Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Danvers review committee urges smaller representative body; Finance Committee removes archaic '96' figure
Summary
Debate centered on whether to leave an outdated '96' membership number in the Town Meeting Act. The Finance Committee voted to remove the archaic figure after hearing the review committee’s recommendation to reduce membership and public comments urging either deletion or replacement with a modern number.
The Finance Committee spent its longest block of discussion on a proposed revision to section 2 of the Town Meeting Act that refers to a membership of 96. Review committee chair Sally Calhoun told the committee the panel had recommended a reduction and had proposed replacing the dated number: "The review committee suggests that this language should be changed from 96... to a 120," she said, explaining the recommendation aimed to improve representation while addressing low candidate interest in recent precincts.
Public commenters and several committee members disagreed about the right approach: some argued to keep a fixed, current figure (144, reflecting present practice) while others urged deleting the numerical reference altogether so the town could adjust membership through routine annual processes. Nova, a member of the review committee, recommended elimination: "I personally would recommend just eliminating it, that whole line out," she said.
After extended discussion and public comment, the Finance Committee voted to remove the ‘96’ sentence from the draft Town Meeting Act as presented and send the revised article to town meeting. Committee members explained the intent is to avoid confusion from archaic language and allow town meeting debate (or future amendments) to set membership numbers if needed.
