hard deadlines

The Portsmouth Town Council this evening tabled a request from skateboard area opponents to abandon plans for the Island Park playground. By a 4-3 vote, with Dennis Canario, Huck Little, and Karen Gleason in the minority, the Council moved to table any action pending the return of all donations to the Town for safekeeping.

"We took an action," said Jim Seveney, referring to the original approval last February. "Money was collected. The priority at this juncture is for the town to understand the status. The donors, I'm sure, are wondering what happened to it."

The Council seemed unmoved by Brian Whittier's argument that Portsmouth's zoning regulations would be violated by siting a skating area in the playground. "According to zoning laws, playgrounds are special uses," said Whittier, who enumerated the guidelines such use must meet: not detrimental, compatible, not a nuisance or hazard. "These are all issues that are going on," said Whittier.

Perhaps I read Article III section D (4) of Portsmouth's Zoning Regulations wrong (which is always possible; IANAL) but here's what it says:

"Notwithstanding any other provisions of this ordinance to the contrary, any structures, buildings and land owned, leased or used by the Town of Portsmouth may be erected, enlarged, or used by the Town of Portsmouth in the performance of its governmental functions, in any district, and said structures, buildings or lands so erected, enlarged, or used shall be exempt from the provisions of this ordinance."
— Full Zoning Ordinance

After the vote, the Council took a 5-minute recess, and opponents of the skate area approached the dais to continue arguing their case with the Council. When a reporter tried to take a picture, he was told, "We don't need blog stuff here," and "Go sit down with your friends."

I've been scrupulous in not quoting things said outside public meetings. These were people talking to the Council, in chambers, during a recess. I've been covering Portsmouth politics for more than three years, and I've never had anyone speak to me like that during a session. I'll let you judge how this goes to credibility.

Following the recess, there was an interesting discussion sparked by Larry Fitzmorris of the Portsmouth Concerned Citizens (PCC). He asserted that the modification of an agenda item he had requested back in January was a violation of the Charter. His original agenda item, he said, had explicitly asked the Council to end consideration of sewers, but the amended item said only "Address Council Re: wastewater management district."

This change, said Fitzmorris, "Essentially defeats my right to address the Council," since, he said, it is within the Council President's role to limit discussion to the agenda item. And, as someone who's sat through a few of these meetings, I can tell you the way an agenda item is cast is particularly important when it comes to what the Council may *vote* on, since according to RI Open Meetings Law, the subject must be properly advertised.

Town Solicitor Andre D'Andrea argued that it should be within the purview of the Council to determine appropriateness and wordsmith the actual items. The public, even in the Charter and the procedures enacted later, "is limited to the right to ask," said D'Andrea. "In what form [it is placed on the agenda] is within the sound discretion of the President and the Clerk." While he seemed to admit that in this case, he might have phrased the item better when rewriting it, he continued to maintain the right of modification. "The right to petition government is not the same as the right to publicity."

Former Town Councilor Len Katzman, who had drafted the procedure in 2006, spoke in support of Mr. Fitzmorris's position, and noted that his original proposal had been "That the Town Clerk may not refuse the request without consulting with the Town Administrator, Town Solicitor, and President. It shouldn't be one person's solitary discretion." He urged the Council to revisit the rule and spell out what the procedure was for denying a request. "It should be hard," said Katzman, "But it should be written down."

In other business, Tailgunner Gleason moved that the Council should release the Woodard & Curran wastewater report — which had already been released last month.

When another council member questioned the form of her motion, she said, "You're making a mountain out of a molehill." There was general laughter.

Didn't make the Portsmouth Town Council meeting Monday night where the wastewater report was on the agenda, but the Sakonnet Times has good coverage (worth reading the comments, too) and the meeting even got a writeup in the Rhode Island Statewide Coalition (RISC) newsletter.

In an occasionally heated two-hour discussion Monday night, the Portsmouth Town Council heard from supporters and opponents of a skating area in the Island Park playground and referred the matter back to the community for further work. At issue are plans to add a dedicated skateboarding area to the park, which currently includes baseball and soccer fields, a basketball court, and a play area for young children. A prior effort by an ad-hoc committee tasked by the Council with developing a solution fell apart over the past month.

Full disclosure: I am a member of the leadership team of the group supporting the skate park.

"You're a neighborhood," said Councilor Jim Seveney. "Go back and talk to each other." He also noted that the Council was being put in a position where any decision would anger one side, and urged both sides to compromise. "The real losers here are the children."

