Tuesday, April 12, 2016

Select Board: Just Say No

Jones Library right, Strong House history museum left Kinsey Garden circled in red

Not surprisingly the Amherst Select Board, our current executive branch of government, voted unanimously to recommend dismissal of Town Meeting warrant article #41 that would prevent the Jones Library from touching a single plant in the Kinsey Memorial Garden located immediately behind the Library and prime turf for a potential $30+ million expansion/renovation.

Click to enlarge/read

The "citizens petition" article, unanimously opposed by the Jones Board of Trustees, is only advisory so even if Town Meeting approves it by majority vote there's no legal requirement for the Library to follow the advice.

 Kinsey Memorial Garden

By far the more important land use decision for the Library would already have been made prior to Article #41.


Land immediately adjacent to the Kinsey Memorial Garden, also green space currently occupied by the Strong House History Museum 18th Century Garden, is required for the Jones Library to do the preferred expansion design.

Article #31, which requires a two-thirds vote, would change the zoning on that property to General Business from the current General Residential.   That would allow the cash strapped Amherst Historical Society to sell the property to the Jones Library for their expansion/renovation. 

Monday, April 11, 2016

Charter Commission: Show Us The Money!

Charter Question passed with a 60% majority 2,039 to 1,340

The Amherst Charter Commission overcame ideological differences and voted unanimously in favor of a $30,000 request to Town Meeting for overhead costs over the next year or so, mainly in the form of a professional consultant or two.

Motion states "for engaging consulting services"
Click to enlarge/read

The Commission spent an hour discussing the pros and cons but very early in the process they all agreed by consensus that a consultant or two would definitely be required.

 Amherst Charter Commission (meeting in the Bangs Community Center)

The three skeptical members -- Meg Gage, Gerry Weiss and Diana Stein -- were concerned the Commission was asking for too much too early in the process.

But they were convinced by the other six who favored the $30,000 from the start, but said it would most likely be necessary to go to the Fall Town Meeting to ask that some of that money be reallocated to other Charter related expenses unrelated to consulting.

Andy Churchill, now Commission Chair, had written and submitted the Town Meeting article early in the process in order to make the deadline for this upcoming session, and now it's too late to change the wording to broaden it beyond use of "consultants".

They all agreed to divvy up a list of towns in the state who are engaged in or recently finished the Charter process to ascertain what they spent and for what services.

Article 35 will probably not come up until late May, so they have time do research and come up with data to support their request.

The Charter Commission also voted to set their first state mandated Public Forum for Thursday, May 12th in the Amherst Regional Middle School auditorium from 7:00 PM until 9:00 PM.

Annual Town Meeting starts May 2nd with a 45 article warrant, 13 of them "citizens petitions," which are often time consuming.

Meanwhile, meeting at the same time over in Town Hall the Select Board announced the three finalists for permanent Town Manager:


Sunday, April 10, 2016

Dear Charter Commission


Dear Charter Commission Members,

I am writing to encourage you all to cast a vote of support for asking Town Meeting to fund a consultant to the charter commission process and to bring such a request forward at the Spring Annual Town Meeting, rather than waiting till Fall Special Town Meeting.

I understand that during the lead up to the election, there was considerable controversy in the community about the need for a Charter Commission. The election, though, is now past. The voters of the Town have weighed in, and a Commission has been established.

It is time now to dive into the work in as thorough, above board and comprehensive a way as possible. Procuring a reliable funding stream for expertise to help guide that process seems entirely prudent, as does doing so from the outset of the process rather than somewhere down the road.

I have responded, below, to some of the specific objections I have heard related to those viewpoints.

"It is too early in the process. Postponing the use of a consultant will engender a spirit of trust and good will in the Commission Members themselves."

If it is good practice to hire outside expertise to guide a charter review process, which a quick Google search seems to indicate is the case, then the Commission should be engaging in that good practice from the get go.

That is what will ultimately engender trust—researching, establishing and carrying out the best possible practices for working together on behalf of and in collaboration with the community.

Efficiencies gained through the availability of consultancy support will free Commission members for the important work of purposeful deliberation and outreach. These are the tasks that I think we want most to entrust in you, our elected representatives, not the more menial legwork and clerical aspects of the process.

"The Town employs too many consultants. We should be able to do this work with expertise already on the Commission or in the broader community."

It is true that the Town hires many consultants. But is this the area to begin skimping on that kind of investment? We are not just talking about where we should park our cars or whether to put in a round about or traffic signal. We’re talking about considering fundamental changes to the way in which we choose to govern ourselves. Surely this rises to a level of importance that merits the seeking of outside support.

"It is expensive."

The costs associated with establishing a Charter Commission, including financial costs, were one of the often-touted reasons for suggesting a No vote on the petition article. And yet, the measure passed by a significant margin. The voters knew the ramifications of what they were voting for or against. As did the Charter Commission candidates.

Mr. Weiss, in explaining why he didn’t sign the charter petition, had this to say: “It’s costly in terms of people’s time; staff time (they must attend every meeting; prepare ballots, count signatures, ensure transparency); town money (the town must pay all costs including hiring a consultant as was done for the last Charter Commission)…”

Doesn’t it seem a bit disingenuous to state ahead of time that the town would have to spend money on a charter consultant if a Commission were established and then get voted onto that very same Commission and vote to deny or delay said money?

"Town Meeting might vote down the request."

This is true. But not before having the opportunity to give full consideration to the merits of the proposal as well as to offer amendments from the floor if so desired (including amendments to the amount of the appropriation). Why not trust in that process? And, even if the measure should fail this spring, wouldn’t it be possible to bring it back in the fall, anyway?

