Last night the venerable Amherst Select Board unanimously passed (with one abstention) an advisory resolution supporting the "public process" about to commence with the Gateway Corridor Project, a unique coalition of three significant public entities: UMass, the town and the Amherst Redevelopment Authority.
(Aaron Hayden abstained on the supportive vote as he is also a member of the ARA.)
While this may appear at first glance a common sense, non-controversial edict, the subtle purpose was to offset a petition delivered to the Select Board last December decrying the broad nature of the public input process and demanding a series of public meetings focusing on the misperception that Gateway is simply a means to "adding a substantial number of undergraduates to old Frat Row."
The ARA meets this evening to choose a consultant (estimated cost $30,000 in state money) to lead the "visioning process" over the next four months. Let the wider public input begin.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
This just shows that insiders rule the roost and public input is always just for show. The fact that people even belong to more than one entity, whether they abstain from votes or not, proves this is a sham. Even Larry, who spends his time pretending to be an outsider, is just part of the machine.
Feel free to file a complaint with State Ethics Division.
You forgot to mention as part of your grand conspiracy scenario that ARA Chair John Coull is Select Board Chair Stephanie O'Keeffe's father (and notice she did not abstain).
Because she already asked in writing the State Ethics Division, and they responded that it was NOT a "conflict of interest".
Actually, it goes to show that insiders don't always get swayed by the minority opposed to the project just because they make the most noise.
Because THEY have a conflict of interest.
Really, the minority has the confict of interest? Even though they are on the outside just trying to be heard. Even though they are the only ones that actually live with the noise and mess from the students? Even though the outcomes are predetermined against them? Larry, you are bought and paid for.
even if Larry is a nitwit
he is not a cowardly anon
bach
Maybe conflict of interest is a bit strong whereas the majority sees the benefits of the project with little or no direct downside, the minority's (read: noisy) partial perspective only sees the downside.
Majority rules.
Usually not in Amherst. But "The Times They are a-changin'."
There is nothing cowardly about anonimity. If there was, we wouldn't have the Stealth Fighter now would we?
So now my Anons are equating themselves with a highly training, disciplined, elite fighting force?
Yikes!
Post a Comment