"I don't want neighbors to be upset," said Councilor Jeff Plumb. "A compromise is what we're looking for. Let's come up with a square footage."

Lori Rinkel and Cheryl Augistine, representing the supporters of the skate area, sought clarification from the Council on their prior votes. Town Solicitor Andre D'Andrea advised the Council that their vote in February granting approval to apply for a Community Development Block Grant could be "interpreted as a vote to support" the building of the park, and that nothing changed in subsequent meetings.

While this appeared to settle question of the Council's historical approval, several Councilors indicated they might change their minds in light of new evidence. At least three — Karen Gleason, Huck Little, and Peter McIntyre — expressed some skepticism about the location.

Island Park resident Brian Whittier spoke against the proposed facility, arguing that abuttors were opposed, and that there was already an "infiltration of people from outside the neighborhood," given that the police had "seen new faces" there.

Trying to get a sense of the scope for compromise, Plumb asked, "Would you be opposed to [a skate area the size of] 100 square feet?"

"Yes," Whittier replied.

Portsmouth Police Chief Lance Hebert rose to clarify his position. "I am not to be put in the middle," he said. He reported that the Island Park area had seen increased calls to the police, "due to the conflicting sides. Obviously, a serious problem." He said that any large skate park should not be located in a residential area, and reiterated that his original approval had been for an area "small enough for the kids of Island Park."

Without pointing a finger at either side, Councilor Plumb expressed concern that the police were being called without good reason. "Please stop doing that," he said.

IP resident Bev Kelly showed the Council a Newport Daily News article on the playground dating from its opening in 1996 which she said mentioned a skate park as a future enhancement. She also told the Council that during the ad-hoc committee meetings, a compromise had been proposed comprising a flat concrete slab half the size of the basketball court and removable equipment subject to a probationary period. "If problems arose," said Kelly, the equipment could be removed and, "the kids can play hopscotch."

Gleason pressed on the location and the earmarking of donations raised to fund the skate area. "Are you willing to consider using [the money raised] elsewhere in the community?"

Rinkel said that she would rather go back and ask donors, and stressed that the money had been raised for a specific purpose. "The kids in Island Park were promised a skate park back in February," she said.

"Go below 800 square feet," said Gleason. "Then come back with a real plan."

Opponents were not happy with the evident lack of progress. "It appears that we're back to square zero," Whittier said.

"The amount [of people] against is obvious," said resident Gary Hahn. "They were never really informed."

Lisa Whittier, an officer of the Island Park Crime Watch Committee, spoke to the Council about the funds raised for the park, currently in the Crime Watch bank account. She questioned why the Council should ask about the money given that they were, "a private committee."

Seveney noted that the grants were applied for "under the auspices of the town." Turning over the money for the town to hold in escrow, he said, was "the right thing to do."

"It's up to the committee," Lisa Whittier replied. "It's the committee's money." She said they would need to put it to a vote at their January 25th meeting.

Asked for his legal opinion, Town Solicitor D'Andrea said, "There's already one lawyer involved." He noted that the expense of resolving the question might well be more than the $7K at issue and said, "Only a court would be able to intervene."

Chief Hebert urged the Council to separate the Crime Watch committee from responsibility for the playground, and that the two had been mingled as a historical accident. "The crime watch group doesn't need any money," said Hebert.

The council asked representatives from the two groups to schedule a meeting and involve the whole community.

At this point, Andrew Kelly and I rose to suggest to the Council the formation of an official Island Park recreation committee. However, while there seemed to be some interest in considering for a Town-wide committee addressing recreation, there was no support for the approach at this time.

In subsequent e-mail exchanges among the leaders of the two groups and members of the Council, the community session was scheduled for January 27, 7pm at Town Hall.

Editorial note: This is story 3 of 4 on Monday night's meeting. Coming up: The Portsmouth Economic Development Committee's annual report.

Update: Sakonnet Times coverage. Check out the "Support the Island Park Skate Park" page on Facebook.

Linda Silveira and Bethany Reese with winning design.

At Monday night's Town Council Meeting, the Portsmouth Business Association (PBA) announced the winner of their contest to design next year's town transfer station sticker. PBA President Linda Silveira and board member John Vitkevitch congratulated the winner, PHS student Bethany Reese, whose entry featured a recycling logo and wind turbine.

Reese will also receive 150 "PBA bucks," said Silveira, "which can be used at any PBA member in town."