"The Charter issue is too divisive and funding a consultant to the process would just add to the divisiveness."

As Charter Commission members you have an opportunity to combat the spirit of divisiveness rather than feeding it. A unanimous vote in favor of funding a consultant to the charter process—to ensure a thorough and efficient vetting of the options available to us as a Town, as well as the range of viewpoints within the Town—would go a long way in setting the stage for a spirit of constructive dialog and deliberation as opposed to division. Lets get off on the right track!

I don’t know, exactly, where I hope the Charter Commission process leads, in terms of specific recommendations for change or modification of our current form of government.

I do know, though, that my hope is for the process to be one that is as open, honest and constructively thorough as possible. Hiring a consultant to help guide and support this complex and vitally important process seems to me to be an idea based not only in common practice, but also in common sense.

I urge your support.

Thank you so much for taking my input into consideration and for your willingness to assume such a far-reaching and important task on behalf of the community.

Sincerely,

Marcy Sala

Sunny Sunday Over Amherst Construction


Crotty Hall, North Pleasant Street, adjacent to Gordon Hall
UMass Design Building
UMass Physical Sciences Building just getting started
 Olympia Place dorms, Olympia Drive near UMass (top right)
Amherst College Greenway Dorms
 
One East Pleasant Street, town center.  Still doing asbestos removal before total demolition
R.W. Kern Center, Hampshire College
Hitchcock Center, Hampshire College

Saturday, April 9, 2016

When Balding Is A Good Thing

The Hanger (left) will host St. Baldrick's event on Sunday

Local police, firefighters and compassionate citizens in general will make their way to the Hangar Pub and Grill's new location on University Drive Sunday morning at 11:00 AM for a unique fundraiser that will leave their heads hairless.

The St. Baldrick's Foundation focuses on children with that most devastating of all diagnoses, cancer.  And unlike a lot of charitable organizations all the money raised goes directly into research.

This fun family friendly event for a serious cause is open to the general public and will run until every head is shaved.

 AFD Captain Bill Dunn gets it done


Friday, April 8, 2016

Downtown Construction Commences

Jersey barriers have sprouted on Kendrick Park


The north end of downtown will get a major cosmetic improvement this summer with the undergrounding of ugly utility poles and lines all along the eastern side of Kendrick Park.

Last year the state awarded us a $1.5 million MassWorks grant to cover the costs of the infrastructure improvements.


Click to enlarge/read
 East side of Kendrick Park will be off limits to bikes and pedestrians

The town is also moving ahead next year with a roundabout at the East Pleasant/Triangle Street intersection which is a main gateway to UMass, our number one employer.

One of the provisions of the $1.5 million MassWorks grant was for the town to do something to improve that intersection.

Intersection of Triangle and East Pleasant Streets will go the way of roundabout

Mega School Update

New school footprint would shift to the rear of current Wildwood location

A couple dozen concerned parents/guardians showed up last night to the Regional Middle School for a public forum on the Wildwood School Building project, which of course now includes Fort River School under the same roof.

 30 people total at the forum, about one-third of them town officials

Although proponents are quick to point out the footprint of the new two story mega school will actually be smaller than the current footprint of Wildwood alone.
The Wildwood Building Committee had convened a couple hours earlier to hear the same presentation from the consultants, although only 12 of the 22 members were in attendance.  

Both newly elected School Committee members were in attendance, Laura Kent as a participating member of the Building Committee and Anastasia Ordonez in the audience.

Although when Ms. Ordonez tried to interact she was shushed by School Committee Chair Katherine Appy because her presence constituted a Committee quorum and it had not been posted as a public meeting.

The consultants confirmed the project was still on track for an Massachusetts School Building Authority September meeting to approve the schematic design and their May meeting for an overall approval which garners a 55% or so reimbursement rate on the $64.4 million overall costs.

 Wildwood Building current cost estimates

Amherst officials will then bring a Debt Exclusion Override to Town Meeting in November for approval of the $30.6 million town share of the costs.  That requires a two-thirds vote of Town Meeting, and then a majority of the Select Board must agree to place it on the local election ballot for town wide approval.

At Monday night's Select Board meeting Chair Alisa Brewer skewered Doug Slaughter over his final report of the Joint Capital Planning Committee to Town Meeting for showing a Debt Exclusion Override on the immediate horizon to fund Wildwood while also showing both Jones Library expansion and new DPW building, but not even mentioning the South Fire Station.

The town is looking at over $100 million in costs for the four major upcoming building projects -- Wildwood, Jones Library, DPW, and Fire Station -- and so far no BIG picture plan has been formulated to fund them.

If the Wildwood School Building project manages to negotiate the challenging funding gauntlet ahead the plan is to use decommissioned Fort River School property as a location for the new $30 million DPW building.   And the old decommissioned DPW on South Pleasant Street would become the location for the new South Fire Station.

Gray area in front of new building is current footprint of Wildwood.  Hawthorn on far left

The current plan for Wildwood construction is to build half the building behind Wildwood,  move students into it and then demolish the original building.  Phase 2 would be the second half of the new building, with students from Fort River moving in upon completion.

Playing areas for the children are a concern since the topography of Wildwood is hilly and a fair amount of pavement is required to handle the 23 buses needed for transportation.

The current schematic shows use of the Hawthorn property, although that too is hilly and will require expensive landscaping not currently in the $64.4 million school building budget.

Assistant Superintendent Mike Morris also said a "land use agreement" could be worked out with the Regional School District for use of the adjacent Middle School playing fields.

Two schools will share kitchen and gymnasium