Monday, the Board of Selectmen (BOS) will again meet with stakeholders in the Route 15 area to discuss a solution to the wastewater challenges facing this section of our community. Currently, several property owners are under consent orders from the Department of Environmental Protection to upgrade their wastewater systems. One in particular - the Sturbridge Retirement Cooperative Corporation (SRCC)- home to hundreds of Sturbridge seniors, most of whom are on fixed incomes has long sought support from the Board of Selectmen in terms of a traditional sewer solution.
In fact, the meeting minutes of 21 June 2004 (page 3) reflect that a sewer line for Route 15 was approved on a 3-2 vote by the Board of Selectmen. Subsequently, after a year of dialogue and disagreement between SRCC and the BOS over (among other things) sewer privilege fees, the approval was rescinded on 20 June 2005 (page 8) by the Board after withdrawal by the petitioners. Discussions have intermittently manifested between the Route 15 stakeholders and the BOS since with the end result being the same, calls for more studies and little substantive action.
I have long been a proponent of a municipal solution to the challenge of sewer and water on Route 15. From a residential standpoint we are currently faced with a situation where hundreds of our residents within the Retirement Community are under a consent decree due to a dated and inadequate wastewater treatment system. These residents are turning to us for relief and I believe we have an obligation to help provide a municipal solution.
From and economic standpoint, one has to recognize that despite various experiments with zoning in the Route 15 corridor – the latest of which is the Special Use District and the Planned Unit Business Development which has existed for nearly 15 years - little interest has been generated in terms of viable economic development. This is disconcerting as Route 15 is ideally suited and located for the types of preferable high-tech industrial development that many rural communities clamor for.
The current zoning (pages 41-43) along Route 15 provides for an array of desirable development opportunities that are mindful of our need for a vibrant tax base, while protecting our rural charm. Zoning however is simply not enough and the lack of any real interest in that area would seem to bear this out. I believe that the number one impediment to improving our economic base in that area is the lack of municipal infrastructure. Indeed Dr. John Mullin, the preeminent expert in rural reindustrialization and economic development has long held that the “absence of water and sewer systems represent the greatest flaw “in trying to revitalize and reindustrialize rural communities. He goes on to say that “Without such services, it’s clear that a community will wait and wait and wait”.
Clearly, the current economic climate in non-conducive to development and/or expansion by sought after industries, but if we do not act now, we will continue to find ourselves unable to leverage opportunities which may present themselves in the future. This has certainly been the case for the last several decades. The current zoning along Route 15 with no modifications whatsoever, provide a great deal of opportunity for increasing our tax base, while protecting the character of our community.
One could surely argue that we as a community have waited long enough and in consideration of the escalating tax burden Sturbridge residents will soon be shouldering from projects such as a new elementary school, the upgraded Wastewater Treatment Facility, and even the Town Hall/Center School project, we can no longer continue to travel this course of inaction. To do so would be both derelict and detrimental. The solution to the challenges on Route 15 (both residential and commercial/industrial) is municipal infrastructure – be it traditional sewer or an on-site system. Certainly, the studies conducted by Tighe and Bond have indicated that the soils in the Route 15 corridor are ideal for a municipally owned and operated on-site system. The clock is ticking however and alternative approaches that address the challenges along Route 15 are becoming less tenable with each passing day.
To that end, we as a Board have failed to provide the leadership and the necessary sense of urgency in addressing this issue. Certainly, another year has nearly expired with little substantive engagement on this issue by those of us charged with the leadership role. Undoubtedly and needlessly, our attention has been redirected elsewhere and that has come at a high cost to our community. I believe that the Board has an obligation to lead from the front on this issue and move ahead with a realistic solution that addresses the challenges facing this important corridor within our community. We owe it to those residents shouldering the growing tax burden within Sturbridge. Standing idle and continuing to sit on our hands, is simply no longer an option.
RE-ELECT TOM CREAMER - APRIL 9, 2012
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Time Will Tell
As we enter another local election cycle, there is opportunity yet again for residents to determine the course of local politics. Nothing offers individuals a more direct voice in the governance of their day-to-day lives than local elections. Tax rates, water and sewer rates, zoning, growth management philosophies, etc. are all impacted by those individuals we elect to local office. To that end, local politicians and their appointees to the various town boards and committees have more impact over our daily lives than do any others.
Though there has been progress and tangible achievements during the last 9 months in terms of my “7 Point Plan”, there is little doubt that this past year has been accompanied with its share of strife and disappointment. Few would deny that on the whole, the current Board of Selectmen is in a state of dysfunction. Collectively (as in working on the whole for the good of all residents) nothing substantive has been undertaken or accomplished by those of us who are responsible for providing the political, moral, and ethical leadership within the community. This is disturbing and quite unfortunate. Jointly, the Board of Selectmen has failed to demonstrate a true Power of Example as it relates to the ethical transmission of our affairs.