Town Council President Peter McIntyre congratulated Reese and thanked everyone involved in the competition. The design will be featured on transfer station stickers which will go on sale at Town Hall early next year.

Editorial note: Story 2 of 4 from Monday's Council meeting. Still to come: skate park and PEDC annual report. Why is the week before holiday break so crazy at work? Sigh.

There's no way to describe just how incredibly huge I am...(confused? see MST3K) cc licensed photo by http://www.flickr.com/photos/twicepix/ / CC BY-SA 2.0

There was a hearing at last night's Portsmouth Town Council on the proposed "Dangerous Animals Ordinance," which had already been through a couple of runs past the council, and was up for a final tweak and vote. But nothing — and I mean nothing — is simple with some people. And when Dame Judy Staven got to the microphone to question whether the enumeration of dangerous animals was properly written, the Town Solicitor Andre D'Andrea had to explain that items set off by commas are parallel and that "domesticated snake, monkey, chimp" (as a list of banned animals) did not, in fact, imply the distribution of domestication across all the other terms. Okay, whew, we got that sorted. Maybe there could be a quick vote here...

"Would you add large iguanas?" Councilor Tailgunner Gleason popped in suddenly. "They're very scary."

So the Council hauled Portsmouth Police Chief Lance Hebert up to the podium, and he talked about the Federal and State guidelines for animals which are considered unsuitable, and reassured the Council that the proposed ordinance was actually an extension and amplification. But as to adding language specifically about iguanas, the Chief wondered, "Well, where do we stop?"

"Right about here, I hope," muttered Councilor Jeff Plumb.

But that was not to happen.

"I've seen four-foot iguanas," said Gleason. "It's not something you want to sit next to."

The Council called the question and Gleason's motion to amend the ordinance failed, 4-1, with her the lone vote in support. Then, when the Council proceeded to vote on the original motion to approve the ordinance, she said, "I'm going to make it 4-1" and voted against it.

She didn't get her iguanas. She didn't support an ordinance to protect people from other vicious critters.

I mean, really. Look at those lizards. What else could possibly be that scary?

Okay. I can think of one thing.

Editorial note: This is the first of several posts on last night's Council meeting. It ran reeeeelly late.

RI Ethics Commission Attorney Jason Gramitt addresses officials

The Portsmouth Town Council chambers were packed tonight, as over 60 elected and appointed officials and town employees came out for a presentation and Q&A session with RI Ethics Commission attorney Jason Gramitt. Councilors Peter McIntyre, Keith Hamilton, and Jim Seveney, as well as school committee member Cynthia Perrotti attended, as well as members of many appointed boards and commissions.

Gramitt complimented the town on the turnout. "I was at a municipality last night where there were 8 people," he said. "It means a lot that this many people take the extra time."

He also reassured the officials in the audience that Portsmouth does well in this area. "I'm a proud resident of Island Park, and our Executive Director, Kent Willever, is a resident of Portsmouth. You always deliver. We breathe a sigh of relief when we don't have to worry about our own town."

But that didn't mean he was letting anybody off the hook: "I assume that if you came here tonight, you have at least one question."

For the first part of the hour-long session, Gramitt provided an overview of the Ethics Commission, established by constitutional amendment in 1986 with jurisdiction over all public employees and a mandate to address conflicts of interest and financial disclosure.

Gramitt stressed that it is not the conflict between public duties and private life which is the problem. "We expect everyone to have them. What violates the code of ethics is when you have that conflict of interest and don't do anything about it."

He stepped through a series of tests. Is it "reasonably forseeable" that
1. A decision I am helping to make,
2. Will result in a financial benefit or detriment,
3. To: A) Me, B) A member of my family, C) My outside employer, or D) My business associate
4. Or, even if no financial impact, is a family member a party to, or participant in, the matter being discussed.

"There is no such thing as a conflict of interest that is too small," Gramitt said. And family members, under the new nepotism rules, go out to first cousin.

Business associates means people with active or forseeable relationships. "That lawyer who represented so-and-so a couple of years ago," said Gramitt, wouldn't count. But membership on boards — even of nonprofit associations — would. He gave the example of a Little League officer also on the School Committee who might run into a conflict if they were asked to provide a field at a reduced rate.

And while there are cases where private interest and public duty might seem to conflict — for example, voting on tax rates — there is a "class exception" where the official or relative is a member of a large class and receives no particular benefit.

And what do you do when you find you have a conflict? Recuse yourself, and do it right up front. "The moment the matter is called," said Gramitt, "Not when the discussion is over and it's time for a vote."

