Two anonymous residents recently expressed their reservations about this candidate via Sound Offs in the Southbridge Evening News. The two writers suggested that another candidate and myself had made fools of ourselves, and would be part of the “funny farm” were we to be elected and seated with the two current freshman selectman. Obviously, these two anonymous writers have concerns and I am more than happy to address them. As I can, and will only speak for myself, I am hopeful that these two anonymous residents will appreciate the courtesy of a response.
Let me begin with my position on the Town Hall. It is unfortunate that someone would suggest that a resident and candidate for selectman had made a fool of himself in simply stating the facts as they relate to the economic challenges facing this nation and this community. Those stated facts are as follows:
• Unemployment currently stands at 7.6% with predictions of 9-10% by year’s end.
• Foreclosures have increased 225% since 2006.
• In 2008, 160,000 retail stores closed.
• Economists predict that 200,000 will close in 2009.
• Consumer spending (a benchmark of the economy) is witnessing its lowest increase in over 47 years.
• This year we are faced with a $200,000 shortfall in our landfill closure fund.
• Our Road Management Plan is faced with a $170,000 shortage.
• In the upcoming Annual Town Meeting there are requests for the following:
- a 5.1% increase in water rates
- a 16% increase in sewer rates
- a request for debt issuance of $200,000 to cover shortages in the Landfill Cap Fund
• Once we begin construction of a new Wastewater Treatment Facility, users will see an estimated $325 - $370 annual increase in their fees.
• We face a 19 cent per gallon gas tax which for that average driver equates to about $8.00 per week or roughly $32.00 per month.
• Our Taxes are Increasing, Home Values are Plummeting, and Services are being Reduced.
• We are faced with an approximate $240 annual tax increase if and hopefully when we vote to approve a new elementary school. With state funding of at least 51% still pledged it is imperative that we take advantage of this OPPORTUNITY to build a new school.
At Tuesday’s Special Town Meeting, I expressed concern in terms of the financial burdens these items will place upon Sturbridge residents and questioned whether residents might be too “tax fatigued” to support funding for a new school when the time comes, which would be unfortunate - in fact tragic. It is unfortunate that someone would consider the expression of facts and the concern for our children’s and our community’s future as making a fool of oneself. There is an old adage used by some suggesting that, when you cannot counter an argument with logic and facts, simply engage in personal attacks directed towards the messenger. Regrettably, the anonymous Sound Off published is a poster-child for such attacks.
The writer’s partner spoke of the “funny farm” effect of the two current freshman selectmen being seated alongside myself and another candidate (were we to be elected), pleading for the two departing selectmen to reconsider their position not to seek reelection.
Such a concern warrants careful review and consideration. Thus, to that end one would be wise to reflect upon the accomplishments of the three veteran selectman and their former peers over the last four to five years. More pointedly, one would do well to consider exactly what hasn’t happened during that period.
Excepting the two current freshman selectmen, one can find no record of any substantial or original project or program being presented or implemented in the past four to five years. In fact, quite to the contrary, one is quick to find that every significant project or proposal brought forward, has been so done by those outside of the Board of Selectmen. Surely, one could argue that the Board need not be originators of ideas in order to be good representatives of the people; but one might well consider that the selectmen serve our elected leaders, and leadership is about ideas, vision, and commitment to identifying and solving problems, not just responding to them.
Here are just a few of the many examples that one can document with research:
Economic Development Committee: In April of 2007, concerned about the rising number of store vacancies along Main Street, I raised the issue of creating an Economic Development Commission. This item had been addressed by the Finance Committee in their FY 2007 Annual Report, which had been released in April of 2006, wherein they recommended that the Town of Sturbridge “Reestablish, fund and staff an Economic Development Commission with authority to stimulate marketplace interest and respond to inquiries.”
Yet, despite the passage of 12 full months and an ever-increasing number of For Sale signs dotting the landscape, the Board of Selectmen failed to engage in any public discussion. Understanding the seriousness of our declining tax base, as well as the less than positive image being conveyed by empty stores along Main Street, I initiated an effort to have the Board of Selectmen publicly engage this issue.
Undeterred by a less than enthusiastic initial response – one selectman stating that “…yes there are some empty store fronts in town but there are some new ones as well” - I continued to pursue this issue until finally in July, the Board voted to establish the Economic Development Committee (EDC). It would be yet another 6 months before the EDC was officially formed due to political posturing by the several veteran selectmen. Interestingly enough, one selectman who is “not” seeking reelection has identified the establishment of the EDC as one of the accomplishments he is proud of. One can only be grateful this selectman “championed” it forward, or so he would have us believe.
Where I come from there is an old saying that goes something like this, “Some People Make Things Happen, Some People Watch Things Happen, and Some People Say - Does Anyone Know What Just Happened?”