Collectively, we have failed to set - or for that matter even maintain - a standard of appropriate conduct by which others in the community could benchmark their own actions. Instead, we have for the most part ignored the self-serving and manipulative actions of our Chair, while condoning - through our collective silence - the deceit and misrepresentation of fact that has marred the Town Administrator's search.
The Board’s collective desire to “move on” and address other less-controversial issues has, in my view, cost us the respect and support of many within the community. We have failed to demonstrate the importance and value of integrity, honor, and personal accountability – the very values we profess as vital to our children’s welfare. We have failed to provide the direct leadership by which others in the community could aspire and have instead demonstrated self-serving arrogance and contempt for the truth.
Some would argue, and indeed, the acting Town Administrator (an employee of the Board of Selectmen, currently serving as the Chair’s point person) has stated that the current state of discourse on the Board falls on the shoulders of this selectman. Clearly, there may be merit in that argument. Had I simply turned a blind eye to the concerns surrounding the Town Administrator’s Search process, the frequent and somewhat dubious ethical practices of Chairman Blanchard in support her husband’s coronation as Town Administrator, one could reasonably argue that the unsettling discourse experienced these past months would not have manifested.
As well, had I remained silent while individuals were attempting to usurp the Town Charter – our very constitution – one could surmise that relationships on the Board of Selectmen would have remained undamaged. Certainly, one can reasonably make the case that I bear some responsibility for the Board’s current state of dysfunctionalism in that I have refused to remain idle, turn a deaf ear, or a blind eye to governance based upon self-serving inducements. To that end, I accept full responsibility for remaining true to my campaign pledge of principled, objective, open, and accountable governance.
Interestingly, I yesterday received an electronic correspondence generated to a mailing list encouraging residents to "run or recruit" individuals for elective and appointive office. The underlying theme of the email highlighted support for “pro-growth” candidates. It spoke not of the need for integrity, character, objectivity, or principled representation, but rather focused on pro-growth candidates who might bring a breath of fresh air to town politics. Hmmm, was this not the same argument that ushered the “pro-growth” candidates to the Board nearly two years ago? Could not a strong argument be made that little has been accomplished by same in terms of adding to the quality of life here in Sturbridge?
Thus far, one individual has stepped forward to seek our support for the position of selectman. He is by all accounts an honorable individual and one who has demonstrated character in the face of adversity. His graciousness last year witnessed by his response to a 14-vote defeat says much about him. I consider him a friend and a genuinely good individual. To that end, few if any have had occasion thus far to doubt his integrity.
My purpose here should not be misconstrued to indicate support or lack thereof for a particular candidate. Rather, it is merely to suggest that a prudent course of action would remain mindful that campaigns based upon pro-growth or limited growth, development of Route 15 or not, the expansion or reduction of Open Space purchases, etc. etc., are of little significance if there is cause to doubt the integrity of anyone aspiring for our support. True prosperity will come as a direct result of honest and transparent engagement of the issues facing our community.
Perhaps, as voters, we might focus our efforts on those qualities that will truly lead us to a path of economic prosperity and cultural vitality. Qualities such as honesty, impartiality, selflessness, and commitment to principled governance will provide the greatest foundation for ensuring our economic viability. When residents trust their elected officials and have confidence in their objectivity, they are generally more engaged and more supportive of the steps taken by those representatives on behalf of the community. Surely, the reverse is true when trust and confidence are lacking.
Would it not do us all a great deal more good to distinguish our candidates based upon the content of their character as opposed to the simplicity of whether or not they support growth on Route 15? Would we not do our community and our children more justice to seek and support candidates who would serve as solid roles models of integrity, objectivity, and principled governance? Should we not aspire for leadership that fully recognizes its responsibility and accountability to all residents within the community, as opposed to any particular group? Do not our children deserve the best leadership we can provide them?
Interestingly, in the weeks preceding Scott Brown's election, I was inundated with emails from individuals here in Sturbridge touting the need to return integrity to government. There was great fanfare about the importance of restoring transparency, objectivity, and balance to the governing process. Many voiced their concerns about the ethical improprieties that have become commonplace in all too many aspects of government. Scott Brown seems to many as the answer to these concerns. But one has to question why we should not be as equally vigilant in our concerns as it relates to the most basic level of government (i.e. locally)? Do we not hold the same set of values in terms of our locally elected officials? Would it not be to our benefit to demand the same integrity, transparency, objectivity, and balance here where it truly has the greatest impact upon our daily lives? I trust that whoever we elect will remain ever mindful of their obligation for principled governance, as nothing confronts us more directly than local politics.
There is little doubt that time will tell.
Though there has been progress and tangible achievements during the last 9 months in terms of my “7 Point Plan”, there is little doubt that this past year has been accompanied with its share of strife and disappointment. Few would deny that on the whole, the current Board of Selectmen is in a state of dysfunction. Collectively (as in working on the whole for the good of all residents) nothing substantive has been undertaken or accomplished by those of us who are responsible for providing the political, moral, and ethical leadership within the community. This is disturbing and quite unfortunate. Jointly, the Board of Selectmen has failed to demonstrate a true Power of Example as it relates to the ethical transmission of our affairs.
