Was RGSC used as cover for an inevitable outcome?
A clean start would have led to a better finish.
The RGSC began to study options for the future of Recreation in April '16.
Notes from Nov. '15 indicate only 1 option of real interest at the top, however.
Notes from Nov. '15 indicate only 1 option of real interest at the top, however.

Five months before the RGSC assembled, both the Village President and Town Manager predicted / supported the creation of a separate Rec District as follows: (Note how preceding agenda items [see image] spoke to the recent success of merging other depts under Town gov't.)
"... Mr. Tyler would like to gauge the sentiments of the SB and Trustees for moving ahead with creating an independent, community-wide Parks and Recreation District, which would have oversight by municipal and school leaders, and community members.
"Mr. Tyler expressed that because this has been a sensitive issue in the Village, he wanted to be completely transparent and introduce this concept to the boards and the public before having any discussions about this issue.
"He asked for the board members' consent to hold a meeting with the Prudential Committee, Trustees and SB sometime in the first six months of 2016 to begin the discussion on how the community would approach creating an Essex-wide recreation district together. The intent of that meeting would be to jointly approve creating a study committee whose task would be to identify and frame all issues pertinent to creating this district and develop a plan to be approved by the Village and Town voters in 2017." Lines 379-389 of Nov. 17, 2015 minutes
"Mr. Scheidel had understood that the (RED [School Merger] Committee) discussions concluded with having a Parks and Recreation District, which would mean that budget discussions would be easy. If a district is not the conclusion to this issue, then it would impact the (recreation) budgets. He felt that this process would produce anxiety with the recreation Directors." Lines 425-425 of Nov. 17, 2015 minutes
"... Mr. Tyler would like to gauge the sentiments of the SB and Trustees for moving ahead with creating an independent, community-wide Parks and Recreation District, which would have oversight by municipal and school leaders, and community members.
"Mr. Tyler expressed that because this has been a sensitive issue in the Village, he wanted to be completely transparent and introduce this concept to the boards and the public before having any discussions about this issue.
"He asked for the board members' consent to hold a meeting with the Prudential Committee, Trustees and SB sometime in the first six months of 2016 to begin the discussion on how the community would approach creating an Essex-wide recreation district together. The intent of that meeting would be to jointly approve creating a study committee whose task would be to identify and frame all issues pertinent to creating this district and develop a plan to be approved by the Village and Town voters in 2017." Lines 379-389 of Nov. 17, 2015 minutes
"Mr. Scheidel had understood that the (RED [School Merger] Committee) discussions concluded with having a Parks and Recreation District, which would mean that budget discussions would be easy. If a district is not the conclusion to this issue, then it would impact the (recreation) budgets. He felt that this process would produce anxiety with the recreation Directors." Lines 425-425 of Nov. 17, 2015 minutes
The Selectboard appoints a committee to study the future of recreation, believing it's advisory. Others know better, yet withhold that info.

February's joint meeting SB agenda [image at right] gave no indication to Town residents of the topics to be discussed or decided. After this incomplete agenda was challenged by a resident that summer, the Town Attorney, without acknowledging a violation of law, urged the SB on August 15 to ratify (re-vote) the (unwarned) motion approved in February.
This shoddy warning didn't go unquestioned at the time. Before the Feb. meeting ended, Selectman Andy Watts asked the Town Manager point blank if the SB could legally vote, given the vague warning, and he was assured they could.
Conversation was completely dominated by members of the two boards that had properly warned the meeting -- the Prudential Committee and Village Trustees. They appeared much better prepared to discuss the topics at hand than their SB guests.
They spoke of "intent" being important. As if wholesome intent hadn't already been compromised by pre-meeting activity! They aimed for a balance of Village and Town residents. In the end, 6 Village residents and 4 Outside-the-Village residents were appointed. (Actual ratio at meetings was 6-3.) Hiring a neutral facilitator, as was done for last year's TGIA effort, was suggested. None was hired.
This shoddy warning didn't go unquestioned at the time. Before the Feb. meeting ended, Selectman Andy Watts asked the Town Manager point blank if the SB could legally vote, given the vague warning, and he was assured they could.
Conversation was completely dominated by members of the two boards that had properly warned the meeting -- the Prudential Committee and Village Trustees. They appeared much better prepared to discuss the topics at hand than their SB guests.
They spoke of "intent" being important. As if wholesome intent hadn't already been compromised by pre-meeting activity! They aimed for a balance of Village and Town residents. In the end, 6 Village residents and 4 Outside-the-Village residents were appointed. (Actual ratio at meetings was 6-3.) Hiring a neutral facilitator, as was done for last year's TGIA effort, was suggested. None was hired.
A Joint Municipal Survey Committee (JMSC) has special powers, per statute. Surprise!

