My Personal Journey Through Sturbridge
Over the last few weeks, I’ve had the privilege of speaking with hundreds of residents in my door-to-door journey throughout Sturbridge. To say that I’ve been overwhelmed by the incredible hospitality, courtesy, and genuine interest extended me, would be an understatement. It has been nothing short of remarkable.
My personal journey is affording me an amazing opportunity to lay witness to our community as seen through the eyes of its residents. Your joys, hopes, fears, and frustrations have been conveyed to me with remarkable frankness and clarity.
It’s clear that Sturbridge residents love this community and revel in its beauty. It’s also clear, that the majority of residents I’ve spoken with are deeply concerned about the lack of economic development, our diminishing tax base, and the lack of substantive engagement in addressing comprehensive solutions to these issues.
Many residents have identified the lack of time that prevents them from being more directly involved with some issues facing our community. The demands of raising a family, working multiple jobs, and staying ahead of economic challenges leave little opportunity for many to participate at the level they’d prefer. Most however have suggested that the path we’ve undertaken these past few years has produced less than encouraging results.
There’s a growing sense of frustration among residents with the “diminishing tax base” evidenced by the number of vacant/for sale/for rent signs witnessed these past 4 years along Main Street. Many have expressed concerns with what has been described as an “increasing tax burden disproportionate to the services received”, along with the lack of what some identified as “substantive efforts to address problems”.
This is precisely the reason I seek your support; I firmly recognize the need for substantive dialogue and concrete, results-based action. I’m committed to directly engaging the issues facing this community and my 7-Point Plan for the First 12 Months documents my belief in the need for engaged, pro-active leadership. My approach is grounded in specifics as opposed to generalities, and provides a clear path of my direct accountability to Sturbridge voters.
I’m a strong believer in action, based upon deliberate and careful review of information. Such deliberation however, need not be bogged down in endless and repetitive dialogue void of a clear end-point. Residents have a right to expect, in fact demand, direct and timely action/pro-action.
I’m committed to providing Sturbridge with principled leadership, distinct objectivity, direct accountability, and deliberate action that is results-specific. I will tirelessly work to engage direct efforts aimed at identifying, addressing, and solving issues facing our community in a proactive and pragmatic manner. If elected, I pledge to bring tangible results to our community and will be a strong, principled voice in representing ALL residents.
My amazing journey has enriched me beyond all expectations and has lead to incredible level of awareness while deepening my commitment to our community. One cannot travel the doorsteps of 1,509 residents (as of Thursday, March 19, 2009) and come away unchanged. Each of you, whether a supporter or not, has graced me with your time, kindness, insights, and hospitality. These are invaluable gifts and I’m eternally grateful to each of you for your contributions to my personal growth.
Posts
2 comments:
I am sorry I was not home when you stopped by our home and spoke with my wife. Like many in Sturbridge, I have followed your exploits in the paper and I am grateful for much of your insight for the town, especially regarding the sewer plant. However, I believe you are often too brash in your criticism of others, which makes me wary of how you will handle yourself on the board. Because of that concern, I am not sure you will have my vote.
Jason, I thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts; they are most appreciated. Clearly, you raise a salient point and one no doubt, that merits a response. It is lengthy and I do apologize for such, but I am not a man of few words.
I agree that my approach has at times has been “brash”, and that has not been by accident. Over the course of 4 years, I have witnessed a growing selectivity in the manner by which elected officials have approached issues within this community. All too often one has seen the needs of the many, outweighed by the desires of the few. This is fundamentally in opposition to the principles of good governance and representative democracy.
Despite nearly 15 months of effort aimed at working cooperatively with these representatives, it became increasingly clear that decisions were being based upon personalities (relationships) as opposed to principles. This was becoming ever more detrimental to the economic and social well-being of this community.
In January of 2007, I raised the issue of the ever-growing number of vacant storefronts along Routes 131 and 20. These concerns went unanswered until I initiated a series of letters to the editor, blog postings, and direct correspondence to the selectmen over the course of several months, which finally prompted public discussions in June/July of 2007. It was then another 4 months prior to the establishment of the Economic Development Committee. A total of 10 months had been exhausted on this subject by me.
This failure by elected leaders to recognize the economic downturn manifesting within this community nearly 18 months prior to my efforts in January of 2007, was and will continue to be detrimental to the economic revitalization of Sturbridge. In April of 2006, the Finance Committed articulated its concerns (as it did in April of 2005 and again in April 2007) with our diminishing tax base and the lack of substantive engagement on this issue.
In their FY 2007 annual report – released in April of 2006 – the Finance Committee recommended we “Reestablish, fund and staff an Economic Development Commission with authority to stimulate marketplace interest and respond to inquiries” while working to “Attract a signature high revenue/low impact project like a science park, financial services center or college branch campus”. Sadly, this request received no public recognition by our elected leadership.
