Skip to main content

Warrants

At the very end of our meeting last night, I overstated that I had been told “no,” when asking for an item called the warrant.

The reality is, both times I have asked to see them, once in December and again last week, I have been met with several emails asking me to clarify what I am asking for and why I need it. I have also been told that I don't need to see them. The confusion is understandable. As a committee we vote to allow the chair to sign the warrant. However Mass Gen Law makes clear that designating a signatory does not preclude the rest of us from our fiduciary responsibilities.


Knowing that, I asked to see the details that were behind the memo on our agenda. Instead of receiving them, I was reminded that we had already had the conversation was asked to let our chair know if I’d still like to see them. I responded in the affirmative asking for the entire committee to see the warrant. (edited 2/29 10:00 a.m. with added picture below)







No one explicitly told me “no,” but I also never received the documents.




This is slide explains why I will continue to want to see the warrants - signatory or not: 


  • slide from “Charting the Course” - New Member Orientation provided by the Massachusetts Association of School Committees


For Reference:  MGL Ch 41 Sec 56 spells out that “This provision [voting a single member to sign the warrants] shall not limit the responsibility of each member of the board in the event of noncompliance with this section.”


Despite the conflict that was visible last night, there was also resolution. Moving forward, I will be able to see the warrants when they are sent to our Chair and the warrants will most likely move from the consent agenda to the Chair's report. Figuring out nitty gritty procedures, especially when they involve change, is not easy but I am grateful for people who hang in there together and reach an understanding.   


Popular posts from this blog

Statement on Recusal

Here are the remarks I gave last night when letting my committee know my decision to recuse:  After the School Committee meeting on October 15th, several individuals wrote into the SpeakUp Natick portal requesting that I recuse myself from voting on the possible closure of Johnson.  The substance of these messages, sent to the full committee, carried a familiar refrain. The messages - often using the same language – said some version of the following:  Catherine Brunell should recuse herself from deliberating and voting on the closure of Johnson because she lacks objectivity, as her children go to school there and she is from that neighborhood. I asked myself the question if there was any merit to the request for me to recuse myself and started to do some research about why people recuse  From what I can tell from the minutes, in Natick, It’s never happened before - not with the Kennedy, Wilson or the High School - not even for members whose children were to attend the future rebuilt s

Questions that I am asking or have received...

Serving in this role, I hold a seat that gives me the ability to ask my questions and yours to our administration with the hope that the questions reinforce our strategic goals. I've long relied on the value that, "two heads are better than one."  So here are some of the questions that the School Committee has been asked this week by parents and constituents: Cameron Middle School in Framingham 1) Will outdoor structures be used in the fall to allow for outdoor mask breaks when the weather is poor or lunch in a safer setting?   While this falls into an operational issue at the school and is not typically in the purview of the School Committee, because of COVID we have an  interim COVID policy  (page 120) where it is stated that the school committee establishes an emergency, interim policy to promote public safety and safety of students and faculty.   Perhaps one example of the use of the application of this policy could be seen in the March 15th School Committee meeting  

In other news... (With correction about the Special Election)

 If you voted yesterday in the State primaries... you might have been surprised like me - I thought I would also be casting a vote for the Natick Select Board seat that sits open...  But, because of laws beyond anyone's control - Natick has to hold another election next week for an uncontested race on Tuesday September 13th.  Voting information here. I'm told that years ago Natick had to hold PRIMARIES because there were often so many people who wanted to run in the elections.  Sigh. I'm always grateful to anyone who will run and am happy to cast a vote next Tuesday - but I'd like to hope we have some contested races in March.  Correction: After publishing the blog, thanks to my readers, I learned that the above is incorrect:   The Select Board, by town charter,  can have a vacancy until the next election (March 2023), they may call for a special election themselves or be required to call for a special election if 200 people sign a petition calling for one.  The speci