Editorial: Cast Aside Politics and Fear, Vote Yes for the Override

By 11 Comments

Photo: The Yes campaigners. 

The Belmontonian endorses a “yes” vote on Question 1, the Proposition 2 1/2 override measure on the ballot to be decided on Tuesday, April 7. 

This question allows residents the opportunity to follow “the better angels of our nature,” when we can set aside manufactured tension and fear and replace it with good, positive, constructive acts.

The proposed override was born after a year-long gestation by the Financial Task Force of sober, careful analysis and facts of the financial constraints facing the community. The task force – including Selectman Mark Paolillo, Town Treasurer Floyd Carman, Town Administrator David Kale, School Committee Chair Laurie Slap, Capital Budget Chair Anne Marie Mahoney and Charles Laverty III of the Board of Assessors, all respected for their dedication and work for Belmont – held dozens of open and public meetings and forums, requested information and data and worked cooperatively with all.

The task force’s final report recommended the Belmont Board of Selectmen call for a $4.5 million multi-year override to both stems the rapidly growing funding deficit due to skyrocketing enrollment and rapidly increasing expenses in our schools. In a vote called a “brave decision,” the Selectmen unanimously approved the recommendation in February.

But just as vital as supplying funding, the override secures up to three, but likely many more years of stability for Belmont schools. While not ideal or even desired, assured level-funding will provide educators over the long-term, Town Meeting and our state legislators the time to commit to fundamental improvements and other necessary changes to retain the outstanding reputation of the schools, our community’s greatest resource.

The override will exact a burden onto Belmont property owners, about $650 on the medium valued house assessed at $847,000. No one should say it’s “only” $162 on the quarterly bill; that is a hardship to some.

But it is time Belmont residents face the fact the community has been attempting to run a modern, urban municipality on the cheap. Belmont has one of the lowest average tax bills in the state and an extremely low cost-per-pupil expenditures (coupled with one of the highest student-to-teacher ratios). It’s little wonder the town is a laughing stock for it’s disgraceful roads, but that happens when you won’t pay an adequate amount for their upkeep. The band Midnight Oil spoke to what Belmont needs to realize: “The time has come/To say fair’s fair/to pay the rent/to pay our share.”

There are worthy opponents to the override. Former Selectman Anne Marie Mahoney, a task force member, is opposing the ballot question as she takes the lonely role of sponsoring the large ticket capital projects – a new High School, police station, Department of Public Works complex to name a few. Her cause requires Town officials and Town Meeting to be acknowledged and brought fully into the fold of long-term planning.

The same can not be said for the “Vote No on Ballot Question 1 Committee,” a tiny renegade group from the Warrant Committee, made up of members past and present, supporting its campaign with little more than empty phrases and promises.

The No committee claims its complaint with the override supporters is fiscal, the Financial Task Force’s careful analysis on revenue assumptions by well-respected town members is wrong, the recommendation producing a “mega” override. All that is needed is to fill the announced $1.7 million deficit the schools will encounter in the next fiscal year.

The Nos has no completing reports to back its claim the money is out there; they counter with “trust us.”

What should take every resident aback is the solution being proposed from the Nos if the override is defeated; this group of non-elected residents will come before the elected Board of Selectmen with their “list” of residents and town members they hope to see on an unelected “budget committee” which will solve the fiscal issues facing the town, all within “three to six” weeks.

The questions that arise with this “solution” are numerous and unnerving:

  • Will the “budget committee” be open to all or closed to a few?
  • Who will lead it?
  • Will it have any authority?
  • Shouldn’t it be approved by Town Meeting before it starts?
  • Will the committee be subject to the open meeting laws?
  • What if the solution from the “budget committee” differs from the renegade Warrant Committee members?

The No committee is making it up as it goes. Its solution is not based on democracy, but power.

And, to misquote Hamlet, therein lies the rub: The No Committee’s mission is political, not financial. The amount could have been $4 million, $3 million or $2 million, the Nos would have pegged the override with the puerile label “mega.”

But the prime target for the Nos is the schools and the “hardcore” union representing Belmont teachers. It wouldn’t surprise anyone that the Nos have circulated lists of teachers pay prompting one supporter wondering at candidates’ night paying a kindergarten teacher $90,000. Several times, one member of the group have suggested that the union must be made to heal to lead the town into a financial nirvana. In addition, by providing annual funding rather than a long-term approach, the school district will be beholden to the “budget committee.”

If the Nos had declared its agenda up front, they would be seen as honest brokers, rather than a very small fraternity of political operatives.

