questions as "How is this different?" and "What is the full build out population of this compared to what we have?" If we need answers to such questions, the questions should be posed soon.
I suggest that we schedule a meeting sometime in the next 3 weeks to which we invite ZAC, some representatives of the village groups and some open space representatives and give each of them time to brief us on their views of this. Personally, I would prefer that this meeting not be in the format of "a Selectmen's meeting which we attend" because I don't think it helps our deliberation of complex issues to use that form. After that first meeting, we can decide whether we want another meeting before July on this topic. Then, I assume we will need a series of meetings beginning 6-8 weeks before the Fall Town Meeting.
John
My strong suggestion for Town Meeting would be that you move immediately from the main motion to the consolidated late amendments supported mutually by your committee, Library and Advisory. If you present them as one batch, jointly supported by these three groups, it will flow much more easily than having separate groups stand up to present their amendments that your committee then stands up and agrees with.I have removed the mistaken "but only" and "for all citizens" phrases that appeared in the last version.I have removed all "comments" that were added to the last draft. They are now unnecessary and an encumbrance.The text reflects the new wording as voted by both committees tonight, I believe.