Paul, But Shari s point is that it will be a busy TM with financial articles foremost (and with a new moderator). Thus, there won t be time to devoteMessage 1 of 5 , May 8View SourcePaul,
But Shari's point is that it will be a busy TM with financial articles foremost (and with a new moderator). Thus, there won't be time to devote sufficient time to your article and it may well get vetoed. It seems better that both articles wait until the Sept TM when they can be discussed at depth.
We should discuss the grandfathering thing tonight.
Dave WAll,Some of this material was submitted in July, 2012 for backup ( not Shari's questions)but was forgotten for the printing of the Warrant and Backup.While May TM is devoted to the 2014 budget, there is no prohibition againstother items being submitted, witness re-zoning of Cummings' land and acouple of other items. It will give me a sense of issues and concerns that no onehas brought up yet.For instance, the building inspector says that it is impossible to control light trespass,absolutely not true, and proven in many towns across the country. Reducing lumens and using shielding, bot natural and manmade is very effective.I hope you will join us in cutting back on the School Dept. budget by postponingsome allocations to the future.See you tomorrow night 5/8/13Paul
Shari, The meeting with the BoS wasn t necessary, they just requested that I meet again with John Clancy, which Ernie and I did. I emailed my report of thatMessage 1 of 5 , May 8View SourceShari,
The meeting with the BoS wasn't necessary, they just requested that I meet again with John Clancy, which Ernie and I did.
I emailed my report of that meeting to LUC members and to Paul Raymond. John Clancy and John Petrin are asking me to shorten the Warrant Article and the Guide. You helped me with the warrant article but I cannot do that to the Guide without weakening it to the point of uselessness.
Let's discuss this tonight.
----- Original Message -----
From: Shari Ellis <samandlee@...>
Cc: Sally Willard <sally@...>, firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: Sun, 05 May 2013 07:46:23 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: FW: [LandUseBurlington] Q&A info pages for TMM, Art. 23
I have looked over your Q&A pages briefly and agree with Dave.
It is far too much information to be put on the back table the night
of Town Meeting. If you feel that it is ready to be distributed, I
would have it sent out now, in order that it can be digested prior
to the meeting. In addition, I think that there are some parts of
the answers that could be taken out as they are superfluous.
Did you have your meeting with the BOS? Did they make a
recommendation? We can discuss this more on Wednesday night at LUC
meeting, however, my overall comment, is that I continue to believe
that this article should be postponed until September Town Meeting.
General and Zoning then can be discussed together. May TM is filled
with budget and financial information and is already cumbersome. In
order to give the Lighting Bylaw enough time for consideration and
deliberation, it would make more sense to postpone. Just my
On 5/4/2013 7:06 PM, Sally Willard
I will look it over soon but I can already say
that it is too long! TMMs are swamped with stuff
and the shorter and clearer, the better.