[0:00] done a little Thank you. [laughter] Uh done an agenda

[0:05] [clears throat] for myself here. The first order of business is to um uh

[0:09] review and approve the minutes from the last meeting. Um and is somebody

[0:16] would somebody make a motion uh to approve them?

[0:21] » I will move to approve them. >> Okay.

[0:25] » Moves it. And as was there a second? Yeah, Jordan will second.

[0:30] » Okay, great. Is there any discussion? >> They looked good.

[0:36] » Good. Uh, all in favor, please say I or raise your hand or do something.

[0:40] » I >> I

[0:43] » I >> So, they're approved. Uh, all opposed?

[0:48] Oh. Uh, so the minutes are approved. My cat is thundering around in the

[0:53] background, so jumpy. That's why. Um um [clears throat]

[1:02] and the other thing we need to do is to uh swear in uh I guess it's John McCulla

[1:09] who is going to give testimony. So I don't have the oath in front of me.

[1:14] Barbara, do you happen to have it? Would you be able to read it out?

[1:18] » I don't. Uh but if you want to just move ahead with the next item, I'll go ahead

[1:23] and see if I can find one. >> Okay, great. Um, and I think that's the

[1:27] only oath that we need to do this morning. Uh, this afternoon we're going

[1:31] to talk about whether we all want to do an oath each time. And that's a

[1:34] different subject, but I don't think we're required to. Um, the, uh, the

[1:40] application that we're considering is the application of um, Charlotte uh, and

[1:46] Scott Bassage and it's parcel ID number 360105.

[1:52] Um, and the request is for uh penalties and fees uh from dating from 2025 in the

[2:00] amount of $434.34.

[2:03] So the next item on the agenda is to inquire um whether anybody on the board

[2:10] of tax abatement um has had exarty communication about this application.

[2:18] Um, and I'm assuming that the listers probably have cuz that's sort of in the

[2:23] nature of this particular request. So, um, don't consider that, uh, to be

[2:28] anything other than to say it happened. Um, and also to inquire whether anybody

[2:33] has a conflict of interest, um, in the proceeding. So, uh, please speak up if

[2:40] you feel you did do. >> Janet, I have the oath. If you would

[2:45] like for me to read it on your behalf, >> that'd be great. Um, and John, you're

[2:49] there. I don't see you, but I assume you're there in the room.

[2:54] » Well, John is here. >> Okay.

[2:56] » Yeah. >> Okay. So, the oath is under the pains

[3:00] and penalties of perjury, do you solemnly swear that the evidence you

[3:04] give and the cause under consideration shall be the whole truth and nothing but

[3:08] the truth? >> Yes.

[3:13] » Okay. Um, >> yes. [laughter]

[3:20] So >> didn't feel like the page of perjury

[3:23] today.

[3:26] » You're on my on my Zoom anyway. You're you're you sound very drifty. So I don't

[3:32] know if you do on others. Um so John, I think you're the um one witness that we

[3:37] have on this application and I assume everybody has the application in front

[3:42] of them or at least they've had a chance to review it. So, um John, if you could

[3:47] uh give us the background and um [clears throat] uh anything that you

[3:53] feel that we need to know in order to take action.

[3:56] » Okay. Um, in uh fall of 20124, a property tax transfer report shows a

[4:05] seller and buyer um for a piece of property came into the office and it

[4:10] showed that the transfer transfer was Scott and the transferee was John Hannah

[4:19] passage with a Seattle address. Um there was no indication at the train at the on

[4:28] the top of the PTTR that this was a life estate, but in fact it was with a life

[4:35] estate. The the main owner is still in this case the person listed as a seller.

[4:43] Um so the name should not have been changed.

[4:47] The address should not have been changed, but it was. The tax bill went

[4:52] wrong address and

[4:56] wasn't paid. >> And then kind of came as a surprise when

[5:01] when it was discovered delinquent and here we are,

[5:07] » right? Um, and so this is under the uh the pro

[5:13] the the uh provision [clears throat] that allows for an an an adjustment or

[5:18] an abatement rather if it's a mistake of the listister. Um, and that's the

[5:22] situation that uh [clears throat] that we're being asked to do the abatement on

[5:27] at the moment. Um, so it are there any uh questions of John that anyone has?

