Charter Commission sends draft report to BOS and AG; sets fall public hearing

After 16 months of deliberation and days ahead of a key state-imposed deadline, the Charter Commission approved a draft charter report last week and sent it to the attorney general and the Board of Selectmen for review.

The 8–0 vote of the commission members present followed a final review of the document at the board’s Aug. 9 meeting and a motion by Chairman Paul Cohen, seconded by Peter Warren, to “approve … and express our support for its passage.” Commissioner Sharon McCarthy, who was out of town, later wrote in an email to the Press that she fully supported the report and “would have voted in the affirmative had I been present.”

The charter report, consisting of a 22-page draft town charter, a cover letter addressed to Harvard citizens, and a statement of intent, was sent to the attorney general Aug. 14; the AG has four weeks to review the charter for conflicts with the Massachusetts Constitution and laws. Copies were also sent to the selectmen and the state Department of Housing and Community Development. A copy of the report is available at the Charter Commission webpage (http://bit.ly/2x3pQIt). The commission must also publish the complete report in a town newspaper and “provide sufficient copies” to the town clerk so that any registered voter who wants one can get it.

A final charter and other material the commission wishes to include are due to the town and selectmen Oct. 12, but before then, the commission must hold at least one public hearing to gather feedback from voters and other stakeholders. That hearing is planned for Wednesday, Sept. 13, in Town Hall. By that time, Cohen said, he expects he will have heard from the attorney general and learned of any articles in need of revision. The September hearing date gives the commissioners roughly four weeks to respond to critiques of their work and alter the draft charter. Once the final report goes to the selectmen in October, however, no further changes can be made. Then it will be up to Harvard voters to approve or reject the document in its entirety at the May 2018 Town Election.

Few changes, some opposition

The latest version of the charter contains few changes, aside from typographical and grammatical corrections. The term “agency” is now used throughout as a general term for the boards, commissions, committees, departments, divisions, or offices that make up town government, a change implying that their work is to implement the overall mission and goals set by the selectmen. The report’s statement of intent has dropped the word “compelled” from the list of duties it assigns the selectmen and instead “reaffirms” the power of the renamed Select Board to perform them, implying they have all along had the authority to do so. A newly added cover letter restates many of the points of the statement of intent, which was published in last week’s Press (see “Town of Harvard Charter: A statement of intent” at http://bit.ly/2w18FKD). The letter affirms the need for a charter and states that the best means of dealing with current and future challenges is a strengthened executive.

While some commissioners, such as Ron Ostberg, were ready to say they “wholeheartedly” approved of the draft charter, others, such as Charles Redinger, said they disagreed with some of its provisions but were prepared to support it. Potential cracks in the road to approval have appeared at public hearings of the commission and meetings with town boards. At the July 11 selectmen’s meeting, Selectman Stu Sklar said he would vote against the charter unless its provision for recalling elected officials is dropped. Selectwoman Kara Minar, past chairwoman of the Planning Board, is opposed to making that elected board an appointed one, although its current chairwoman, Erin McBee, has said she supports the change. And there is opposition to limiting the terms of committee chairs to two consecutive one-year terms.

During the next two months, the commission can, if it chooses, alter the draft charter to respond to these and other objections and to correct any conflicts with state law called out by the attorney general. No further changes can be made once the final report goes to the selectmen, however, although state law allows for a minority report should the charter commissioners be divided when they vote on their work. And while a charter must be re-evaluated every 10 years, it may be reviewed or revised sooner at the will of the town’s citizens.

Once the commissioners finish their work, there is still more work to be done should voters approve it. Where the charter conflicts with existing town bylaws, those bylaws must be updated to comply with the charter, which becomes the ruling document of town government. The commission recommends that between Oct. 12, when the final report is sent to the selectmen, and next year’s election, the selectmen form a task force to guide the implementation of the charter and to recommend modifications to current bylaws.

Meantime, the selectmen, Town Administrator Tim Bragan, the Finance Committee, and the Capital Planning and Investment Committee have agreed to test drive the new budget procedures outlined in the draft charter this fall, a change that will be the subject of a follow-up article in next week’s Press.