Per the meeting videotape, the Town Manager asks at 66:56: "Are we in agreement that the name of the committee is the joint municipal survey committee (JMSC) to study rec, if that's, I mean, it comports with the law."
Irene Wrenner asks at 67:13, "Do we need the word 'survey'?" No one replies. She wouldn't discover the significance of that JMSC phrase until August 1 [see below].
The Town Manager continues 67:17, "I mean the ad's going out tomorrow... Is that what we're gonna call the group?"
Irene Wrenner asks at 67:13, "Do we need the word 'survey'?" No one replies. She wouldn't discover the significance of that JMSC phrase until August 1 [see below].
The Town Manager continues 67:17, "I mean the ad's going out tomorrow... Is that what we're gonna call the group?"

The boards deliberate and select a different name. As Village Pres. George Tyler crafts a motion to create a Recreation Governance Study Committee to study the options and make a recommendation, EJRP Director Brad Luck interjects the phrase "joint municipal survey committee" into the motion at 81:16, per a memo he'd distributed.
So the SB votes "to form a committee named 'Recreation Governance Study Committee' which is a joint municipal survey committee to study recreation and to explore all various options for potential restructure of the Village and Town recreation departments as outlined in the memo from Brad Luck, dated 2/10/16 ..." Lines 132-134 of Feb. 16, 2016 minutes
So the SB votes "to form a committee named 'Recreation Governance Study Committee' which is a joint municipal survey committee to study recreation and to explore all various options for potential restructure of the Village and Town recreation departments as outlined in the memo from Brad Luck, dated 2/10/16 ..." Lines 132-134 of Feb. 16, 2016 minutes
Gotcha! A JMSC can usurp the Selectboard's decision-making power to determine the final option.

To the left are the only statutes provided by Brad Luck in advance of the discussion to decide on the type of committee.
THE critical statute that Brad neglected to supply to the boards or mention aloud Feb. 16, as he urged them to vote specifically for a RGSC that was a JMSC, is shown below.
Brad had to know that a JMSC has super-powers! Whereas a plain-vanilla RGSC would have been only advisory in scope.
A run-of-the-mill RGSC would have no built-in incentive to select one option over another. Any option it chose would be vetted by the Trustees and SB before they approved it, or not.
On the other hand, if a special RGSC / JMSC were to select one particular option -- say an independent Rec STD over the other 8 options -- no board could question / alter its decision, from a legal standpoint.
THE critical statute that Brad neglected to supply to the boards or mention aloud Feb. 16, as he urged them to vote specifically for a RGSC that was a JMSC, is shown below.
Brad had to know that a JMSC has super-powers! Whereas a plain-vanilla RGSC would have been only advisory in scope.
A run-of-the-mill RGSC would have no built-in incentive to select one option over another. Any option it chose would be vetted by the Trustees and SB before they approved it, or not.
On the other hand, if a special RGSC / JMSC were to select one particular option -- say an independent Rec STD over the other 8 options -- no board could question / alter its decision, from a legal standpoint.
When one is incentivized to choose Option X, how level is that playing field?
The other options -- including our Plan B, consolidation under Town government -- never had a chance. Some SB members discovered this "gotcha" a full 5 months after appointing a committee that they expected to fairly weigh / judge the options.
Section 4861 was read aloud by the Town Attorney on August 1, when asked by Selectman Wrenner to explain why the RGSC had the power to decide on an STD, rather than merely advising the SB of their preferred option:
Section 4861 was read aloud by the Town Attorney on August 1, when asked by Selectman Wrenner to explain why the RGSC had the power to decide on an STD, rather than merely advising the SB of their preferred option:
It's legalese meaning "you're outta luck", as far as many residents are concerned, because it gives RGSC / JMSC a pass from the locally-elected boards which represent a wide-range of constituents and would otherwise have Final Say on this important decision.
It's also an exemplary decision-making coup on the way to an even larger coup. If the vote to create an STD passes in December, EJRP takes EPR away from Town governance, leaving behind the checks-and-balances that otherwise protect a taxpayer's wallet.
It's also an exemplary decision-making coup on the way to an even larger coup. If the vote to create an STD passes in December, EJRP takes EPR away from Town governance, leaving behind the checks-and-balances that otherwise protect a taxpayer's wallet.