[5:37] So the the uh normal course is but it's not required is that we go into

[5:43] deliberative session uh to make a decision. We're not required to do it.

[5:48] Um and it's a little awkward. One half of us are not there. The other half are

[5:54] there but we can do it if you want to. Um or we can just uh entertain a motion

[5:59] if somebody uh has a motion to make. I I'd like to make a motion that we go

[6:05] into deliberative session. This is Barbara.

[6:08] » Okay. All right. Um and I I assume that you

[6:14] know how to do this because it happens in other occasions. Is that right? I

[6:18] don't know how to do it. >> I think we just need a second and then a

[6:21] vote. >> Well, but the the I'm talking about the

[6:24] mechanics of doing it. >> We'll just stop recording. I think

[6:28] that's the only difference. I think we stopped

[6:31] » and if anyone tries to come in, we tell them they need to wait a moment.

[6:35] » Okay, [clears throat] that sounds fine. Um, so, uh, the mot the motion's been

[6:40] made to go into deliberate session. Is there a second?

[6:44] » I'll I'll second. >> Okay. Uh, all those in favor, please say

[6:48] I. >> I. I.

[6:50] » And those. [clears throat]

[6:52] » Okay. So uh whatever the if you want to and uh so we're now in open session

[7:03] although it does feel just like the deliberative session but uh but there

[7:07] you go. Um so I'd like to see if somebody would make a motion to uh uh

[7:14] get us get us moving in terms of making a decision.

[7:18] Uh I would like to uh make a motion to uh approve the uh abatement of late fees

[7:27] um >> and penalty

[7:28] » and and penalty uh associate associated with uh Scott passage and Charlotte

[7:34] Hannah's uh request to do so. Um uh and the stated reason uh was that uh uh

[7:41] there was an error uh on the part of the listers and I think that that seems to

[7:45] be represented in this case. Uh that uh abatement amount is $434.34.

[7:55] » Okay. Uh so that's a motion. Is there a second to that?

[8:00] » Second. >> Okay. Uh, it's been moved and seconded

[8:03] that we uh approve the application for abatement of the penalties and interest

[8:09] in the amount of $434.34

[8:13] partial ID 360105. Um, so is there any discussion before we

[8:20] vote? Um, [clears throat]

[8:24] see any discussion? Uh, could I have a show of hands of all I'm not sure. Do we

[8:30] have to do this with a roll call? We don't. Do we? I don't think we do. Show

[8:34] of hands. Um, everyone, all in favor, please raise your hand.

[8:41] » And those opposed.

[8:44] Okay. Uh, so the motion has passed. Um, and I think that's it. Uh we did have a

[8:54] discussion about whether we were going to uh at Tegan if you want if you think

[8:59] this is a good time to have a discussion about whether we do an oath at each

[9:03] meeting we can do that now or we can wait till some non snowstorm time when

[9:08] we're all together which might might be a better discussion but it's up to you.

[9:14] Um I I think it's good to at least start the discussion and then if there's a lot

[9:19] we want to talk about maybe we could save it for when we're all in the same

[9:24] room. Um Janet brought up the idea that perhaps that the oath that we have

[9:29] signed in the past and I have a bunch of them in here is not required and I

[9:34] checked in with the LCT and while a lot of clerks and towns do have all the

[9:37] board members sign an oath at the beginning of every meeting not everyone

[9:40] does and it's not required. Um, I did ask Charlotte if she had any feedback on

[9:46] this point since she's not here tonight. And she said that she thinks of it kind

[9:50] of like there was another kind of meeting she used to attend where they

[9:54] did a prayer in the beginning. And while she's not a big prayer person, it set a

[9:59] tone of somnity and gravity, I suppose, to the

[10:05] situation and helped helped center people before a meeting. And so she

[10:09] aired on the side of in favor of an oath. Um, do we want to talk about it

[10:15] today? >> Um, this is Barbara.

