Select Board: May 19, 2025

Transcript captured from MHTV’s Vimeo auto-captioning. No speaker labels; proper names and dollar figures occasionally misheard. Click any timecode to jump to that moment in the source video.

0:04 You tell me when I’m good to hear. I think you’re all set. Alright, thank you for your patience.

0:11 Um, Nick Ward six Ton Road. Um, uh, good evening. I’m here. Obviously this is with public comments on, on Inspector Town election. We have coming on, we to affirm town meetings decision, um, regarding Bri uh, BRI zoning. And there are really two points that I’d like to make. But the first point is that my understanding of the kind of primary motivation of those who the petition to trigger this special town election is concern amongst the number of residents that they didn’t have the opportunity to vote at the town meeting. Completely valid. I totally get it. Like I completely understanding where they’re coming from. So the point that I wanna make is, I think I would really like to encourage the select board in town to actively allay those concerns to the extent that they can

0:57 by making sure that we have every possible avenue available for voting in this special town election. Uh, open to the residents of the towns as, as as possible. So I think at a minimum that’s gotta include vote by mail, but I think ideally it would also include early in-person voting as well. I think there are a lot of people fair in town who like the tactile experience creates a bit of a tradition to go and vote in person. And that’s something I can totally respect in the context of democracy. I’m sure you all can as well. So, um, my, my points are really twofold. Number one, when I just made earlier, let’s allay those concerns of, of the people who would not able to vote at town meeting given absolutely every opportunity to vote that he possibly can, number one.

1:44 Number two, I guess I’d like to sort of turn the question over to your slate like this, not directly when can get back to proceedings, um, to ask how you had any discussions along those lines, do you have any details that you can share with us, you know, problem decisions, but if you have any details or thoughts you can share with us on the, so the concern 1200 people to signed the petition triggers I got. Okay. Thanks grandma. Thank you. Thank you. Well, I can speak to that and we, their mail-in voting is, um, now, uh, by, uh, right, you’d have to opt out of it. And so there is mail-in voting available for all elections. You have to, uh, go to the Secretary of State’s website

2:30 and register out of time. Decisions about early voting in town are made by the board of registrars and they are actually made meeting next week to determine whether early voting will be, um, happening for the June 10th election. And we’ve asked them to consider the issue of the special election as well.

2:53 Anybody online?

2:59 Um, yes. Okay. Megan, yell him again. Megan.

3:08 One minute I go. Okay. You go. Yeah. Hi, can you hear me? Hi.

3:23 Hi, can you hear me? Yes. Okay, sorry, I just wanted to make sure. Um, yeah, I just wanted to, um,

3:34 just put in, I’m sorry I’m not there. I’m just on a ride to Selectboard and rally. Um, I just wanted kind of to put in my 2 cents that, um, again, as a state in the town meeting, that it would probably have been best for the select board to file an exemption, um, to the state, um, regarding article three. Um, instead of having this whole fiasco, um, happening, um, with that I do wanna thank the select board and the town clerk, um, ensuring that we have a, a, a good vote. Um, I know this is the first time that this has happened in Marblehead and I appreciate the fact that probably some ticks will happen,

4:20 but we just wanna ensure of course, that the voting will be open to see also, like, um, my previous, um, residents said, um, no, if there’s gonna be any early voting, um, mail-in voting as well. And just to ensure that everybody, um, in town that wants to vote their voice, um, can do that in a timely manner. Um, thank you.

4:48 Okay. Anything else?

4:57 John? Sixth grade Road. Um, so I guess, so my comment is really in full, uh, two questions. So, um, I agree with Mr. Ward that everyone should be given as much opportunity to vote on this issue as possible. Chapter 4 0 5, the special acts of 1954 under which we’re operating has two areas, um, that are, um, uh, one which, which allows discretion with respect to the sign that pulls close and one which is an unsettled, uh, question of what margin of votes do we need to reverse the vote at town meeting. Don’t think that question has been settled. I think there is support for one reading, but there is no case law. So the first issue is the Acts axle 4 0 5 indicate

5:45 that the polls will be open from two o’clock in the afternoon until no late, and we shall close no, uh, no earlier than 8:00 PM That does not, um, indicate that we can’t go beyond 8:00 PM And so I would urge the board to keep proposal open until today is 10 o’clock because the previous week is a holiday week. And that is consistent with Mr. Ward’s, um, statement. And I agree with them, uh, that we should give the voters every opportunity to vote.

6:16 Um, you wanna take that up or you want me to go to the second one? Or continue? You can continue. Okay. On the second issue is the issue of the margin of votes necessary to reverse the vote of town meeting. Um, the board is interpreting, I believe, with the assistance of town council that language to me that, um, it must be, uh, a majority of voters and that majority of voters must be no less than 20% of the registered voters of the community to reverse the vote at town. Meeting the board relies on, uh, interpretation of that language from the Secretary of State, which I believe was interpreting a codification of referendum language that came later than the acts of 4 0 5, not the actual act of 4 0 5 itself

7:04 of 1954 itself. And so, um, although I’ve done some research and, um, my colleague again has done some research, we have found no case law interpreting that language of that statute. So if we had some case law, I would take that as a definitive interpretation of statutory interpretation. We don’t have that leaves, um, the citizens, uh, and I wanna be very clear that I have never wanted to, and I don’t want to now have another litigation with my town and don’t want another litigation with the state could have done that already. With respect to some of the actions with respect to the E-O-H-L-C, my goal is to, um, to have the maximum amount of democratic process on this issue.