With only seven contributors and a campaign paid by a single source, the Nos remain a powerful opponent, playing to a substantial number of residents who view Belmont as the same small town of several generations past, those who believe providing a “good enough” education – in a world that punishes those who are only “good enough” – is what is required, while nervously viewing their own finances as economic forces beyond everyone’s reach ever change.

We, Belmont, must reject the fear and mistrust being pushed by the No committee.

We, Belmont, must be for something, rather than be opposed to stability and taking responsibility for the true cost of running the town.

We, Belmont, must grab the opportunity to move forward with facts and realism rather than be led back with half truths and the empty “trust us.”

Vote for the override.

One-Woman Show: Financial Report Shows Allison Self-Financing ‘No’ Effort

By 6 Comments

Photo: Elizabeth Allison.

Move over, Koch brothers and Tom Steyer; you may think you have a big influence on politics, but you guys have nothing on Elizabeth Allison.

According to a campaign finance report filed March 30 with the Belmont Town Clerk, the Chair of the “Vote No on Ballot Question 1” committee has all but self-financed the effort to defeat the Proposition 2 1/2 override before voters on April 7.

The report which is filed eight days before the election with the Town Clerk shows Allison contributing $5,000 of the $5,640 given to the committee – about 91 cents of every dollar taken in – which saw a grand total of six residents donate to the “No” committee since mid-March.

Of the committee’s leadership, both Campaign Treasurer Raffi Manjikian or Robert Sarno failed to contribute to the fund (although Sarno’s wife, Judith, put in $100) while Jim Gammill pony upped $10.

In addition, Allison made two “in-kind” contributions totaling $1,642.62, raising her total tally to $6,642.62.

On the other side of the ballot question, the “Yes for Belmont” Committee shows a far greater depth in the number of contributors and total money raised. Nearly 80 residents gave less than $50 and 66 more than $50 for a total of $17,385 raised from more than 145 residents since Jan. 1. On top of an opening balance of approximately $6,500, the “Yes” side had a little more than $23,900 on hand.

Nearly all the money raised on both sides have gone to print firms to create yard signs and other promotional material.

Going into the critical final week of the race, the “No” committee was running on empty with less than $200 in reserves while the “Yes” had $13,268.

Over in the Selectman’s race, the incumbent Andy Rojas flexed his money-raising muscles by taking an impressive $21,000 from about 80 contributors, which added to a running balance in his war chest of $11,300, gave the current chair of the Board just about $32,300 to use in his race with challenger Jim Williams. Contributors included members of the Planning Board, former colleagues Ralph Jones and Liz Allison, the School Committee’s Lisa Fiore and former Boston Herald business writer Cosmo Macero.

Interestingly, while not contributing to the “No” committees coffers, Manjikian ($150) and Gammill ($200) ante upped for Rojas.

In the final eight day, Rojas was sitting on just over $19,000 for any last minute push.

First-time candidate Williams found about a quarter of the number of residents – and some out-of-towners – contributing as the Glenn Road resident raised $6,055 since mid-January. Unlike the “No” campaign, Williams has been able to spend very little over that time and can use his remaining $5,359 to impress voters in the final week of the campaign.

Heated Election Emotions Spurs Plea for Civility from Town Clerk, Top Cop

By 2 Comments

Photo: Ellen Cushman.

For the past few weeks, Belmont’s Town Clerk Ellen Cushman has been receiving an increasing number of calls, emails and personal visits from residents on the same topic, the Proposition 2 1/2 override on the Town Election ballot set for April 7.

But the residents were not seeking information about the Question 1. Rather, they showed Cushman examples of vitriol from neighbors or strangers on what side they took on Question 1: angry personal attacks in email and notes left on their property, political signs taken or destroyed, biting comments on social media.

“They’re upset that people are attacking their character for a political position,” Cushman told the Belmontonian Thursday afternoon, April 2.

“It’s been very bad tempered and personal,” she added.

After hearing from Belmont Police Chief Richard McLaughlin that his department has received similar messages, Cushman decided it was time to act by sending an extraordinary email to Town Meeting Members, elected officials, and town department heads to call for a return to civility in the election season.

Under the subject line, “The Community of Belmont – We All Share Responsibility,” (see the email below) Cushman spoke of “rising tide of negative emotion and malicious deeds and speech” against residents on the override question. Declaring she “abhor(s)” the actions taking place, Cushman is calling for those receiving the email to ask anyone they see participating in such acts to stop them and have the people return to “respectful discourse.”

The note is the first time the long-time Belmont resident can recall a town official requesting residents to remain civil during an election. Heated campaigning is not new to Belmont, infamous for the poison pen letters sent days before elections impugning the character of residents seeking town office.