[10:20] It's not that hard. It doesn't take but just a minute and I think it sets the

[10:24] tone as well. I would I would vote in favor of taking an oath each time.

[10:29] » So, the the concern that I had that I raised with Tegan, I'll I'll share with

[10:33] everyone. It um we had a we had a big some very sensitive about the idea of

[10:38] oaths. we had a big dust up in the legislature about whether or not we'd

[10:41] done our oaths properly. Um, and it raised all not a deliberative body, but

[10:46] it raised all kinds of questions about whether the actions we took were legal

[10:50] and constitutional and so on. So, it's a serious thing. Um, and the concern I

[10:56] have is that if we start doing it and because of a different town clerk or a

[11:02] different, you know, chair or different whatever, if it's not in our procedures,

[11:08] um, and we don't do it at a given time, that that may raise issues about the

[11:13] validity of what we're doing. So I um if we require it, my feeling is that we

[11:20] should put it in the rules of procedure so that it will be there for whoever

[11:25] takes over in 10 years from now when hopefully most of us won't be here. I

[11:31] won't be here [laughter] for sure. Um so that so that's just my

[11:36] thought. It's a serious thing. It's not it's it's I agree that it lends a a a

[11:43] feeling of gravity, but that's because it actually has gravity to it. Um, so I

[11:49] want to be cautious about it. I want to be sure that if we say we're going to do

[11:53] it that we actually really do it. Anyway, those are those are my thoughts

[11:58] about it. Anyone else want to jump in?

[12:03] » Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Don. Um,

[12:09] I think I've been in this role like I don't know maybe 12 years or something.

[12:12] And I remember Denise I thought used to have us um actually do the oath like

[12:18] this but only at the very start of each um time that we were elected. Um I

[12:23] thought that was a nice balance of um like not just signing a piece of paper

[12:27] so like actually taking an oath but not having to do it every time that we um

[12:32] convene. So, I I honestly don't have strong feelings on this one. I

[12:36] appreciate your point, Janet, about it about us. What happens if we forget to

[12:40] or don't do it, but that's what I would >> that's what I would uh think throw.

[12:45] » We did do an oath.

[12:52] Uh >> oh, Jennering

[12:56] that we're doing. Um, and I So, so we did kind of do what you're talking

[13:02] about. I freeze up probably. Uh, anyone else want to jump in?

[13:07] » Janet, you froze up. Do you mind saying that again?

[13:11] » I just said we did do an oath um in in the LA at the last time we met um for

[13:17] for the office when we we took office. So, it was along the lines of what Dylan

[13:22] was describing. Anyone

[13:26] else? >> I think it's um

[13:30] uh with some of these boards that have pretty official duties um

[13:36] uh and the likelihood that there's going to be turnover amongst the board between

[13:41] meetings uh because of just kind of the general makeup. I uh I I do see value

[13:47] probably in in having uh an an oath being, you know, read or acknowledged at

[13:54] the beginning of of of hearings. Um and and I do agree with you, Janet, that if

[14:00] we're going to make that commitment that it should be represented

[14:04] uh in in the procedure so that we're consistent about its verbiage and

[14:10] everything else. Um, so I guess I would propose m maybe uh asking somebody to

[14:17] prepare some language to be adopted in the procedures that we can vote on at

[14:22] our next convening. Um uh and then I guess the only other uh question there

[14:28] uh about kind of validity uh would be um would it be adequate for you know

[14:34] something like that to be read and everybody to kind of in unison say say I

[14:41] um you know does that does that you know is that sufficient um to be to be valid.

[14:49] So, >> you [clears throat] know, yeah, the oath

[14:52] that we took as legislators, we all stood there and raised

[14:55] » Yeah. >> a right hand, but that was considered

[14:59] not the not valid. The the oath that was valid was the one we signed. Um, had to

[15:05] sign one. And so the the the with the hand up was ceremonial and it looked

[15:11] like >> except [clears throat] it turned out to

[15:13] be your left hand if you were on >> Zoom. Mhm.

