Spurred by an improper vote at last week’s Annual Town Meeting, the Capital Planning and Investment Committee voted unanimously Monday to recommend a change to the Harvard bylaw that specifies how money can be added to the town’s Capital Stabilization and Investment Fund.
Article 19 on this year’s warrant, which appropriated $40,000 to the capital fund, required a two-thirds vote of Town Meeting to pass. But when he called for a vote at Monday night’s meeting, Town Moderator Bob Eubank announced that the measure needed a majority. Observing the sea of fuchsia cards raised by attendees in its favor, and noting the absence of objections, Eubank declared the vote to be unanimous.
At this week’s capital committee meeting, acting Town Administrator Marie Sobalvarro attributed the error to confusion over the reach of the recently enacted Massachusetts Municipal Modernization Act, which allows towns to add money to their stabilization funds by majority vote. In vetting Article 19, Town Counsel Mark Lanza assumed the new law prevailed, according to Sobalvarro. But Havard’s two-thirds requirement is written into its bylaws, and that bylaw can be changed only by a two-thirds vote of Town Meeting.
At their April 10 meeting, capital committee members voted to recommend strike the phrase “by a two-thirds vote” from the bylaw. That change must be approved by Town Meeting. If, as expected, a Special Town Meeting is called this June, the capital committee will no doubt submit an article to amend the bylaw.
Meantime, will the attorney general allow the miscalled vote on Article 19 to stand? Asked for her opinion, Town Clerk Amy McDougall deferred to Sobalvarro. Sobalvarro told the Press that because the vote was unanimous, she was confident it would stand. Yet to be heard from is the attorney general’s office.