7:52 The, the only way really to definitively determine that is to file an action with declaratory judgment that would come with a request for preliminary injunction on this ballot question being advanced to the polls. We probably wouldn’t be voting on this until the end of 2025. The earliest because we would be all waiting through legislative and committee history of 1953 to 1954. We would be comparing the voter registration statistics of today versus the voter registration statistics of the mid 1950s. My solution, and the reason I’m, uh, pressing this issue is because this is the first we’re making history mark. It’s the first time in 70 years since we’ve adopted this referendum that we’re using it. And so we are setting precedent

8:38 for every referendum ballot question that will un undoubtedly doubt doubtlessly come into future. Now that the speed is out of the bottom, what I’m going to suggest to the board is that we achieve a compromise number due to the two reasonable interpretations of that language that’s below 20%, but that’s only for this particular ballot question and doesn’t set precedent going forward. That, that in my mind, the amount is 15%. That’s a difference of about 825 votes. That would be what I would ask the board to do, um, so that we don’t have to consider the term the statutory interpretation.

9:23 Okay, thank you. All right.

9:29 Oh, sorry.

9:33 We’re good. Okay. So, uh, we will go forward with our agenda to open and close the warrant. Uh, we’ll go through six votes in doing so. First, I need a motion that the prior public notice of the board of, uh, the select board’s intention to call a special town meeting for the purpose of a special election for a vote on a citizen’s petition. Pursuant to chapter 4 0 5, the acts of 1954 be waived because in the opinion of the select board, they’re required on the act to take action forthwith. So moved. Second. All those in favor? I also need a motion that a special town meeting be called for Tuesday, July 8th, 2025 for the purpose of a special election to vote on a question from a citizen petition pursuant to chapter 4 0 5 of the acts of 1954. So Moved. Second. All in favor?

10:17 I need a motion that the warrant be opened for insertion of a question. So moved. Second. All in favor?

10:24 I need a motion that the Board of Selectmen place on the special election ballot the question related to the citizens petition pursuant to chapter 4 0 5 of the acts of 1954. All as set forth in the following question One. Question one, shall the town vote to approve the action of the town meeting wherein the town meeting voted to approve? Article 23, the adoption of three General law Chapter 40 a Section three A zoning overlay districts, yes or no? A yes vote on question one would affirm the town’s adoption of the zoning amendment described in the informational handout. A no vote on question one would repeal the town’s adoption of the zoning amendment described in the informational handout. So moved. All in favor?

11:01 Uh, and, um, I’d like a motion that the warrant for the special town for the special election to be held, uh, on Tuesday, July 8th, 2025 is now closed. So moved a All in favor. Okay. And I’d like a motion that the notice of this question be transmitted forthwith to the town clerk. So moved a All in favor? Okay. That, um, concludes the regular business for this meeting. And, um, do we have any select announcements? Second. Okay. The only thing I just wanna say is as my time, you know, comes to an end here, um, you know, having served six years, the last two, um, one of the things I’ve been very proud of is that I haven’t ever had to apologize

11:48 to somebody for how I treated them in any of these meetings in these. So once has anybody ever come to me and complaining that they were treated unfairly. And as I sit back and I just look at what I’m seeing online and the visceral I see, you know, from our, you know, our constituents, um, they’ve individually attacked two people of this board and throwing them under the bus. And that is not fair. Let’s put this into context. All five of us voted in favor. All five of the planning board voted in favor. Eight of the nine FinCon voted in favor. So we’re talking like 18 outta 19 people voted in favor of Article 23.

12:34 And we had two people, Ms. Noon and our chair and Mr. Fox as our speakers. But we, they represent us, you know, as a board, but they’ve been attacked online. And I just have to say, you know, uh, we all have thick skin. We’re not in this because we don’t have thick skin, but I just happen to, you know, but just that ral. But, but giving a personification to it, you’re attacking and, you know, you’re just attacking, you know, it just gives a demon to attack. And that’s not fair. I would highly recommend people go on and, and Google or go to YouTube and do John Police extremism. It’s a two and a half minute for you talkers. It’s probably about six tiktoks links. And it’s a wonderful thing to show the benefits of extrem extremism. And that’s what I just don’t like is the fact

13:20 that we’ve had people attacking. And with all due respect, Mr. Dip Pano, I think you owe, ‘cause you were one of the people that’ve done this. I would really urge you to apologize these two, you know, attack this level.