Public Broadcast of Conservation Commission Meetings: In March of 2007, several residents approached me with concerns about the conduct of several members of the Conservation Commission (ConCom) during public meetings. They alleged that some members were overstepping their authority and were repeatedly antagonistic to residents and businesses that came before them. Unbeknownst to me at the time, ConCom meetings were not televised; thus when I attempted to access a public meeting via T.V. – a meeting by the way held in the public broadcast meeting room – I was unable to. At that point, I reached out to one of our current veteran selectmen and inquired as to the lack of public broadcast.
I followed up by attending two ConCom meetings and was somewhat “shocked” at what I witnessed. As suggested, some ConCom members were in fact clearly overstepping their statutory authority in their questioning of proponents, and one in particular, took two cell phone calls during a Public Hearing - both times retreating to the lavatory to engage his caller.
I raised this issue publicly with the Board of Selectmen and reminded them that the Finance Committee had recommend “...a reconfiguring of the meetings of all Town boards, committees and commissions to maximize the televising of those meetings” in their FY 07 Annual Report, which they had released in April of 2006. Three current veteran selectmen wanted no part of any discussion relative to the complaints of proponents or the lack of televised meetings.
I then conducted an in-depth analysis of ConCom meetings and found multiple instances where ConCom members had voted during Public Hearings when they had in fact missed part of an ongoing Public Hearing. This is a direct violation of the Public Meeting Law, as members are only allowed to vote in Public Hearings when they have attended all meetings associated with the Hearing. In the event that they have missed one meeting or one aspect of the Hearing, they must have read an exact transcript (which we do not maintain, as meeting minutes do not constitute transcripts), watched a video tape, or listened to an exact audio tape of a single meeting or aspect of a single meeting they have missed.
I then contacted the Attorney General’s Office for confirmation and was informed that the ConCom was in violation and it needed to cease. This was conveyed to the Town Administrator and confirmed by him through Town Counsel. It was only then that the Board of Selectmen’s posture on this issue was altered. Noteworthy, is the fact that one member of the ConCom shares a familial relationship with a current veteran selectman and said ConCom member was opposed to public broadcasts. This resident is forced to ask, “Why was there such strong reluctance by the Board of Selectmen to ensure that ConCom meetings were televised?
“Some People Make Things Happen, Some People Watch Things Happen, and Some People Say - Does Anyone Know What Just Happened?”
Senior Services: In April of 2007 a request was brought to the Board of
Selectmen for a sum of “$6,500 or any amount up to”, so that the Senior Center could maintain more regular hours in order to address the needs of seniors. This request dismissed and tabled for later in the year, because, as one veteran selectman stated, the board did not “…consider it to be an emergency situation”. Luckily, the Finance Committee did and the request was ultimately approved at Town Meeting.
Oddly enough, these same veteran selectmen who did not view the needs of our seniors as a priority, were quick to recommend $2,500 for the care and maintenance of a Hazard Tree at the foot of a driveway owned by veteran selectman’s sister.
During that same year while discussing tax rates and the Senior Municipal Service Program, one veteran selectman “not” currently seeking reelection, wondered aloud if “…there was a way for the state to provide assistance to seniors?” That is where the discussion (and apparently his concerns) started and ended.
Fast forward to post April 2008 and one will note the proposal of the Senior Tax Assessment Reduction Co-op (STAR Co-Op) developed and authored by Selectman Scott Garieri and myself. This program, which requires State approval is currently being sponsored by Senator Brewer and will allow members of the community to volunteer service time to the town and having their hours co-opted or credited to a Sturbridge senior in the form of a tax credit or reduction.
Rather than develop or brainstorm on an issue of significance within this community, several of our veteran selectmen seem to be more content to simply think aloud with sound bites of interest to the community void of any concrete effort.
“Some People Make Things Happen, Some People Watch Things Happen, and Some People Say - Does Anyone Know What Just Happened?”
I do credit these present and former veteran selectmen in that their misguided support for a tree at the expense of seniors, was the spark for me that lead to implementation of a senior energy assistance program with then resident Scott Garieri, which has distributed approximately $20,000 to qualifying Sturbridge seniors.
“Some People Make Things Happen, Some People Watch Things Happen, and Some People Say - Does Anyone Know What Just Happened?”
WWTF – Accessory Dwelling Unit By-law: These are the same veteran selectmen that did everything within their power to fight the approval of a much needed 1.3 Million Gallons per Day (mgd) Wastewater Treatment Facility because of their glaringly evident anti-growth bias. One veteran selectman “not” seeking reelection went as far as to suggest that those residents who supported the 1.3 mgd plant which was based upon engineering considerations, wanted this community “…to look like route 9 in Shrewsbury” while those supporting the smaller and certainly insufficiently sized, plant that he supported, (based upon political ideologies) preferred “…a town with some character”. Sewer has no business being used as a tool to restrict or manage growth, that is the purpose of zoning and a Master Plan. Water is, and should always remain, an engineering and health related discussion if it is to be properly used to meet the needs and demands of residents.