(The Belmontonian has recently deleted Facebook and website comments for phrases and words that questioned poster’s characters.)

After speaking to McLaughlin, Cushman felt the underlying current of ugliness that “people were afraid to have conversations” about the election.

“It reached s a point where someone needed to notify residents of what’s happening,” said Cushman, hoping that residents realize they will still be neighbors on April 8.

While most of her focus is on the day of elections, Cushman said her mandate also is to make sure residents have the right to participate in the election process.

“Honestly, all I’m attempting to say is just be respectful,” she said.

The email from Belmont Town Clerk Ellen Cushman:
As the chief election official of the Town of Belmont, and in consultation with the Richard McLaughlin  our Chief of Police, I must call your attention to a rising tide of negative emotion and malicious deeds and speech regarding the Override, April 7th .   I have the utmost respect for the many volunteers who are active and willing to help educate our voters on this important issue, but I also realize that people cast their secret ballots for a myriad of reasons that I must also respect. Belmont needs the help of all of our elected and appointed officials to get back on track.  Some of the more outrageous examples of this problematic behavior:
  • Vicious emails have been sent to individual residents, stating that other residents “hate” the person who has announced an intention to vote a certain way
  • Political signs on private property, both Yes and No, have been removed
  • Handwritten notes containing aggressive, distressing language have been attached to political signs on private property
  • Facebook posts, online commentary and blogs that question the integrity of an individual volunteer rather than examine the person’s political stance
As a lifelong resident of Belmont, I’m not proud of those behaviors, I abhor them. They do not send a positive message to our children and neighbors; they send a message of personal attack, harassment and disdain.
Belmont is just over four square miles in area containing 25,000 residents. On April 8th, that won’t change. What I ask of you as one of Belmont’s elected and appointed officials is simple:
 
When you hear or see someone denigrating or criticizing our Belmont neighbors, stop them! Ask them instead to participate in a respectful discourse, not a campaign of hate but one of cooperation. Whatever the outcome on Tuesday night, Belmont will continue to rely on our many volunteers to keep our town strong and a wonderful place to live.  Let’s start displaying that respect right now.

Market Returns to Center as South End’s Foodie’s Market Set for Macy’s Spot

By Leave a Comment

Photo: The Foodie’s Market on Washington Street in Boston’s South End. 

The owner of the former Macy’s department store announced today, Monday, March 23, it has signed a lease with a small but growing Boston-based grocery chain to occupy nearly a third of the space in Belmont Center. 

Belmont’s Locatelli Properties said Foodie’s Urban Markets, which has operated a store in Boston’s South End since 1999 before expanding in the past two years into Duxbury and South Boston, will lease 15,000 square foot in the building located on Leonard Street. 

“Our goal is to bring an exciting mix of retailers and restaurants to Belmont Center,” said Kevin Foley, manager of Locatelli Properties.

The deal marks the return of a grocery store in Belmont Center two decades after the previous retailer, J. Bildner & Sons, closed its doors at 69 Leonard St.

Foley told the Belmontonian in December he would seek to fill the nearly 50,000 sq.-ft. commercial space with a range of national, regional or independent retailers and restaurants as tenants.

“Right now, I’m hoping spring or summer 2016 to open,” he told the Belmontonian.

Foodie’s, as it is know to legions of South Enders, was the first up-scale grocery and market on Washington Street 16 years ago as that Boston neighborhood began its gentrification. The now three-store company is known for prepared dinners and lunches, specialty departments, beer and wine selections as well as home delivery service.

‘Lights’, ‘Camera’ … Belmont’s Studio Cinema Returning to ‘Action’

By 1 Comment

Photo: The Studio Cinema in Belmont.

The interior lobby just got a recent coat of gray paint. The concession counter has a new top. There are LDC billboards hung on the wall displaying ticket prices and show times. And there are posters proclaiming coming attractions such as the 2015 Academy Awards winning film “Whiplash.”

Belmont’s 96-year-old movie palace, the venerable Studio Cinema, is ready for her latest close-up.

After closing just before the New Year and after months of speculation, owner Jim Bramante said the landmark on Trapelo Road will soon be back in business.

“I’m very close to being back in operation, in about a week or two,” Bramante told the Belmontonian on Wednesday, March 18.

For the past two-and-a-half months, the future of the building at 376 Trapelo Rd. was in doubt as Bramante and a handful of Belmont town departments including fire and inspectional services sought to resolve existing structural and safety issues at the century old building. In mid-January, the outlook for one of the few remaining single-screen movie houses in the country appeared bleak as the two sides came to an apparent impasse.