[15:18] » Well, you and you all sign the or at least the judge of the piece all sign an

[15:22] oath >> um when they are elected and the select

[15:25] board like we all sign various oaths when we are elected that are not the

[15:30] same oath as we've been using for abatement hearings. Um the

[15:34] [clears throat] oath in question by the way is I do solemnly swear or affirm

[15:38] that I will well and truly hear and determine all matters at issue relating

[15:42] to the abatement of taxes and other levies submitted for my decision. So

[15:46] help me God or under the pains and penalties of perjury.

[15:51] » So can we make in the procedure the requirement that I guess when when we

[15:56] have a new member of the board whatever is going to trigger that they're going

[16:00] to sign that and then maybe it's just a a reading um as like an acknowledgement

[16:06] at the beginning of a hearing just as a reminder everybody who's serving in this

[16:09] role has signed an oath that expresses as much. So then then we have the

[16:15] signatures that are that are captured when a new member is installed and uh

[16:20] and then we have kind of more ceremonial acknowledgement um at the beginning of

[16:24] the meeting. >> I think that's a sort of a nice way to

[16:29] balance the various concerns. Um >> yes.

[16:32] » Yeah. [snorts] >> So Tegan, this is Barbara. For the

[16:36] purpose of your minutes, uh John was sworn in.

[16:39] » Yes. But that was not this the oath that I found in the BOA handbook. So just so

[16:45] you know, that's not the oath that John took, but he did swear in this evening

[16:50] » as a witness. >> Thank you.

[16:53] » As a witness. As a witness. >> Sorry, I was delayed. Um there were no

[16:58] additional candidates who came forward, but I was

[17:01] delayed and I missed the beginning of the meeting. Um, so

[17:05] what I'm hearing at this point, and we haven't made a motion, I don't need to

[17:09] know that we need to do that this time, but that you would like me to bring back

[17:14] the rules of procedure with an inclusion of

[17:20] reciting the hearing at the start of every hearing. reciting the oath at the

[17:24] start of every hearing and then after we are all elected the first the first

[17:30] meeting after we have all been reelected or elected that we would all sign it at

[17:35] that particular meeting. Is that what people are thinking?

[17:38] » I thought what Jordan said was to um state that we had all taken the oath but

[17:44] not to take it at each meeting. But perhaps I misunderstood Jordan.

[17:50] » It it was more a statement than Then

[17:54] » yeah, I mean that's kind of semantics. So what I had in mind was similar to

[17:59] what you know Tan was saying that we that we just that we have an oath that

[18:03] we all sign it when there's a when there's a you know point of installation

[18:08] um that and you know that that is then being you know kept on file and then at

[18:13] the beginning of a hearing uh the oath is read and you just have a ver

[18:21] verbal reminder that everybody present has signed

[18:26] » was already done it. Yeah. >> Yeah. Just read one time as a reminder,

[18:31] not read by everyone individually. >> Yeah, that's that's what I understood.

[18:34] That that makes sense. Um yeah, I mean the the advantage of that is if for some

[18:40] reason somebody forgets to do it, it's not going to make a difference and uh in

[18:45] terms of the of the validity of what we do. So [clears throat]

[18:50] » sounds good. Uh are people in agreement that that's this is a good way to

[18:54] proceed? We don't need to vote on it because we'll vote when we see the

[18:57] language. But um >> people good with us.

[19:00] » Agree. >> Good good discussion. Uh any other

[19:05] business that we uh need to deal with before some of us move off

[19:12] here? >> Uh I don't think so.

[19:14] » Okay. Uh so I'm going to say that we're we are adjourned. Um

[19:22] good to see everybody. Uh, oh, wait a minute. I may need to Somebody needs to

[19:26] write up the decision. Um, and I think Tegan and I have usually worked on that.

[19:31] We'll circulate it, but I don't think it'll be a complicated um letter. So,

[19:39] » so we'll do that. >> Okay, great. Thanks. Bye, everybody.

[19:44] » Thanks.

Calais Board of Abatement Meeting 1-26-26

Transcript