13:36 You don’t have the floor. Oh, excuse me. You don’t have the floor, sir. Please give him Thank you. You don’t, I don’t take, I don’t need it. I don’t, I appreciate. Give him the floor. You’ve had plenty of time to speak and you continue to, to do that. I do not need an apology from you. I appreciate that, Brett, you would never get, excuse me, ask you not have the floor. Excuse Me. All right, Mr. Uba, please everybody, we can continue this meeting. Thank you. You know, I mean, these issues have really torn us apart. And this is just horribly, you know, we’re being tore at the national level. We’re being torn at the local level. You know, this is not marblehead. We have to remember once Milton was decided this was a state law, that’s where this angst needs to be directed. This is a state law. We’re following the orders of state.

14:24 I know people said exemptions, but again, as we remember on the May 12th, you know, meeting that we had at the high school, and we had Jay Tellerman come and he said, these issues are very hard, if not impossible to overcome. The five of us at any time could have done that. We didn’t. So we’ve spoken to this either directly or indirectly as a board, and I don’t mind attacks against us as a board, but individually that is just not marbled head. You know, we can do better. And that’s just, I, I’m just, I’m just sick of this polarization in our politics domestically, internationally, you know, nationally. But, you know, but especially for our town, this is just not right no matter what side you’re on. I think you should find that it’s just not in our character.

15:09 And I’m just very disappointed in our town for ju and I, and I just feel so badly for them because, and again, we’re all thick skin, but they have family, they have friends attack the issue, be against article three, fine, be against the select board, fine. But when you start putting individuals, that to me is when it’s going a little too far. And, uh, and I’m just really disappointed in their town that we’ve done that. I really am. And, uh, I I just feel sorry. So I’m sorry you two have had to do that. I feel, I know maybe you don’t need it, but I, I just feel badly and I just had to say something because enough’s enough and, uh, I’m just gonna leave it. Uh, Okay. Yeah, I’d just like to add that, uh, you know, it, it, uh, we have a mechanism in Marblehead, uh, for debate. And I think if there’s any, uh, you know, kind

15:56 of civic covenant that should, we should endeavor to keep in Marblehead except we can talk to one another. And, uh, you know, I think what we’re seeing on social media is, uh, you know, kind of permission to go a little overboard. Uh, I know I’ve been the subject of ad ho attacks and it, and it sucks. Uh, I think you gotta, you know, of course develop thick skin, but I’m not losing faith in our capacity to debate. I’ve been a hundred percent for the debate, a hundred percent for pursuing alternative legal means for people who disagree with the precedent that we’re perhaps setting with this mandate. You know? And I think we, we do have a mechanism portion later to resolve it. And, you know, I think the whole board is supportive

16:44 of this referendum and initiative. We really are. I mean, you, you just saw us pass these motions unanimously. So I, you know, I think that’s our job is to, is to make sure the debate happens, right? Um, but it does, you know, listen, it really, it’s, it’s, uh, you know, it, it sucks that we have to go to an ad ho situation, and that’s definitely been, you know, been the case. I’ve been subject to it too. I think it comes from both sides of the political spectrum. I, you know, it’s, it’s just, just kind of the, the environment that we’re in right now. So I’m just hoping that the, uh, you know, that the debate at the end of the day will resolve itself in a vote that will be perceived as fair, and it should be. And I, I hope every marble header takes this, uh, next step seriously and gets out and votes. So with that, I, I yield that by that chair. Okay.

17:31 Um, chair, I respond to the direct Chair. Yeah, go ahead. Statement For Mr. Not right now. I just wanted to just add, and I think this is for, um, the public as well. Uh, you know, first of all, I always appreciate anyone who comes to public meeting speaks at public meeting. Um, you know, there’s people who are very dedicated that come and we hear what you say. Um, I, you know, speak for myself and, you know, I think for the board as well, if they can speak for themselves, you know, I take everything that you say to hurt and listen and do my best to process the information I was put before us. And this has been a very complicated polarizing issue. Clearly. And I do want to say that, you know, over the last three years of being here, I’ve worked hard to

18:17 add communication platforms for you guys. So there is email to reach out. Um, you know, some, some people, you know, have come to my house and I’ve spent time talking to you. I’ve had, you know, call on the phone. Um, and you know, we have the email option. So I ask that if you have questions, concerns, if you want to have those conversations, you know, please reach out to us if we worked hard to make that accessible. Um, and you know, we’ve had multiple issues that have come up this year in regards to people wanting to voice their thoughts and their opinions. And, um, you know, I, I do ask that you try to also use those means. ‘cause I think it’s important to have the healthy conversations, to get the factual information out there

19:02 and allow people to have informed decisions on what, you know, what it, what it, what actually is being put out there. And also so they know what they’re voting on, what that means. They understand the issue. And, you know, if we can do our part to explain that or to say how and when, you know, each of us individually got to this point, we will do our best to do that. So, thank you. Okay. Um, we do have, uh, legal opinion on, um, the referendum vote on the threshold question. Uh, we’ll make that available as all. Um, um, with that, uh, just make a motion to adjourn. So moved. All in favor? Okay. For.