By DAN TOMASELLO
LYNNFIELD — The Select Board unanimously voted on Oct. 14 not to recommend two citizens’ petitions headed to Fall Town Meeting on Monday, Oct. 27.
Traffic Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC) Vice Chair Tom Manning submitted Articles 13 and 14 for Fall Town Meeting, which will take place on Monday, Oct. 27, beginning at 7 p.m. in the Lynnfield Middle School auditorium. A quorum of 175 voters is needed for Fall Town Meeting to occur.
Manning submitted a citizens’ petition article that formed the TSAC at the 2024 Spring Town Meeting.
“The TSAC is an advisory committee reporting to the Select Board,” the TSAC’s overview states on the town website. “The purpose of the TSAC will be to evaluate public safety and nuisance issues involving traffic, roads and related infrastructure in the town. A monthly meeting forum will allow for townspeople to bring forward issues that will be heard and reviewed by the committee and conduct any business related to its function as described in this article. The TSAC’s primary function will be to facilitate issue resolution and communications between townspeople and the Select Board.”
Article 13 will ask Fall Town Meeting to approve adopting an additional rule for the TSAC.
“Starting in January 2026 and every six months thereafter, the Select Board shall place a review of TSAC activities on the Select Board meeting agenda for open discussion,” states Article 13. “For purposes of this article, TSAC activities shall include, but not be limited to, the following: Open and closed resident issues brought to TSAC and the status of those issues, (and) performance of TSAC in adhering to the governance and compliance requirements of TSAC, including the TSAC Bylaw, Select Board minutes and agenda policies, and the Open Meeting Law of Massachusetts.”
Manning also submitted Article 14 for Fall Town Meeting, which seeks to create four additional rules for the TSAC and the Select Board to follow. The first proposed rule states that, “any issue duly brought before TSAC for consideration by a townsperson shall be scheduled for discussion with the Select Board within two months of the townsperson’s request to discuss the issue with the Select Board.”
The second proposed rule seeks to require the Select Board to “schedule the discussion to meet the townsperson’s availability.” The third proposed rule will “allow the townsperson to present the issue.” The fourth proposed rule states that, “Adoption of these rules will not inhibit the appearance and comments of any TSAC member at any Select Board meeting for any issue under TSAC’s consideration.”
Select Board Chair Phil Crawford said the panel was required to include Articles 13 and 14 on the Fall Town Meeting warrant.
“I know by petition we have to let this on,” said Crawford. “Have we got any ruling if this is even allowed at Town Meeting or whether it is legal because it doesn’t make any sense to me.”
Retired Assistant Town Administrator Bob Curtin, who is still working as a part-time consultant for the town, said he doesn’t believe that “Town Meeting can compel a board to create rules.”
“At best it would be considered advisory, but we will get a ruling from town counsel,” said Curtin.
Select Board Vice Chair Alexis Leahy asked if “there is no other committee that does this?”
Curtin said no.
“I did speak to Mr. Manning, who is the chief petitioner and is also a member of that committee,” said Curtin. “He could not make it here tonight, but he said that he would be happy to answer any questions from board members if they had any individually.”
The Select Board unanimously voted not to recommend Article 13.
Crawford said he also did not understand Article 14.
“What’s the point of the board?” said Crawford. “The board discusses that and brings it to us. Why do we even have the committee?”
Leahy concurred with Crawford’s viewpoint.
“Why does the committee exist?” said Leahy.
The Select Board unanimously voted not to recommend Article 14.
Legality questioned
Town Counsel Tom Mullen weighed in on Articles 13 and 14 in a memo sent to Town Administrator Rob Dolan and the Select Board last week.
“The citizen petition articles at the end of the Special Town Meeting warrant would have the Town Meeting order the Select Board to adopt certain ‘rules’ for overseeing the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee,” stated Mullen. “Specifically, the Select Board would require itself to hold an ‘open discussion’ semiannually about all TSAC-related issues (Article 13) and to allow any ‘townsperson’ who wanted to talk about the TSAC to address the Select Board (Article 14). I believe that both articles, if passed, would be void and unenforceable because they violate the separation of powers between the Town Meeting and the Select Board. The latter is the chief public body within the executive branch of town government.”
Mullen stated that the Section 3-2-1 of the Town Charter, which pertains to the Select Board, states that, “all executive powers of the town, except as otherwise provided in this Charter, shall be vested in the Select Board.”
“More specifically, ‘the Select Board shall have the power to enact rules and regulations…and for the establishment of town policies not otherwise governed by statute, this Charter or bylaw,’” stated Mullen while quoting the Town Charter.
Mullen stated that, “Town Meeting, on the other hand, serves as ‘the legislative body for the town.’”
“As such, Town Meeting is ‘vested (with) the traditional powers of the legislative branch of any level of government, i.e., the power to make laws (bylaws) and the power of the purse,” stated Mullen.
Mullen cited several court cases in his memo about the legality of Articles 13 and 14, including the Supreme Judicial Court’s Anderson v. Board of Selectmen case ruling of 1990 that stated, “Town Meeting may not override the executive branch on a matter within the exclusive authority of the executive branch.”
“For this reason, I believe that the moderator could lawfully decline to have Town Meeting consider the articles in question,” stated Mullen in the memo. “There is, however, no authority that would require him to do so, and he could choose to treat the articles as advisory only, permitting votes to express the will of the meeting without purporting to instruct the Select Board.”