UPDATED, Oct. 16: Arlington voters next month face a ballot question on the Community Preservation Act, a measure that aims to help preserve open space and history, create affordable housing and develop outdoor recreation.
KEEPING WHAT‘S OURS: Is perception behind debate? Part 1
Simple, right? Nope. Here is one glimpse about some of the people involved on committees for and against the question. Stories will follow about other issues, including finances.
Both groups got going early. The yes committee filed paperwork with the town clerk back on June 4. Those opposed did so Aug. 20.
But viewpoints about the act, or even what the law is, have received virtually no public attention in Arlington until recently. Discussion began Sept. 25 with a lengthy post to the Arlington email list by Dean Carman, a Precinct 20 Finance Committee member. Writing in opposition to the law, he has since regularly posted entries from his blog >>
Comments public, private
Others chimed in, and Carman continued to post, until Adam Auster, a yes supporter, responded in a briefer way Sept. 25. That continued to be the pattern of debate among the two sides for the next two weeks, with frequent tangential threads, as occurs on the 17-year-old list.
An attempt to give the discussion weightier public visibility fell through.
An Oct. 3 Advocate a news brief reported that representatives of both sides would discuss their positions at the Oct. 9 School Committee meeting. Selectman Joe Curro (yes) and Capitol Planning Chair Charlie Foskett (no) said they would provide five-minute statements. Both promised to provide their statements for publication to YourArlington after their scheduled presentations.
They did not happen: Two days before they were to occur, committee Chairman Bill Hayner pulled the agenda item. He has not responded to three requests for comment about why he did so. YourArlington has learned from another published source that he was under pressure from committee members.
The tension on the School Committee over the Community Preservation Act (CPA) derives from the fact that Hayner chairs the vote-no group and his six colleagues all are listed as supporters of the CPA on the yes group’s website.
So why can’t committee members disagree? They can — and do — but often out of site of the public.
Starks email reported
An email sent Oct. 7 by member Cindy Starks — reported at Trupersons.com — asked Hayner “one more time (while there is still 48 hours to post the change) to remove the Community Preservation Act from our agenda.
“You stated that you did not like that some of our names were placed in support of it on the CPA website and we have remedied that by following legal counsel suggestions as to how to word it and added wording stating that neither the school committee nor the board of selectmen have voted to support or not support this measure on that website.
“You are using your role as chair of our committee to place on the agenda an item that many of us have stated does not belong.
“You are also breaking the law by using public resources (our meeting time) to attempt to affect the outcome of an election.
“You do not have the right to strong arm this committee into discussing something it does not want to take up.
“And you have no right as the head of the anti-community vote to address this issue at our meeting.”
Harrington wrote in a post reporting his comments at the Oct. 9 meeting that he was making a formal request for the School Committee to provide a written explanation of its actions in 14 days. Hayner has been asked to provide the School Committee’s response.
Responses from Hayner
In an email YourArlington received from a source, Hayner addressed each point that same day to all committee members:
” … As I have said verbally and in writing several times I have not and will not ever deny the right of any individual to support or oppose something. As I have stated it is the way it was done that gave the perception that the Committee had taken a vote. The Selectmen did take a vote in support of the CPA by allowing it to come to Town Meeting with a 4-1. They are on record supporting it when they could have voted NO ACTION.
“… I have been directly contacted by two members to remove this from the agenda. One member voice concerns that I was suggesting they could not place their name followed by School Committee in support of the CPA, I addressed this person in an e-mail. I received an e-mail stating that a change was requested to the CPA site.
“… This committee supports in the affirmative and negative several questions that come before the voters. As I have stated before Mr. Curro, brought the Town Meeting question regarding the appointment of certain elected officials. If my memory is correct, the Committee decided that we would not get involved which is an option here.
” … No member can be forced to discuss anything.
” … I wished to remind you that when I assumed the Chair I indicated that I thought that as the Chair, I should not participate in discussion and a majority of the members said that I was a member and should actively participate. As stated verbally and in e-mails, I have brought this forward as the Chair in response to several people asking when the Committee voted to support the issue. You have stated this is their problem in not reading things carefully or misinterpreting. Again as stated several times, I disagree, perception is how many people view the world, not by facts.
” … Several people have indicated in the media that the School System will benefit from the CPA passing. No member has indicated that this will not happen. One of the Co-chairs of Arlington Community Preservation Act Ballot Question Committee has stated that the majority of the School Committee is supporting their position. Again, PERCEPTION.
“This item will take no more than 10 minutes unless members decide to speak. The choices are to:
“1. Vote to support the CPA
“2. Vote to oppose the CPA
“3. Take NO ACTION and move on to the next item on the agenda.”
YourArlington received an updated agenda, with the CPA item removed, about 4 p.m. Oct. 7 and changed the agenda on its website to reflect the matter.
Series to address other concerns
Differences among School Committee members about the ballot question illustrate one aspect of the ballot question. Others include financial issues that turn on the words used by those in town to make their cases for or against. That will be the subject of another report.
Vote-no committee | Supporters
Vote-yes committee | Supporters
Opinion: Schlichtman provides context
This story was published Friday, Oct. 10, 2014, and updated the next day to add a link as well as Oct. 16. This is the first in occasional series. The author supports a yes vote for the CPA as a citizen and as publisher, but strives to be impartial in reporting about this issue.
If you want comment on issues related to the Community Preservation Act, or this story, you may do so at the comment link below this blog entry >>
