SHELBURNE FALLS — The Senior Center Expansion Committee has voted in support of sending to the three member towns a draft agreement for the creation of a regional senior services district, to ultimately be voted on at fall Special Town Meetings.
A West County Senior Services District would allow the three member towns — Ashfield, Buckland and Shelburne — to have equal say in decisions with respect to the Senior Center in Shelburne Falls and its future expansion, explained Daniel Pallotta, president of P-Three Technologies Inc., who the committee hired in 2019 as a project consultant. The Senior Center is currently located in the Masonic building on Main Street.
“Right now, the town of Shelburne is paying more than its fair share to keep this institution running forward,” Pallotta said. “This creates an equal playing field for three towns for the services, and sets up an ability for you to modernize those services in the future — whether it’s next year, five years from now, 10 years from now, or whenever.”
For the creation of the district to go through, however, the district agreement — which was reviewed in its draft form at an Aug. 26 joint meeting of the Senior Center Expansion Committee and the Senior Center’s board of directors — must be approved by a Town Meeting vote in all three towns. The text brought to each town meeting must be exactly the same.
The draft document outlines the establishment of a six-person board of managers, with two members from each town. All members would be appointed by the respective town’s Selectboard.
Prior to the vote, Senior Center Expansion Committee members expressed concern over the lack of bylaws included in the text of the document, or a defined list of rules and regulations. In particular, one member asked for a means for the public to express grievances.
“The document has the ability to expand,” Pallotta responded. “To put all that in the bylaws is hand-cuffing a board of managers 30 years from now.”
Margaret Payne, a committee member as well as a Shelburne Selectboard member, agreed with Pallotta.
“I think we’re running into the problem of everyone thinking this is a concrete document,” she said. “I think what Dan said is important, that we need to get this in place and then begin to tinker with some of the other things.”
Barry Del Castilho, speaking as a Buckland Selectboard member, asked for clarification on how the factors for the individual town assessments would be weighted — the specifics of which Pallotta acknowledged would need to be included in the document.
He also questioned language in the document requiring a town to give notice to withdraw from the district before March 1.
“If Town Meeting votes in May, then it can’t give notice before March 1 of that year,” Del Castilho said.
But committee members clarified that a town could put in a notice to withdraw prior to March 1, “subject to a Town Meeting vote.”
“The language doesn’t say that, but that makes sense,” Del Castilho said.
Del Castilho also said he was under the impression there would be a process for asking questions and making changes to the draft. This concern was later addressed with the committee’s decision to vote on the draft as a placeholder for each town’s Special Town Meeting warrant, with the understanding it would be reviewed and tweaked further by a group of Selectboard representatives.
Eventually, a final draft will be brought back to the Senior Center Expansion Committee for another vote.
“I think we’re in a situation where we’re 98 percent there with all three towns,” Pallotta said. “And we just need a little tweaking with selectmen to try and get an agreement between the three entities.”
Mary Byrne can be reached at mbyrne@recorder.com or 413-772-0261, ext. 263. Twitter: @MaryEByrne