He discussed the best practices around recusal. "I'll tell you what the law requires," he said, "But because this is my town, I'm going to give you advice on how to do it better than that." Once you recuse, he said, you are a member of the public, so if it's an executive session you need to leave. If it's open, you're allowed to be in the room. But as to staying on the dais, "There's nothing in the code that says you must get up from that chair," Gramitt said. "But, would you allow a member of the public to sit in an empty chair during a Council session? Best practice is to get up from the chair and sit in the audience with the rest of the public."

He suggested you might even want to leave the room, "If it's a hotly contested issue and you can't control yourself."

Gramitt talks with Town Administrator Bob Driscoll and Council President Pete McIntyre

Conflicts many times, said Gramitt, are not clear cut. "Think of football field with the 50-yard line separating ethical from unethical behavior. People sometimes think they can march right up to the 50 yard line," Gramitt said. "You really need to go back 10 yards on each side. It's a big gray zone. That's where all those questions are going to fall." And the best advice: "Stay out of the zone. Hold yourself to that higher standard."

The evening wrapped up with a discussion of gift regulations (no cash, no gifts over $25 or $75 worth in a calendar year from any interested parties) and a question-and-answer session.

Resources:
RI Ethics Commission Web site
Phone number: (401) 222.3790
See previous coverage from March, 2007.

Click chart to embiggen.

The Portsmouth Economic Development Committee (PEDC) delivered an update to the Town Council at their meeting last night, and the while there was significant progress to report on the group's planning work, the economic picture facing the town is challenging, with a projected budget gap growing to nearly $20M by 2020 unless additional revenue streams are identified.

"A revenue shortfall is 'business as usual,'" said John Palmieri, co-chair of the Strategic Planning subcommittee, as he showed a chart of projected expenditures and revenues for the town. "Rhode Island is near the bottom of the country in business-friendliness. Portsmouth doesn't need to sit down there with the rest of the state. We can be better by being more friendly and lowering the cost of doing business in the town."

Palmieri updated the Council on the strategic planning work over the past year to develop "revenue positive initiatives," an inclusive process which included two workshops (see here and here) with a third scheduled to follow in November. The entire presentation from last night will be posted on the Town Web site, and the PEDC will deliver a full report to the Council in January.

As if to underscore the financial challenges, the Council dealt with an agenda item to transfer $186K out of the fund balance to cover lower than expected revenues and overspent expenditures at the transfer station. While this was not entirely unexpected — there were concerns voiced when the Council voted on the sticker fee back in May — the additional hit to the fund balance was clearly not welcome news. The vote was 5-1, with Karen Gleason the lone dissenter (Council President Peter McIntyre was absent; VP Huck Little chaired the session). A full report on transfer station operations was promised to the Council in October.

The Council also discussed a letter of resignation from Prudence Island Fire Chief Thomas Gempp, with Councilor Dennis Canario expressing "serious concerns" about the basis for his departure, which Canario characterized as a response to the experience level of personnel being promoted to specific positions.

Driscoll noted the Council's limited authority. "The Prudence Island Volunteer Fire Department is an independent organization; they can elect whoever they want."

Portsmouth Fire Department Chief Jeff Lynch echoed this point. "I don't have any jurisdiction," said Lynch, adding, "I have gone over there twice to do some basic training. If it sounds like it's going to be a serious call, we respond to the Island."

Citing a need to discuss the issue further with Chief Gempp, the Council moved the item to their next meeting.

There was a report by Town Administrator Bob Driscoll on the results from the working group convened to consider the question of an Island Park skateboard area. "We had three very good meetings," said Driscoll, "And came up with points everyone agreed on. The group did approach the School Committee, and is now working to review school properties that might be available." When questions came from the Council about the originally proposed Island Park site, members of the group responded.

"It is two completely separate issues," said Lori Rinkel, "We do still want to have the small venue, but we understand the problems that the neighbors think would happen. I'm more than happy to continue working in our ad hoc group."

"The bottom line, we felt that a decision from the Council would drive a large wedge between the two opposing sides of the community," said Brian Whittier. "That's pretty much the way it was left. We felt it was better to sit back for a little bit."

In other business, a proposed wildlife feeding ordinance aimed at curbing coyote populations was approved for advertising and a future hearing will be scheduled.

The next meeting is scheduled for tomorrow night, when an attorney from the RI Ethics Commission will present to the Council and other Town committees and boards.

Full disclosure: I am a member of the ad-hoc skatepark committee.