I would like to set the record straight concerning my involvement in the defeat of Article 22. On March 28 the Council on Aging (to which I am the selectmen’s liaison) learned that the [Hildreth House] Phase 1 cost estimate was $195,000 over the amount funded by the 2015 Annual Town Meeting. Concerned about this overage and subsequent delays that might occur, several citizens asked to meet with me to discuss possible funding sources in the financial articles going before the Annual Town Meeting that could be used to cover this potential shortfall. After reviewing the warrant and researching Chapter 17 of the town bylaw, we considered amending Article 22 to restrict a portion of the $295,599 in free cash for any Hildreth House project overrun, with the balance to be transferred to the Capital Stabilization and Investment Fund (“the fund”). I learned, however, that such a restriction would be outside of the scope of the article and, therefore, not allowed.
After further discussion, I, along with others, agreed that a no vote on Article 22 would effectively hold back free cash from the fund, thereby giving the town the ability to apply those funds to the Hildreth House project should they be needed. I notified several town officials that this strategy was being considered.
I met with the Capital Planning and Investment Committee (CPIC) shortly before the Town Meeting commenced on April 5 regarding a citizens’ push to vote no on Article 22. I suggested that CPIC vote and state to the Town Meeting that it would make available the funds needed to address any shortfall in the Phase 1 budget. Should CPIC take this action, I felt the citizens group would probably drop its opposition to Article 22. Unfortunately, CPIC was not willing to make such a commitment, which became apparent to the meeting during the course of debate on Article 22.
My speaking in opposition to Article 22 was not to demonstrate lack of respect toward the CPIC; rather it was to provide a source of additional funding so that Phase 1 of the two-phase Hildreth House project could move ahead in a timely way. And, as noted in last week’s Harvard Press, I was joined in opposing Article 22 by two of my fellow selectmen as well as a substantial majority of the Town Meeting.
Lucy B. Wallace
Orchard Hill