Again, in April of 2007, the FinCom report articulated its growing concerns with the deteriorating economic landscape in Sturbridge by stating the following in their annual report:
“Have you noticed in recent months the number of vacant buildings in Sturbridge, left empty by businesses that have closed or moved? Have you noticed how long many of these buildings and business rental spaces have remained empty? We have lost a significant number of businesses in the Town. Each of these empty business sites promotes an impression that Sturbridge is no longer a place to visit for interesting and unusual shops, a bit of history, and fine foods. If we continue to lose businesses in Sturbridge, how do we build and retain a base of businesses sufficient to support
the Town’s budget needs? How does the character of the Town change? Is that where we want the Town to go?”
Still, despite my efforts and those of the FinCom, there was no public recognition of this report by elected leadership until June/July 2007. Valuable and unrecoverable time has been lost which only serves as a detriment to our community.
The same can be said for the lack of engagement in terms of televising the Conservation Commission meetings. Despite the FinCom recommendations in April 2006, which recommended “…a reconfiguring of the meetings of all Town boards, committees and commissions to maximize the televising of those meetings”, which would enable “…every resident to possess sound information covering the facts, processes and decisions affecting all of us”, there was no public recognition of this report by the selectmen until I engaged the issue.
This subject was first raised by a resident back in August 2004 see meeting minutes, then subsequently by me in February of 2006 in response to several complaints and inquiries I had received from residents. It took another 6 months for any public discussion to manifest (that again was initiated by me to little avail), despite the fact that I had identified numerous occasions of public hearing voting violations by the ConCom. It was only after outreach to the Attorney General’s Office by me, and discussions with Town Counsel via the Town Administrator that public video-taped broadcasts were ultimately implemented.
Simply stated, some members of the ConCom (social acquaintances of several selectmen) were opposed to taped/televised meetings despite the Town’s adoption of the Mullin Rule. The Mullin Rule requires audio/video recordings, or detailed transcripts of meetings (not meeting minutes) in order to allow voting by public officials during a Hearing when those officials have missed one single part of a continued Hearing. I had identified instances where one, two, or even three aspects of a Public Hearing had been missed and members of the ConCom voted on an issue anyway. This is a clear violation of the Public Hearing process and a disservice to residents who depend upon government officials to do the right thing.
Suffice to say there are other examples of selective representation, which I am sure you are quite familiar with. Clearly, it is unfortunate and regrettable that any resident would feel the need to be “brash” in their “criticism of others”, as one would always prefer a more positive and cooperative approach. It has been the very practice of my life’s work to seek compromise as opposed to confrontation and agreement as opposed to disagreement.
This approach however, fundamentally recognizes the requirement for all parities to engage honestly, objectively, and cooperatively. Without such, there is little chance for productive engagement. Such was well recognized by Samuel Adams during his ownership of the Public Advertiser, which highlighted the inconsistencies, hypocrisy, and selective representation by the British Crown.
Samuel Adams strongly subscribed to practice of “Principles over Personalities” as it related to the governance of state and local affairs. His belief in the responsibility of public officials to be “Powers of Example” in the discharge of their duties and their daily lives was central to his evaluation and reporting of British governance leading up to the revolution. He was also a key contributor to the Declaration of Independence and a firm believer that though a citizen may and should advocate strongly from one position or another, one can and should only govern from the middle.
To that end, I would offer, as I have repeatedly, that advocacy from one side or another is healthy and necessary, governance however must be from the middle if all are to be represented. In my view, such has not been the case these past years and that has resulted in disenfranchisement and disengagement by many residents. I believe that there is nothing more “brash” in the public participation process than dismissal of dissenting opinions as has been the case for years and the disenfranchisement of residents due to selective representation.
There is little that is more disheartening to the democratic process than a practice of governing for the few as opposed to the many, or the hypocrisy of officials who are expected to live in a manner reflective of our laws, yet are in violation of town bylaws themselves. This practice has become rampant within our system at all levels of government and all too often, a blind eye is turned.
Thus, I would ask you to consider the following: if you and your family are presently satisfied with the current level of representation and engagement of issues facing this community by our elected leaders, then your vote will be guided by such, and no amount of commentary from me will alter that, nor should it. As well, if you believe that pragmatic, proactive, energetic, and results-oriented leadership is in abundance on the current Board of Selectmen and that your family is the beneficiary of such, that too will guide your decision on April 13th. Equally so, no amount of commentary from me will alter that belief.
If however, you are unsure that such is the case, I would ask that you extend me due consideration and recognize that my commitment to integrity, principled leadership, accountable representation, and results-based engagement will guide every step I take, every determination I reach, and every resident I face. These are the principles I have dedicated my life to and 32 years of service to.
Thank you for taking the time to convey your thoughts and I welcome any feedback. You have my contact information and I invite you to feel free to utilize it.
Warm Regards,
TRC
Post a Comment