Collectively, we have failed to set - or for that matter even maintain - a standard of appropriate conduct by which others in the community could benchmark their own actions. Instead, we have for the most part ignored the self-serving and manipulative actions of our Chair, while condoning - through our collective silence - the deceit and misrepresentation of fact that has marred the Town Administrator's search.
The Board’s collective desire to “move on” and address other less-controversial issues has, in my view, cost us the respect and support of many within the community. We have failed to demonstrate the importance and value of integrity, honor, and personal accountability – the very values we profess as vital to our children’s welfare. We have failed to provide the direct leadership by which others in the community could aspire and have instead demonstrated self-serving arrogance and contempt for the truth.
Some would argue, and indeed, the acting Town Administrator (an employee of the Board of Selectmen, currently serving as the Chair’s point person) has stated that the current state of discourse on the Board falls on the shoulders of this selectman. Clearly, there may be merit in that argument. Had I simply turned a blind eye to the concerns surrounding the Town Administrator’s Search process, the frequent and somewhat dubious ethical practices of Chairman Blanchard in support her husband’s coronation as Town Administrator, one could reasonably argue that the unsettling discourse experienced these past months would not have manifested.
As well, had I remained silent while individuals were attempting to usurp the Town Charter – our very constitution – one could surmise that relationships on the Board of Selectmen would have remained undamaged. Certainly, one can reasonably make the case that I bear some responsibility for the Board’s current state of dysfunctionalism in that I have refused to remain idle, turn a deaf ear, or a blind eye to governance based upon self-serving inducements. To that end, I accept full responsibility for remaining true to my campaign pledge of principled, objective, open, and accountable governance.
Interestingly, I yesterday received an electronic correspondence generated to a mailing list encouraging residents to "run or recruit" individuals for elective and appointive office. The underlying theme of the email highlighted support for “pro-growth” candidates. It spoke not of the need for integrity, character, objectivity, or principled representation, but rather focused on pro-growth candidates who might bring a breath of fresh air to town politics. Hmmm, was this not the same argument that ushered the “pro-growth” candidates to the Board nearly two years ago? Could not a strong argument be made that little has been accomplished by same in terms of adding to the quality of life here in Sturbridge?
Thus far, one individual has stepped forward to seek our support for the position of selectman. He is by all accounts an honorable individual and one who has demonstrated character in the face of adversity. His graciousness last year witnessed by his response to a 14-vote defeat says much about him. I consider him a friend and a genuinely good individual. To that end, few if any have had occasion thus far to doubt his integrity.
My purpose here should not be misconstrued to indicate support or lack thereof for a particular candidate. Rather, it is merely to suggest that a prudent course of action would remain mindful that campaigns based upon pro-growth or limited growth, development of Route 15 or not, the expansion or reduction of Open Space purchases, etc. etc., are of little significance if there is cause to doubt the integrity of anyone aspiring for our support. True prosperity will come as a direct result of honest and transparent engagement of the issues facing our community.
Perhaps, as voters, we might focus our efforts on those qualities that will truly lead us to a path of economic prosperity and cultural vitality. Qualities such as honesty, impartiality, selflessness, and commitment to principled governance will provide the greatest foundation for ensuring our economic viability. When residents trust their elected officials and have confidence in their objectivity, they are generally more engaged and more supportive of the steps taken by those representatives on behalf of the community. Surely, the reverse is true when trust and confidence are lacking.
Would it not do us all a great deal more good to distinguish our candidates based upon the content of their character as opposed to the simplicity of whether or not they support growth on Route 15? Would we not do our community and our children more justice to seek and support candidates who would serve as solid roles models of integrity, objectivity, and principled governance? Should we not aspire for leadership that fully recognizes its responsibility and accountability to all residents within the community, as opposed to any particular group? Do not our children deserve the best leadership we can provide them?
Interestingly, in the weeks preceding Scott Brown's election, I was inundated with emails from individuals here in Sturbridge touting the need to return integrity to government. There was great fanfare about the importance of restoring transparency, objectivity, and balance to the governing process. Many voiced their concerns about the ethical improprieties that have become commonplace in all too many aspects of government. Scott Brown seems to many as the answer to these concerns. But one has to question why we should not be as equally vigilant in our concerns as it relates to the most basic level of government (i.e. locally)? Do we not hold the same set of values in terms of our locally elected officials? Would it not be to our benefit to demand the same integrity, transparency, objectivity, and balance here where it truly has the greatest impact upon our daily lives? I trust that whoever we elect will remain ever mindful of their obligation for principled governance, as nothing confronts us more directly than local politics.
There is little doubt that time will tell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)