1999-12-15Hall at 7:30 PM on December 15, 1999. Commissioners present were: Crystal Atherton, Peter Gilmore,
Jack Quigley, Mickey Ratte, N. Paul Galuzzi, Carol Girard, Mary Roderick, and Maria O'Brien.
Commissioner Mary Grant was absent.
The meeting was called to order by Chair Qulgley who provided some opening remarks
reiterating the Commission' s limited purpose of considering reopening West Beach, which wouid require
approval of the voters of Beverly. The public hearing was then open
Ann Driscoll of 48 Oak Street identified herself as a member of West Beach Corporation and
indicated that the beach is open to the public for nine and a half months. She felt that the Commission
should get on with its work as quickly as possible and avoid rumors and personal attacks.
Stella Mac Seemarts of 840 Hale Street urged the Commission to chose appropriate leagl counsel.
John Nturray of 14 Greenwood Avenue, the councilor from the sixth ward, provided an extensive
history of West Beach dating back to the 1600s. His primary conmetion was that the beach was never
publicly owned.
Tom Fallon of 25 Pershing Avenue also proxdded history of the beach. Halhas done an extensive
title examination. However, he could not answer Commissioner Gilmore's question regarding who
owned the beach m the time it was incorporated in 1852, unless the public owned rights that were not
recorded. Mr. Fallon added that, should the reopening of West Beach be found to be a land taking, it
could not be done without compensation.
Kathryn Craighead of 171 Lothop Street remarked that the issues being addressed needed an
appfopriate forum for resolution, including the question of what constitutes a taking. She urged the
Commission to conduct a thorough investigation.
Catheiine McCmlhy of 75 West Street expressed the concem that the beach is too small to be
open and there would be problems with parking and safety.
Micheal Hill of 733 Hale Street added his concern with maintenance of the beach, since the city'
does not do a good job with the beaches that are open to the city.
Timothy McGinness of 23 Vine Street requested a copy of Mr. Quigley's opening statement.
Renee Mary of 274 Hale Street voiced her opposition to the opening of the Beach in light of more
pressing issues and suggested that the citizens who signed the petition didn't understand what they were
doing.
Francine Gemor of 11 Cherry Street stated that she took signatures for the petition, and she knew
lust hand that each one understood and willingly signed it as an issue worth investigating.
David Hackett of 12 Oak Street felt that Peter Gilmore should have a greater voice on the
Commission because he was the number one vote-getter.
Nell Handier of 18 Paramata Road also took signatures for the petition and encouraged the
Commission to resolve this issue once and for all.
Tom Burr of 646 Hale Street stated that most of the beach is private and that the maintenance
would be very expensive for the city.
Jerry Driscoll of 48 Oak Street indicated his distress with the work of the Commission and
expressed concern for the potential costs to the city.
Alvin Brown of 903 Hale Street raised a question regarding Mr. Qulnn's qualifications for
providing legal assistance on Charter revisions.
Stephen O'Brien of 6 Oak Street stated that the West Beach Corporation has taken care of the
beach for more than 200 years and is not an elite group.
Eric Elbot of 111 Ca'over Street recommended that the participants ~iew this as a process dealing
with change, and we should look at how real interests can be protected end access be opened at the same
time.
Francine Cecieta of 100 West Street spoke as a local business person and urged the Commission
to hire an attorney.
Eric Hayes of 680 Hale Street suggested that the Commission review an auditor's report filed
with a 1907 decision of the state Suprame Judicial Court opinion about West Beach.
Crystal Atherton read a letter from Mary Grant expressing her apologies for not being able to
attend the hearing.
Peter Gilmore asked John Quinn whether the Attorn~' General's opinion would be binding. Mr.
Qulnn responded that the case could go to the court, and referred to a 1907 court decision regarding
ownership of West Bcack which he will distribute to the commissioners. ,Mr. Gilmore then made a
motion that the Commission appoint a qualified person to examine appropriate records and render an
opinion as to who were the owners of record at the time ofti~rmation of the West Beach Corporation.
The motion was amended to allow individual commissioner to investigate candidates and costs and
report back at the next meeting before making a decision. The amended motion was passed unanimously.
The next meeting was scheduled for March 22, 2000
The Commission thanked the citizens for their comments. The meeting was adjourned at 9:35.
Dec. 15,1999
Charter Revision Commission
Opening Statement
The Chair would like to make an opening statement on behalf of the
majority position of this commission after which we can hear from any
commissioner who wishes to make an additional statement before we get on
with the public hearing
1. We are a legally authorized Charter Revision Commission set up by the
vote of the people of Beverly last November 2nd, that opened the charter
and elected nine commissioners.
2. As such, we are legally required to hold a public hearing within 45 days
of the vote to take testimony from the public and that is what we are here
to do this evening.
3. We are here to listen and take notice of your statements about the single
issue on which the majority of this commission ran and on which they
were elected. There should be no mystery whatever about the position of
the majority. We have stated it openly and repeatedly, I would also point
out here that at our first meeting on Nov. 30, the commission voted to
restrict our subsequent discussions and deliberations solely to the question
of re opening access to West Beach to all Beverly citizens. This motion
eliminates the possibility that anything else in the charter will be changed
or amended.
4. We intend to develop and document a legal and historic basis for
amending the Special Act of 1852 which, the majority feels, converted a
formally public beach into a private beach. That will be the work of this
commission over the next year. The majority position on this commission
will insure that this work will be both cost effective and productive so that
our final report represents our best effort on behalf of all the people of
Beverly.
5. We do appreciate that there are commission members and, of course,
other citizens at this hearing who hold different positions from our own.
These alternative positions will be listened to and considered before any
preliminary report of the commission is submitted for review. I would
also like to note here that there is a legal provision for a statement, of not
more than a thousand words, that can be developed by a commission
minority that will also be filed, if available, with the final report before it
is distributed to the city council, the department of housing and community
development and to the attorney general.
6. The bottom line on all of this is, and has always been, that nothing can
be changed in the charter, unless the voters of Beverty choose to do so.
This commission's report will be reduced to a question that will appear on
the ballot for the next regular city election in November of 2001. Should
the people vote the question down at that time then the process is over. ff
they vote to proceed then the question will undoubtedly be settled by the
Massachusetts Judicial system.
At this point the chair would like to recognize any commission member
who wishes to make a statement, after which we will move on to the public
hearing where the commissions task will be to listen to the people.
Public Hearing: Procedures
Get a count of those who wish to speak tonight, divide it into 120 minutes.
Mention that the commission is quite willing to accept written statements.
Send them to Charter Revision Commission, c/o Jack Quigley, Beverly
City Hall, Bey. Ma. 01915