But Bramante said an agreement was reached in February and work has been progressing to allow the Studio to reopen.

“I’m waiting for another final inspection,” Bramante said, saying there had been a delay in getting the operation going “as there has not been a lot of coordinating within town departments.”

While the cinema is returning, the same can not be said for Cafe Burrito, Bramante’s Mexican-inspired storefront next door to the theater that opened in September 2012 serving “Mission-style” burritos and espresso drinks.

“After a great opening, business got slower and slower until the first of the year, I decided to just shut the door,” Bramante said, noting the business climate “has been one of the worst I’ve ever seen.”

Bramante has not yet decided what to do with the site.

Citing Precedence, Selectmen Deny Jimmy’s Food Mart Beer/Wine License

By 4 Comments

Photo: The owners of Jimmy’s Food Mart, Surinder Kaur Dhaliwal and Parmjit Singh with their attorney, Steve Rosales, before the Board of Selectmen.

Citing a precedence in opposing past applicants which failed a fluid set of criteria, the Belmont Board of Selectmen unanimously denied a license to Jimmy’s Food Mart to sell beer and wine from the store at the corner of Belmont and School streets.

“This is about fairness,” Selectman Sami Baghdady told the Belmontonian after the meeting held on Monday, March 16, referring to the board’s recent denials to a pair of Trapleo Road businesses which failed to meet a benchmark of requirements set when the board OK’ed a full liquor license for the Loading Dock on Brighton Street in May 2014.

“If we denied LC Variety and Trapelo Variety

for not meeting certain community standards, how do we approve Jimmy’s when they also failed to do so? That’s unfair to the others,” he explained.

The board’s decision now places the future of Jimmy’s Food Mart into question.

“I don’t know if we can stay open,” said co-owner Parmjit Singh told the Belmontonian after the meeting.

Singh said he heeded the board’s suggestions made by the board three weeks prior when he and his wife and co-owner Surinder Kaur Dhaliwal, first presented their application for a beer and wine license.

“We did all they asked. Why did they now reject us? The business is changed to what they wanted,” he asked Belmont attorney Steve Rosales, who represented the couple.

In their application, the owners informed the town the store would provide popular and affordable brands of beer and wine, products in demand as the four current beer and wine and full liquor license holders in Belmont are providing selections that are viewed as more selective.

“I don’t know about you, but I like,” said Rosales.

At the meeting in February, the board informed the couple it would view their license application more favorably if they fundamentally changed their business model from a corner store selling the staples and sundries into food preparation and a “market”-style operation. The meeting was continued until this Monday.

Singh and Dhaliwal bought the shuttered site of the former Shore Drug in 2013 and opened it as a convenience store in January 2014. The store is managed by their son and business partner, Jimmy Singh. Since opening, neighborhood reaction has been overwhelmingly favorable, with residents commending the owners for operating a clean and inviting business.

Hannah Haynes, who lives on Lewis Road, said Singh polices the area including keeping the sidewalk clear of snow beyond the business’ boundaries and conveniently staying open into the night.

“For someone who works late, I appreciate the light and activity the store brings to the street,” Haynes told the board.

Since the February meeting, the store has set aside a significant square footage of floor space to accommodate South Asian foods, products and fresh “to-go” foods, transforming the store into an “international” market. Singh said he has not yet created a spot to serve or consume food since he would need to obtain a common victualler license.

While praising the new business plan the board strongly suggested Singh and Dhaliwal adopt, and the owners’ decision to voluntarily end tobacco sales, Baghdady said the business, “still doesn’t feel right to me that you have lottery sales.”

“Honestly, [lottery sales] is inconsistent with your business plan,” said Baghdady, telling the owners they would “do better if you got off the lottery and focused on the ethnic food products.”

Singh told the board lottery sales allows the store to stay in operation, providing the business a small profit to soften the high cost of doing business at the site including a $4,000 a month rent in addition to other fees and taxes he must pay.

“I need the lottery. It’s very hard for me to make my money [from the store alone],” said Singh, noting that similar Indian stores in Somerville, Cambridge and surrounding areas all sell lottery tickets to customers who are from South Asia.

Baghdady would not budge from his and the board’s demand the store abandoned lottery sales, noting the “precedence” set in rejecting two previous applications.

Rosales told the board the precedence from the Loading Dock decision was if an establishment wanted a full liquor license, “then you give up [lottery and tobacco] sales.”

The pleas did not move the board.

“I clearly understand that the lottery is a revenue source, but I don’t think you have it tonight, unfortunately,” said Selectman Mark Paolillo.

In addition, the Board noted traffic issues existed on nearby Lewis Road – running perpendicular to Belmont on the same block as Jimmy’s – which could be exasperated with vehicle traffic from Jimmy’s customers.

While Lewis Road residents were critical of the parking and traffic on the roadway at the February meeting, they were nearly universal in commending the owners in their commitment to operating a neighborhood-friendly store.

“I encourage you to keep working on your business plan, expand your business and when you’re ready, then come back,” said Baghdady, suggesting a return is possible in “eight months.”

“I don’t know how they are not ready now?” queried Rosales.

The board voted to accept Baghdady’s “itemized reasons” for denying the application; “I don’t think the use is capable with that neighborhood, I think a lottery license is incapable with our previous decisions and until the Traffic Advisory Committee does take some action on Lewis Road, I think this affects traffic in the residential areas.”

When asked if the board has established a “criteria” for future beer and wine applicants must follow, Baghdady said the board’s new “guidelines” should be taken into consideration by any business seeking a beer and wine license.

“They should know what we expect from applicants,” said Baghdady.

The presence of an unwritten set of rules applying troubled Rosales, a past member of the Board of Selectmen.

“Let me just say personally, [unwritten guidelines] would have been unthinkable when I was a member of the [board of selectmen],” Rosales told the Belmontonian.

When asked to elaborate, Rosales declined with a shake of the head.

When asked if the board has established a criteria future beer and wine applicants must adhere to, Baghdady said the board’s new “guidelines” should be taken into consideration by any business seeking a license.

“They should know what we expect from applicants,” said Baghdady.

When told of the possible closure of the year old operation, Baghdady said the owners should not have based a business decision on the “hope” they would receive a beer and wine license.

“They should have made opening the business contingent on receiving a license, not the other way around,” he said.

Selectman Candidates’ Question of the Week: Mitigating the Impact of Belmont Uplands

By 8 Comments

Photo: Jim Williams.

Every Wednesday leading up the Town Election on Tuesday, April 7, the Belmontonian will be asking a “Question of the Week” to the candidates running for a seat on the Board of Selectmen: incumbent Andy Rojas and Glenn Road resident Jim Williams.

This weekly feature will allow the candidates seeking a three-year term on the board to answer topical questions concerning Belmont and help demonstrate their ability to lead the town.

This week’s question: Over the three-year term beginning on April 8, what will you do to mitigate the expected effects of the 299-unit Belmont Uplands development on town resources and the local environment?

Jim Williams

The proposed development in the Uplands is a situation where we have to prepare for the worst, and collaborate to achieve the best outcome. While it is, of course, disheartening to see the Silver Maple Forest surrounding the Uplands disappearing, there is still much that I, as Belmont Selectman, can be done to ensure that the developer adheres to 40B affordable housing regulations. The environmental impact is also of utmost concern and traffic issues must be addressed. 

We must prepare now for the impact of an additional 299 housing units will have on town resources and our already over-crowded schools.  My plan is to work with the developer and the town with the goal of ensuring the best outcome for the Uplands and the Town of Belmont. 

First, we need to determine the net cost to the town based on the number of units, number of residents, and impact on our utilities. We do not have clear estimates for the number of additional children; nor do we know how traffic patterns and congestion will impact us. It is my understanding that, as of yet, the Board of Selectmen has not run a model nor have they asked the planning board to develop a model to estimate costs of services, and look at any benefits from tax or other revenue. How can we prepare for the strains on our system if we aren’t willing to make projections?

Second, major environmental concerns are two-fold: flooding and pollution. The developer is using storm water data from 1961; when in in actuality the 2011 rainfall statistics shows 150,000 gallons in excess storm water. Not only is there a risk of flooding, the excess storm water also impacts pollution at the site.

Third, the developer needs to proactively fund and put in place certain measures to mitigate traffic. The most practical change we can implement to help with traffic would be to build the tunnel under the railroad at Alexander Avenue. This has the potential to reduce traffic on Brighton Road, one of the roads which would be most severely affected by traffic from the Uplands development.

I believe the most alarming challenge we face with the Uplands development is the sheer increase in population; which means more cars on already less-than-acceptable roads and a further strain on our town services, such as police and fire, and utilities like sewer and water and electricity.  Furthermore, our school system is growing at an unprecedented rate, and an additional rapid in-flux of students into our already overcrowded schools may push us to a breaking point.  

All of this requires fiscal discipline and diplomatic solutions to ensure that we balance the outcome of the Uplands development with our current and future needs. I have a proven track record in ensuring that the best outcomes are achieved within the parameters of our financial constraints and available revenue. My plan shows promise and potentially and optimistic outlook for the Town. Facing our financial problems head-on is the only way we are going to preserve the town we love.

Andy Rojas

As required, because all necessary state permit conditions had been met, the Community Development Department recently issued a foundation permit for the Uplands residential development; project construction will now begin in earnest. The full impact of this project on Belmont will take a number of years to be felt. However, the town must prepare for the aftermath of this unfortunate occurrence and deal with any immediate effects.

  • This is an area where my extensive site development and mitigation experience will be extremely helpful to Belmont.

Since the project is comprised of five separate residential buildings, it is likely that the impact on Belmont’s services — schools, police, fire, etc. — will be felt in waves as each construction phase is completed. However, the primary environmental impacts on flooding and habitat destruction will likely be apparent as soon as the site has been cleared of vegetation in preparation for foundation construction.

Protecting the Belmont neighborhoods most directly affected by the environmental consequences of the Uplands development will be a central theme of ongoing reviews and approvals during construction. I am committed to using my site development and mitigation expertise in helping to protect these neighborhoods.

  1. I will work with the Community Development Department and our construction control team to make sure that all construction activity adheres to the law and to all applicable environmental regulations and best practices.
  2. All environmental impacts relating to water management, stormwater control/storage and natural habitat disturbance will be monitored to make sure that the project abides by approval conditions.
Andy & Smudge Rojas - IMG_0779

Andy Rojas and Smudge.

Accommodating the Uplands’ projected post-construction requirements for town services will be very challenging. Uplands property taxes will not cover costs.

As each project phase is completed, the school-age population will increase; students must be absorbed and placed appropriately. While projections of student numbers are an inexact science, Belmont will inevitably be faced with providing quality education, transportation and perhaps additional mandated services to this larger population. I will work closely with the Schools Superintendent and the School Committee to carefully gauge and accommodate this influx from start to finish.

The Uplands’ other projected demands on town services such as police, fire and emergency response will also require constant monitoring and adjustment; much of this will happen as each construction phase is completed. Given the Uplands’ geographic location, the town departments affected may require additional personnel and vehicles to properly service the completed project.

A police sub-station within one of the buildings is a possibility. While this will be a bigger burden for Belmont, as a community, we must support the life, safety and security of our new residents.

My experience with these departments as well as with my understanding of their capabilities, needs and budgets will allow me to work with them so we can address these challenges effectively.

I respectfully request your vote for Selectman on Tuesday, April 7, 2015. Thank you.

As Town Clarifies Permit, Belmont Uplands Opponents Speak Out

By Leave a Comment

Photo: The entry to the Belmont Uplands site in October. 

As the town clarifies what the building permit issued this past Friday, March 6 to A.P. Cambridge Partners II – the developer of the proposed $70 million, 299-unit apartment complex at Belmont Uplands – will allow the development team to do, opponents to the long-delayed project have begun to speak out on the effect of the project will have on Belmont and surrounding communities.

“The issuance of a building permit to executives from Prudential Real Estate Insurance and developer Brian O’Neill appears to confirm that neither the town of Belmont nor the [Commonwealth] of Massachusetts consider it their duty to protect the public and the earth from pollution and flooding … ,” said Anne-Marie Lambert of Chilton Street, who has been a strong critic of the proposed complex being built amidst the Silver Maple Forest in the Alewife Reservation.

After two decades of plans, proposals (that included a commercial research and development building in the early 2000s), lawsuits and delays, Belmont’s Director of Community Development Glenn Clancy as town engineer issued the first of three permits allowing the Philadelphia-based O’Neill Properties Group to construct a five-building complex situated on 15 acres on the Cambridge line on Acorn Park Drive.

“The permit is the approval for foundations for each of the five buildings,” said Clancy Monday, March 9.

Clancy said the development team has acquired the necessary paperwork to being utility work at the site that is a stone’s throw from Route 2 and Arlington.

The actual building permit to do the remaining work that includes the framing and actual building is pending final sign-off from the Fire Prevention Office, said Clancy.

“A final building permit to do all work on the foundation is the only outstanding approval I am aware of,” he told the Belmontonian.

The town has been handcuffed in imposing local zoning bylaws on the proposed development as O’Neill is building the complex under the state’s Chapter 40B law.

Enacted in 1969, the law allows a developer to bypass local restrictions if the municipality’s housing stock is less than 10 percent is deemed affordable for moderate-income residents and when the builder sets aside a specific percentage – at Belmont Uplands it will be 60 units – for buyers with income less than the 80 percent of the median in the region.

For those who have kept a constant battle to prevent the construction of the development, the permit comes after six months of increasing evidence – the clearing of the site of trees and vegetation beginning in October and a recent request to allow the placement of construction parking – O’Neill Properties was preparing to begin actual building.

For Idith Haber of Oliver Road who is president of the Coalition to Preserve the Belmont Uplands, the town’s issuing O’Neill a building permit continues the lack of support groups that have been attempting to thwart the project, which included the Board of Selectmen withdrawing a lawsuit backed by the town’s Conservation Commission.

“The Coalition believes that issuing the building permit similarly inappropriate,” said Haber.

Both Haber and Lambert have long contended the site can not sustain a major development as it will impact local neighborhoods – in Belmont around Little Pond – with increased flooding and to the public health due to the potential of higher-than-expected stormwater activity.

“[It] appears to confirm that neither … Belmont nor the (Commonwealth) of Massachusetts consider it their duty to protect the public and the earth from pollution and flooding which will result from the undisputed 150,000 gallons of storm water runoff this project will generate,” Lambert said.

In 2014, Lambert presented data showing the amount of storm water at the site used by O’Neill to win approval by the state to move forward with the permitting process underestimates the storm water levels by a large percentage since the developer uses data published in 1961 instead of rainfall statistics from 2011 due to the impact of global warming.

With this new data, O’Neill would be in violation of the town’s Storm Water Bylaw passed by Town Meeting last year.

“It is shameful that [the developer] claims to have sensitivity to environmental issues yet invests in a project which blatantly ignores current climate change reality,” stated Lambert, adding that “ensuring enforcement of Belmont’s stormwater bylaw regulations throughout the town is also critical.”

While the town has issued the permit, there remains pending litigation filed to enforce Belmont’s stormwater bylaw and the Massachusetts Clean Water Act. Clancy said the court did “not explicitly” say the town could not issue the go-ahead.

“The applicant proceeds at their own risk,” he said.

Despite the town’s action, Haber has received words of encouragement to continue the fight.

“We continue to receive a lot of moral and financial support from Belmont, Cambridge, and Arlington residents,” Haber said.

BREAKING: Building Permit Issued to Belmont Uplands Developer

By 2 Comments

Photo: A protest at the site of the Belmont Uplands in November 2014. 

After years of legal battles and delays, the Office of Community Development has issued a building permit today, Friday, March 6, allowing construction to begin on a $70 million, 299-unit apartment complex in the Belmont Uplands section of Belmont.

“Please be aware that today a building permit was issued for foundation work at the Belmont Uplands site,” wrote Glenn Clancy, the Community Development director in an e-mail memo to town officials and selected residents. 

“AP Cambridge Partners has fulfilled all requirements under the Zoning Board of Appeals Comprehensive Permit and the Massachusetts State Building Code necessary to secure a building permit,” noted Clancy of the site that borders the Cambridge town line and is part of the Alewife Brook Reservation. 

Pennsylvania-based O’Neill Development has long planned to build hundreds of market-rate and subsidized apartments under the state’s Chapter 40B law which allows developers to bypass local zoning requirements if a municipality’s housing stock is less than 10 percent affordable.

The project has for years been stalled by a series of legal actions, notably by the Belmont Conservation Commission and the Coalition to Preserve the Belmont Uplands after the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection gave its OK for the development to proceed. 

In addition, a sprawling apartment complex has been seen by the town as having a detrimental impact on the school district with hundreds of additional students entering a system bursting at the seams with higher enrollment.

Development of one sort or another has been proposed for the site since the late 1990s which included a commercial building.

More to come in the Belmontonian.

Schools Budget Deficit Fix: Teacher Layoffs, Increased Class Sizes, Lost Ground

By 1 Comment

Photo: The Wellington Elementary School will lose a third-grade teacher with the acceptance of the available revenue budget in fiscal year 2016.

When asked her reaction to the presentation by Belmont School Superintendent John Phelan on the details of cuts facing the district, Jamie Shea at first just shook her head.

For Shea and others who attended the Belmont School Committee meeting Tuesday night, Feb. 24, the impact on education in bridging the anticipated $1.7 million facing the district in the coming fiscal year was akin to listening to an eulogy for the reputation of a proud district.

“It’s extremely sobering to hear the potential cuts we all are facing,” said Shea, who is the current president of the Foundation for Belmont Education, the group that supports excellence and enrichment in Belmont’s six schools.

“It would be transformative to the district. It will impact every single student in the district. Every single one,” she said.

Phelan said the district – which he has been in charge since July – will not be the same to the one which many families moved to Belmont to attend.

“The Belmont Public Schools will struggle deeply to meet the expectations of their students and families that they so rightly deserve. If there were a headline from this presentation, it would be ‘Available Budget Impact Students Experiences Negatively,” Phelan told the Belmontonian after the meeting.

The cuts are necessary due to a historic surge in enrollment, higher expenditures for special education and unfunded state mandates.

During Tuesday meeting, Phelan walked the committee and residents through the components in each school group – elementary, middle school and high school – where savings will be made.

The cuts, which were compiled by the Leadership Council – made up of school principals, senior staff and curriculum directors – are significant and deep by most measures.

(The presentation can be found on the school district’s website.)

Most of the retrenchment, $1.3 million, will come in personnel with the elimination of 22 full-time equivalent professional positions, with the remaining amount coming in less support for instructional material, personal development and facilities and increase fees for student actives and full-day kindergarten.
The cuts include:

  • In the elementary schools, the elimination of more than seven aides, the Butler, Burbank and Wellington will lose guidance counselors, a reduction in music education and physical education and the firing of a third grade teacher at the Wellington.
  • At the Chenery, there will be wholesale cuts to the long-standing team teaching model in English, math, science social studies and world language in sixth through eighth grades, the eliminate of all eighth grade music and art electives, cutting sections of small group reading and a large reduction in library services.
  • Belmont High School will see the elimination of English, math, social studies and fine and performing arts teacher while all the World Language teachers will be reduced to part-timers.

District wide, the science director will be let go as will a preschool teacher. A reduction of instructional material and supplies, facilities, and professional development while student and rental fees are increased.

In total, Belmont will lose more than 14 teaching positions and nearly ten aides.

For classroom teachers, the cuts will fundamentally change the relationship with their students, said John Sullivan, the president of the Belmont Education Association, which represents Belmont teachers and aides in salary negotiations.

“You can’t get to know [your students] personally, to know when they are upset about something and then reach out to support them. It changes the entire student experience,” said the Belmont resident who teaches at Belmont High School.

While the cuts in teaching staff and other savings will drain the system of its red ink, the impact on students will be significant, said Phelan. For example:

  • Three of every four elementary students, about 1,300, will be in taught in classes exceeding the school committee’s guidelines for effective education.
  • Junior and seniors in high school – more than 600 pupils currently enrolled – will be limited to five courses in a seven-course schedule.
  • The average class size for math and English at the high school will be more than 27, effecting 1,250 students.
  • More than 300 seniors will be unable to take courses that will impact their chances being accepted at high-performing colleges and universities.
  • More than 300 students in the middle school will be heading to study halls due to the cuts in fine and performing arts.

The cut of the science director will seriously delay the district’s plan to move forward with STEM (science, technology, engineering and math)-related courses which national leaders are calling crucial for all citizens to know.

And the loss of aides and guidance councilors in the four elementary schools will reduce the effectiveness of the district’s Response to Intervention services that identifies educational challenges for young students as well as addressing the social and emotional needs of students.

The magnitude of the cuts was unsettling for those who oversee education in Belmont.

“I think it has the potential to really decimate the system,” said Laurie Slap, School Committee Chair.

“What struck me was that one of our colleagues said that it was so sad to see educational opportunities just shrink for our students from K to 12 especially in the high school. Five courses? That isn’t what anyone expects from this district.”

Phelan said the district, and especially Belmont High School, has been worn down over time by trimming courses and reducing staff. With this major hit

“The reductions we are proposing and the elimination of positions are rooted in the methodology in what we need to do first and what we would like to do second. Our ‘likes to do’ are now are stables and cores – the everyday things – in districts that surround us. We will lose even more ground with the proposed budget,” said Phelan.

For Phelan, the School Committee and many attending the meeting, the only way to preserve the district’s reputation is for the passage of a $4.5 million Proposition 2 1/2 override recommended by the Financial Task Force in January.

“I support the Task Force’s recommendation for the fiscal health of the entire town. If that fiscal health is brought back to a certain level through an injection of funds that goes to sidewalks streets police, fire, and schools, the whole town is a better place,” said Phelan.

At the end of the meeting, Slap said that everyone in town needs to know what the choices they face and everyone needs to get informed to understand what the cuts means to the district.

“It’s important that people get informed and understand what the reductions will bring if we do not pass the … override and get to the polls,” Shea told the Belmontonian.

“Hopefully we can get a coalition of different coalition of different constituent groups that can work cooperatively to make sure our students get the best education they can,” said Sullivan.