Last Friday morning, School Committee Chairman and Capital Planning and Investment Committee member Keith Cheveralls sent the following e-mail to Board of Selectmen Chairwoman Marie Sobalvarro, with copies to the other selectmen, Town Administrator Tim Bragan, George McKenna, and members of the Advisory Committee to the Board of Selectmen:
Madame Chair,
While we are all entitled to our opinions, formally legitimizing in any way a lack of respect for the expressed will of the town is, to me, unfathomable.
The Board of Selectmen, by their majority decisions of Tuesday night, created and endorsed a new advisory committee comprising, in part, three former members of the MBC—two of which articulated their reluctance to adhere to the will of our town as specified at Annual Town Meeting. To state the obvious, Town Meeting is our highest order of local government. It is also more longstanding than many, if not all, of our town buildings.
A stunning, almost overwhelming, amount of volunteer time spanning many key boards and committees, went into working recommendations and compromises to try and help save the day at Annual Town Meeting. We somehow succeeded, on that day, in speaking to the town with one eloquent voice through the powerful delivery of the Statement of Intent by Chairman Warren—(copy attached as read). The town’s response was overwhelming and humbling. I respectfully submit that that response must be nothing less than the call to action.
Moving forward, one can only surmise that the recent infusion of clear-thinking new members as these projects now hopefully advance, combined with a strong oversight function and a clear, unambiguous charge document will bring objectivity and newfound respect for good town process, to say nothing of all the hard work of the other committees whose support will be critical for success in front of the voters.
For my part, though clearly disillusioned at the proceedings and outcome of Tuesday’s meeting, I look forward to working much more closely and harmoniously with the new Advisory Committee for Town Hall and Hildreth House schematic designs through my continued service on the Capital Planning and Investment Committee.
Sincerely,
Keith Cheveralls
Quarry Lane
Cheveralls’ e-mail exemplifies a notion held by some, that the Town Meeting vote approving Article 17 (Municipal Buildings) was conditioned by the so-called Statement of Intent. Nothing could be further from the truth.
As reported in the Harvard Press, April 22, 2011, Reporter’s Notebook: “The story behind the Articles 17/18 ‘great compromise’,” the Statement of Intent read by Selectman Peter Warren, following his reading of the revised Article 17, was not part of the motion voted by Town Meeting. It was not available as a handout to voters, and only a few copies were circulated among selectmen, Finance Committee members, and Capital Planning and Investment Committee members moments before their votes prior to the start of Annual Town Meeting. No public hearings were conducted, there was no opportunity for public comment, and negative input from Municipal Buildings Committee members standing on the periphery of these assemblies was ignored.
To be sure, there was effort, mediated by Town Administrator Tim Bragan, to develop a “memorandum of understanding” between the Municipal Buildings Committee (MBC) and Bill Johnson, who represented the 22 signers of the citizens’ petition that put Article 18 (Municipal Buildings) on the warrant, but that effort broke down late Friday afternoon, the day before ATM, and the document being negotiated became a “Statement of Intent.” This statement was to be adopted by the Board of Selectmen (BOS), with the understanding that Article 17 would be changed to eliminate two words—”and expansion”—pertaining to schematic design for Town Hall, and that expansion of Hildreth House would not be funded by the town. MBC members spent Friday evening preparing handouts and presentation materials consistent with that understanding, but Bragan and Johnson spent the same time making further changes to the Statement of Intent to be considered the next morning by BOS.
After Warren, who had been BOS liaison to MBC, read the motion and the Statement of Intent and praised Bragan for his role in bringing the process to the point of a revised Article 17 and the promised withdrawal of Article 18, MBC Chairman Ron Ostberg made a brief statement, outlining what MBC recommended:
“As a result of the BOS’s effort to find a constructive path forward, the MBC endorses the following:
- Town Hall
The MBC reduces its funding request to reflect the design of one scheme. The scheme will work within the existing footprint to maintain the full upper Town Hall space and enable a future addition to the building. - Hildreth House
The MBC recommends that a portion of the renovation and addition be funded privately. This portion would logically be the addition. - Old library
MBC agrees with the goal of leasing the old library so all costs of renovation and ongoing operations and maintenance are funded privately. Further, the MBC concurs with the goal of using the old library for temporary town offices should that prove the most economical. The MBC recommends that the Pilot Project continue to be supported by the BOS.
Consequently, the funding request for Article 17 is reduced from $225,000 to $185,000.”
MBC member Pete Jackson then gave a lengthy presentation, speaking to the handouts that were available to all present, consistent with Ostberg’s comments, but at odds with some of the last-minute additions and changes in the Statement of Intent.
There were a few comments from the floor, including at least two (Donald Boyce, Paul Green) objecting to the change of scope without public review. There were no comments speaking to the conflicts between the MBC presentation and the Statement of Intent.
Indeed, the vote was overwhelming. Even though a two-thirds vote was required, no count was needed. In this reporter’s mind, the positive vote was unrelated to the Statement of Intent. The fact that the MBC responded to the main thrust of the opposition—keep the cost of the project in check by eliminating expansion—and gave voters assurance that this could be done without compromising the quality of the outcome, is why the vote was positive.
Hooray for the majority of the BOS and their decision to move forward without handcuffing the new committee with the Statement of Intent as its mandate. Let’s continue the process that has worked so well to this point—appoint our best and brightest to oversee major projects, give them broad, general guidelines, and get out of their way.
Unfortunately Ron Ostberg has just resigned from the newly formed advisory committee. He told the Press Wednesday that he believes the remaining members can do an admirable job for the town.