These are also the same veteran selectmen who did everything within their power to prevent a 2/3rds majority vote on the Accessory Dwelling Unit Bylaw back in 2007 which was designed to “Provide older homeowners with a means of obtaining, through tenants in accessory apartments, rental income, companionship, security, and services, and thereby to enable them to stay more comfortably in homes and neighborhoods they might otherwise be forced to leave…”
Oddly, the same exact bylaw that just missed meeting the 2/3rds threshold 2 years ago, is back on the April Town Meeting and is now completely supported by these same veteran selectmen who were party to an opposition argument that consisted of the following viewpoints:
“If this bylaw passes, Sturbridge will be overrun with low wage casino workers just like Southbridge” - Open Space member and parent to one veteran selectman
"These units should be restricted to blood relatives and not outsiders" – a former selectman who was defeated in his reelection bid last year.
These veteran selectmen have spent more time and effort in preventing beneficial projects within this community than in presenting them.
Community Engagement: When this community was struck with a significant ice storm that left 76 houses without power for nearly 6 full days, there was absolutely no effort from the veteran selectmen to reach out to those affected. But one freshman selectman along with this writer and a group of other concerned residents expended a great deal of time and effort in addressing the relocation and power needs of neighborhood residents.
Hotel accommodations at significantly reduced rates were secured, warming stations and shower facilities were established, while generators were collected from a multitude of sources along with the services of an electrician, so that families could be returned to the comforts of their homes until power was restored.
One must not forget as well Selectman Blanchard's Labor of Love Program, which is designed to assist qualifying Sturbridge residents with minor home/landscape projects in the spirit of community centered approaches to community challenges.
“Some People Make Things Happen, Some People Watch Things Happen, and Some People Say - Does Anyone Know What Just Happened?”
Sturbridge Landfill/Recycling Center: While our veteran selectmen have exhausted a great deal of time and effort focusing on a landfill expansion in another community (certainly a worthy cause), this writer has been working to bring their attention to some of the issues associated with our own landfill.
Despite repeated requests by the FinCom to initiate a study of our current landfill/recycling center operations over the last 2 years, nothing, absolutely nothing has been publicly discussed in terms of this issue until I raised it in December of 2008. The requested study is designed to review the following:
1. Cost of on going operations and budget
2. Land Fill Cap Fund
3. Fee generation
4. Cost Reductions
5. Town trash /recycling initiatives
6. Hauler recycling alternatives
7. Landfill closure
8. Future “Brownfield” options: After capping, some town’s landfills are recycled into community using them for recreation areas.
Despite repeated communications with the Town Administrator and a commitment from the BOS Chairman that this discussion would take place, such has not occurred, though the public is now much more aware of our shortcomings at the landfill. Consider the following:
The FY 2009 budget for the landfill/recycling center is $280,000. The Town Administrator in response to my inquiries has stated that we currently have a $200,000 shortfall in our landfill cap/closure fund which must be addressed this year, in order to close cell number 2. This equates to a half million dollar “operating budge” for this year. Yet, less than a quarter of Sturbridge residents utilize the recycling center (me being one of them) while the majority are paying anywhere from $280 - $380 (approximate) per year in contracted trash services, while still supporting the landfill with your tax dollars.
The Town Administrator and the Chairman of the Board have stated that the landfill is an asset to the community and as such it need not be a money maker. Clearly, it is an asset, but so is my car and yet I still have to pay an annual excise tax to the Town of Sturbridge. I will continue to pursue this issue to ensure that the appropriate study is conducted so that you and I can ensure that our return on investment is appropriate to the tax assessment levied.
“Some People Make Things Happen, Some People Watch Things Happen, and Some People Say - Does Anyone Know What Just Happened?”
As this post is already quite lengthy, I ask each of you to review my 7-Point Plan for the First 12 Months and ask yourselves, what former or current veteran selectman has initiated any of the efforts listed in that plan, is currently engaging on those issues, or has even provided you with a plan period, during their candidacy or their tenure as selectman. Please take the time to review what I have proposed and am currently doing in terms of implementing a Comprehensive Budget Analysis, my efforts with the Senior Municipal Service Program, Elderbus services, and the STAR Co-op, my commitment to and engagement on the need for a new elementary school, engagement on the Sturbridge Landfill/Recycling Center, Charter Communications, as well as public access to information, etc. Ask yourselves as well, what current or veteran selectmen have undertaken the efforts within this community that this writer has.
Finally, please ask yourselves this, with the issues facing this community who do you believe has the willingness, the courage, and the stamina to properly identify, study, and solve the challenges we face today and tomorrow.
“Some People Make Things Happen, Some People Watch Things Happen, and Some People Say - Does Anyone Know What Just Happened?”
4 comments: