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.

Final Pitch by Override Campaigners Provide More Answers and Questions

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Residents attending the final Precinct Meeting before the Town Election on April 7.

The community room at the Beech Street Center was filled Monday, March 30 with more than 200 residents who came to attend the final Precinct Meeting hosted by the Belmont Board of Selectmen and the Financial Task Force.

But it wasn’t so much the opportunity to hear, once again, the details of the town’s fiscal 2016 budget and the Proposition 2 1/2 override on the April 7 Town Election ballot; there have been more than a dozen presentations to the public and groups in March.

Rather, it was a last-minute addition to the agenda that brought the crowd to the center: the opportunity to hear presentations and have public questions answered from representatives of the two sides of the override question facing voters.

And while the position of those seeking the passage of the $4.5 million, multiyear override has been articulated to the public for several weeks – approving the override is necessary to prevent large cuts to school personnel and programs – Monday would be the first time those calling for a “no” vote would detail its opposition and the course of action if it is successful in defeating the ballot question.

For Adam Dash, who has become the voice of the “Yes for Belmont” committee in the past week, the argument for backing the override – which will add approximately $650 in taxes annually to the “average” Belmont house valued at $847,000 – is simple enough: the time has come to pay the rent.

IMG_3528

With 49 line-item cuts in the school department’s fiscal ’16 budget, “it’s mind–numbing it’s so long,” he said.

“It’s … a time to stand up and do what we need to do to accomplish the goals of the town,” said Dash, standing behind a slide with an orange “Yes” behind him.

He also questioned the “No” side’s assurances that the a $4.5 million override is not needed as additional revenues can be found to fund the schools this year “are just assumptions, and assumptions can be wrong.”

Dash compared those pushing the ballot question with complaints of teacher salaries and contract negotiations to Shakespeare’s King Lear bellowing into the tempest, (“Spit, fire; spout, rain”) as they rage against what is out of their reach.

“When the house is on fire, we have to … act now and then do other things later,” Dash said.

“In the big picture, it’s what do you value?” said Dash, saying good education and educators costs money.

“Yes is the action moving forward … and looking at long-range planning while no is just the same old system where we just kicked the can down the road,” he said, telling the audience the easiest way to remember that the override ballot is on the back of the ballot is to recall the phrase, “back the override.”

Holding court for the Vote No on Ballot Question 1 Committee was current Planning Board member and former Warrant Committee Chair Elizabeth Allison, who started by praising “this wonderful town” with many great qualities including a “terrific” school system that, if it was its “small country,” Belmont students would quantitatively be “the best in the world.”

IMG_3531

The No committee’s starting point is the same as those supporting the override; funding a level service budget for the schools in fiscal ’16, knowing it will need $1.7 million in additional revenue to bridge the deficit gap.

“The school bus is in the ditch, and we need to pull it out,” said Allison.

But what the no committee doesn’t accept is the path override supporter are mapping. While saying she has admiration for the work of the Financial Task Force, but its financial projections for the town’s revenue growth is “too pessimistic,” running below the ten-year average.

While the no committee bulwarked its argument with data and numbers, its also sought to make political points with voters by attacking labor and unions. While much as been made of the skyrocketing enrollment forecast of nearly 800 more students in the next ten years and accelerating costs in special education and English language instruction, Allison pointed to teachers pay and other compensation as being the greatest cost driver impacting the school budget.

A victory on election day for the ‘Yes’ position “will ratify the hard-liners in the teacher’s union who say, ‘Just keep on going … push through five percent, five-and-a-half percent pay increases a year,” said Allison.

With higher taxes on households, another expensive collective bargaining settlement and higher overall municipal expenses, Allison said voters would not be in the position to support the much needed new Belmont High School with a temporary debt exclusion that will top $1,000 over several years.

Allison outlined the No committee’s alternative course of action, “a road better taken,” to that of the override; calling on the Board of Selectmen to form a “work group” – to include the “new school committee member with an MBA from a school out west” – to produce a “new spin-on-the-ball revenue forecast” since it does not believe the current low estimate.

In addition, the new group would look at cost solutions and seek reallocation of funds “from one department to another” to fill the gap the schools face.

If at the end of that process there remains a deficit, the Board of Selectmen can then call a special election to vote on a “reasonable and justified override on the ballot.”

The No approach provides transparency, keeps taxes down and prepare for the fiscal 2017. Allison suggested one way to cut future costs was for the Superintendent of Schools John Phelan to seek a waiver of the state unfunded mandate on teaching children requiring English learning.

(After the meeting, Phelan said no district has been granted such a waiver and those systems that have not followed the state requirements “to the letter” have been taken to court.)

Selectman Mark Paolillo, a member of the Financial Task Force, defended the revenue projections noting he felt “comfortable enough” with the task force’s assumptions.

During the one-hour long question and answer segment of the meeting, the majority of questions were directed to the No committee, seeking clarification to its blueprint.

Allison said many concerns from Yes supporters will be resolved when the added revenue “baked in” the budget estimates is uncovered. And even if the no side’s estimates “fell short,” most residents will vote for a new, modest override, “perhaps not happily but its so much better for the schools than the alternatives.”

“In the end, people will not damage the schools,” Allison said.

“This approach is a one-year Band-Aid; you’re going to right back where you were. It doesn’t solve anything,” said Dash. “We can build a beautiful high school but if you have a deficient program, what’s the point?”

When asked if the No committee could guarantee that the schools will be adequately funded next year if the overrides doesn’t pass, Allison said there is “a high probability” that nearly the entire $1.7 million needed with more realistic revenue projections.

In addition, Allison said if the $4.5 million override passes, the town is not required to use the entire amount where proponents hoped it would go.

“You have no guarantee that the large designated slice of the pie will go to the schools,” suggested Allison, adding that if there in no cost containment on teacher salaries, it will be very difficult to sustain the schools.”

Asked by a Belmont High School freshman the effects of losing “20 teachers” if the override fails, Robert Sarno, one of the leaders of the “No” committee as well as the chairman of the Warrant Committee’s subgroup that analyzes the school budget, said even in the worse case scenario, only about six or seven full-time equivalent teaching positions will be lost.

“You’re not going to lose that many teachers,” said Sarno.

In the most illustrative moment, Phelan demonstrated Belmont’s student to teacher ratio in relation to all districts in Massachusetts. Holding up six pages from a state-issued report, Phelan took out the fifth page to show that Belmont’s 17.1 ratio is far from the state average of 13.6.

“We’re not that far from the sixth page, and that has only four entries,” he said.

The final question came from a resident concerned that High School students are not meeting the hours of instruction the state requires each pupil to obtain.

Phelan said many upperclassmen at the high school are barely meeting that minimum and “I believe our hours will be at risk” if the override fails.

“I encourage that if [the override] doesn’t win, that those people who supported it, call the state,” referring to an intervention by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

Selectman Candidates’ Question of the Week: Making Belmont Business Friendly

By 1 Comment

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:

The long-standing perception – going back generations – held by many business owners is that existing town bylaws and how they are interpreted by town departments creates a negative environment for retail and commercial ventures in Belmont. As Selectman, how would you make Belmont more “business friendly” for small retail and mid-size commercial companies?

Jim Williams

I am running for Selectman because I know that Belmont is a great town that needs more in the way of support for our residents and businesses.

Having worked with small and large companies my entire career, I am of the belief that local business helps round out the community – from contributions to tax revenue to the donations they make to our neighbors. The specific ways Belmont can support its local business community is outlined in the Vision 21 Business and Economic Development Committee’s recommendations from 2005.

We should immediately implement this town-appointed committee’s recommendations, as we should with other thoughtful recommendations that have come from similar committees. One specific example of what I would recommend is the finalization of the Community Path, because research shows that community paths in other towns improve business vitality. The same should be true in Belmont.

As I have repeated, initiatives that support our whole community are my first priority which is why you should consider me for Selectman.

Andy Rojas

Streamlining the various approvals and permit processes within Town departments is critical to attracting new businesses – large and small. Many new business owners are:

  1. confused by the many requirements for permits which vary by use and must be obtained from departments with jurisdiction over specific permits and approvals, including the Building and Health Departments; and
  2. overwhelmed by the length of time, number of hearings and professional fees needed to obtain approvals from the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA).

Streamlined Communications & Checklists

The Planning Board and the ZBA are implementing streamlined applicant communications to reduce project review and approval time. My appointees to the Planning Board and ZBA have in-depth professional process experience that allows practical goals to be developed and requirements to be communicated clearly.

  • A well-defined checklist for each required regulatory process — Planning Board, Zoning Board of Appeals, Building Permit, Health Department, etc. — should be created so applicants can tailor approval efforts.

Electronic Processes

I have begun the work needed to produce efficient, transparent approvals and permitting processes. Many cities and towns have fully electronic building permit processes that let applicants track, monitor and pay for permit request processing without contacting departments or plan reviewers. Electronic transparency also allows department heads to monitor and evaluate reviewers to determine whether each application is being processed efficiently. While Belmont’s computer software permits this level of electronic building permit processing, further implementation is needed.

  • I will partner with the Community Development Department so a fully transparent electronic building permit application and review process can be implemented within the next year.
Andy Rojas - IMG_0799

Andy Rojas

 

Business — Specific Districts

The Cushing Square Overlay District (CSOD) should be updated to incorporate these efficiency measures. Revisions should be such that requirements are communicated to business applicants effectively and approval criteria are efficient and transparent.

New overlay district by-laws should be considered for Waverley Square and South Pleasant Street which will likely see development. They should be written to protect residents and, so they include clear goals and approvals processes; all business should know what to expect from day 1.

  • I am committed to leading this effort and to using my expertise and Belmont know-how to make it work.

Current Progress

Business district retail and commercial ventures such as Alchemy 925, Savinos, Il Casale, Spirited Gourmet, and Foodies (coming soon) have increased as issuing more restaurant and alcohol licenses has made Belmont more attractive to businesses. The Belmont Center and Trapelo Road Reconstruction Projects, Macy’s redevelopment and Cushing Village construction will provide even greater commercial and retail growth and improve the prospects for existing small and midsize retail and commercial firms.

Providing businesses with clear, easy-to-navigate building and permit processes will expand Belmont’s commercial tax base, something vital to our long term financial stability, help mitigate the impact of residential taxes that currently comprise approximately 94 percent of Belmont’s revenue and result in a business-friendly vibrant shopping and dining environment.

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

Town Clerk: The FYI on the Annual Town Election

By 1 Comment

Photo: Election day in Belmont.

The annual Belmont Town Election will take place in one week, Tuesday, April 7, 2015, according to Town Clerk Ellen Cushman.

And below is information that will make the process of casting your ballot all the easier.

Voting Places

For voting purposes, Belmont is divided into eight voting precincts, located as follows: 

  • Precinct 1 – Belmont Memorial Library, Assembly Room, 336 Concord Ave.
  • Precinct 2 – Belmont Town Hall, Selectmen’s Room, 455 Concord Ave.
  • Precinct 3 – Beech Street Center, 266 Beech St.
  • Precinct 4 – Daniel Butler School, Gymnasium, 90 White St.
  • Precinct 5 – Beech Street Center, 266 Beech St.
  • Precinct 6 – Belmont Fire Headquarters, 299 Trapelo Rd.
  • Precinct 7 – Burbank School, Gymnasium, 266 School St.
  • Precinct 8 – Winn Brook School, Gymnasium, 97 Waterhouse Rd. (Enter from Cross Street)

Please adhere to the posted parking restrictions and use caution to ensure safety of pedestrians around the voting precincts.

Election Day Campaigning

The Town Clerk and the Board of Registrars of Voters reminds all residents that no campaign signs, stickers, buttons or materials may be displayed within 150 feet of each polling place. This prohibition, per Massachusetts General Laws, Ch. 54, §65, even extends to a candidate whose name is on the ballot, when the candidate is not actively voting.  The maps that display the 150 foot radius are posted on the Town Clerk’s website under Campaigning: Running for Elected Office and Town Meeting.

Are You Registered to Vote in Belmont and Eligible to Vote April 7? 

If you are wondering if you are a registered voter and/or your voting precinct, please go to the

Town Clerk’s webpage

or phone the Town Clerk’s office at 617-993-2600. 

The deadline to register to vote and make changes to voter registration such as address was March 18 at 8 p.m. Any forms received after that date or not postmarked by that date will be process AFTER the April 7 election.

Election Results – How Do I Find Out the Results?

Election results for each precinct are announced by the Warden of each precinct after the close of the polls. The Unofficial Townwide Results will be announced at Town Hall and posted on the home page of the Town website as soon as they are available Tuesday evening or phone the  Town Clerk’s office at 617-993-2600 on Wednesday morning.  Campaign representatives are welcome to wait at Town Hall for the printed results.

Opinion: Belmont’s ‘No’ Nothings; The Override Offers Voters a Choice: Financial Planning, or Finger Pointing?

By 1 Comment

Photo: Torn textbook.
By Paul Roberts
 
We didn’t need Warrant Committee member Adam Dash to hold up a student’s tattered, 20 year old text book, as he did at last week’s Candidate’s Night debate, to grasp the depths to which our Town of Homes has fallen. Nor did we need him to heft the softball sized piece of pavement dislodged from a pothole outside his home to appreciate the truth of what he was saying: Belmont has woefully neglected in its infrastructure, schools and town services for too long.

We understand the truth of what Adam said viscerally. As parents, we have seen our own children’s classes swell even as course offerings shrivel and fees jump. We crouch in decrepit carols at the crowded Belmont Public Library and skate around the bird droppings at the Viglirolo ice rink. Our cars drop into cavernous potholes.

If these are problems for you, as they are for me, then you expect and deserve to be told how your vote – “YES” or “NO” –on the proposed $4.5 million Proposition 2 ½ override will help to address those problems.

Our town’s leadership has a clear answer and a plan based on research and study by the Financial Task Force. It was the Task Force that recommended passage of the $4.5million override as a first step to putting Belmont back on track. In brief: revenue from the override will fund a yearly increase in investments in road and sidewalk repair. It will hire and retain teachers to keep course offerings in place and allow Belmont to add classes to respond to a sharp increase in student enrollment. Money will be set aside to create a budget stabilization fund to address future needs. This is the plan and vision that the YES for Belmont campaign is working to realize.

In contrast, the “No Override” campaign that has emerged in recent weeks has no plan for addressing those issues. Not only does the group not have a plan, they don’t even have an explanation for the problems that face our Town of Homes.

What the No campaign does offer is a lot of folksy sayings. Campaign Treasurer, Mr. Raffi Manjikian, speaking opposite Mr. Dash at Candidates Night, said that after Belmont voters rejected the override, the town would “go back to the drawing board” and “sharpen our pencils.” What would be on that drawing board? What specific problems would those pencils be pressed into solving? He couldn’t say.

Asked by attendees at Candidates’ Night how the town and schools should cope with immediate issues created by the failure of the override, such as a projected $1.7 million school budget deficit, Mr. Manjikian offered no concrete ideas.

Asked how the town should respond if the planned cuts at Belmont High School in the wake of a “No” vote put the town afoul of the state mandatory minimum of 990 instructional hours, Mr. Manjikian had no thoughts.

Asked to explain how it was that our neighbor Lexington – which also gets 86% percent of its annual revenue from local property taxes – saw fit to pass $5.3 million in overrides to Belmont’s $0.00 in the last decade to support schools, roads and public safety, Manjikian brushed the question off, seemingly incurious about the goings on next door.

 
Paul Roberts a Town Meeting Member from Precinct 8 and the editor of Blogging Belmont.

Is Your Street Going to be Paved this Year? Here is the List of the Lucky 13

By 1 Comment

Photo: Concord Avenue.

The Belmont Board of Selectmen made residents along 13 streets very happy by approving a $107,800 contract to town’s pavement management consultant which lists those roadways to be reconstructed during the 2015 construction season.

According to town engineer and Community Development Director Glenn Clancy, the roads include:

  • Charles Street (from Slade to Orchard)
  • Edward Street (from Orchard to Waverley)
  • Holt Street (from Lexington to 25 feet east of Knowles)
  • Orchard Street (from Common to Beech)
  • Richmond Road (from Prospect to Lawrence) 
  • Somerset Street (from Pleasant to Shady Brook)
  • Warwick Road (from Common to Carleton)
  • Wellington Lane (from Concord to Somerset)
  • Winthrop Road (from Common to Charles)
  • Garden Street (from Washington to Long)
  • Concord Avenue (eastbound from Common to Cottage, and westbound from Cottage to Common)
  • Hastings Road (from Common to Brettwood)
  • Elm Street (from School to Payson)

‘Yes’, ‘No’ Sides Push Their Positions – Financial and Political – at Candidates’ Night

By 7 Comments

Photo: Adam Dash (left) and Raffi Manjikian at the Candidates’ Night.

It’s alway smart to have a prop on hand to make your point.

To demonstrate the necessity of the $4.5 million override to be decided by Belmont voters at Town Election on April 7, Yes for Belmont’s Adam Dash brought a threadbare textbook without its cover and a slab of asphalt to the lectern at Candidates’ Night on Thursday, March 26.

“Let’s be clear what voting no means,” said Dash, holding up “an actual level service quality text book” along with a piece from “my street,” before more than 100 residents attending the Belmont League of Women Voters’ sponsored event at the Chenery Middle School.

“We will see more and more of this,” said Dash, a member of the Warrant Committee for the past six years.

“We are not going to fix his by nibbling around the edges. I’m sorry, but this will cost money, it just does,” Dash told the audience, which were favorable deposed to his argument as noted by dozens who stood in a steady rain holding orange “Yes for Belmont” signs.

Yet Raffi Manjikian, the treasurer of the resident’s committee opposing the override, spurning the request for additional taxes to pay for skyrocketing enrollment and added expenses is not an anti-school vote, pointing out he has four children attending Belmont schools.

Rather, a no vote would be a rejection of “bad assumptions” – such as being “too conservative” in estimates of revenue and expenses – made in a year-long analysis of town finances by the Financial Task Force, which recommended “this mega override.”

“We voters have been given an unfair choice of a $4.5 million override. It’s not all or nothing; there are alternatives and the time to get the job done,” he said in his opening statement.

A “no” vote would give “an unambiguous message to our leadership to get back to the table, sharpen their pencils and manage our public finances wisely,” said Manjikian.

Yet to Dash and the “yes” supporters, a “no” vote transmits “is a bad sign to the people and a bad sign to the kids that we are not willing to do step one” for them.

The night of answering questions – it was hardly a debate in the truest sense – allowed each side to push their positions to residents. While the Yes campaign has been active in Belmont for nearly a month with rallies, meetings, and mailings, Thursday’s meeting was the “nos” first opportunity to explain its argument disputing claims that $4.5 million is the right amount.

It didn’t take long for the most telling comment to be uttered, coming at the very start during Manjikian’s highlighted the main reasons the “No” committee opposes the ballot question, suggesting the “No” committee’s motivation is as much political and procedural as it is fiscal.

“This year the town leadership choose to leap frog over the usual budget process calling for an override before we deliberated on the budget,” said Manjikian, referring to the Warrant Committee’s oversight mission. Several members of the “No” group are current or former members of the committee which serves as the Town Meeting’s financial watchdog.

In fact, the “No” Committee is not opposed to the concept of an override; it would seek to work towards a “right sized” measure that would meet department and schools needs, but only after a “budget committee,” whose work would come under Warrant Committee scrutiny, narrowed the $1.7 million funding gap facing the schools in the 2016 fiscal year.

During the question and answer portion, when residents addressed the representatives, Dash defended the override as the only sensible way of closing a deficit that could see more than 22 full-time equivalent positions cut from the schools, the ending of advanced art courses, the increase in class sizes and providing the bare minimum of classes to 11th and 12th grade students.

Pointing to neighboring towns such as Lexington, Concord and Acton, which has passed numerous overrides since Belmont’s last in 2002, Dash said, “they understand that sometimes things cost more … than 2 1/2 percent a year.”
Manjikian countered “money doesn’t solve the problems,” saying Belmont’s “achievement oriented” parents, students and teachers will continue to make it a successful system.

Rather than revenue, cutting expenses is required, specifically educators pay which is the “biggest driver of the school system,” he said.

When asked by a resident to name the specific cuts to the schools, Dash said the reductions have been clearly spelled out by Belmont School Superintendent John Phelan from major cuts to staff, extra free time and two of three classrooms above recommended enrollment numbers.
“It’s getting ridicules,” said Dash. “If we vote yes, you can have everything that you have now … or you can vote no and all these cuts are going to happen,” said Dash.

Manjikian said if the “no” vote prevails, “it would be in the best interest of the community to bring all the leaders back to the table much like we do in the budget process to look where additional revenue and addition expenses that get realigned and maintain the needs of the schools.”

While Manjikian discussed creating a multi-year plan to finance capital projects such as a new High School as well as annual educational needs, Dash said $4.5 million override is seen by the Financial Task Force and supporters as a long-range financing measure for the schools and the community.

In their closing remarks, Manjikian said a no vote would allow the town to explore “alternatives” to an override that will double from an average $854 per household in a decade.

Dash said Belmont has said “no” for far too long on infrastructure and now the schools.

“The great English philosopher John Lennon once said, ‘Yes is the Answer.'” said Dash.

League’s Candidates’ Night Features Selectman Race, Override Question

By Leave a Comment

Photo: The Belmont League of Women Voters’ annual candidates’ night will be held at the Chenery Middle School. 

The Belmont League of Women Voters annual Candidates’ Night – being held tonight, Thursday, March 26, at 7 p.m. in the Chenery Middle School auditorium – will give most residents the opportunity to hear directly from the two men seeking to secure a seat on the Belmont Board of Selectmen and, possibly, learn from both sides of the override issue the arguments for and against the ballot question.

Tonight’s schedule is:

  • 7 p.m.: Meet your Town Meeting Members in the lobby and inside the auditorium. 
  • 7:30 p.m.: Town Meeting Members will introduce themselves in order of precinct number.
  • 7:45  p.m.: The candidates for Belmont Board of Selectmen – incumbent Andy Rojas and challenger Jim Williams – will give an introductory statement and will answer questions from a League moderator. 

Time will be set aside at 9:15 p.m. after the selectman candidates have spoken for a question and answer on the $4.5 million Proposition 2 1/2 override ballot question. 

The night’s events will be broadcast by the Belmont Media Center.

Selectman Candidates’ Question of the Week: A Vision for Future Development in Belmont

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Andy Rojas.

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: There is a critical need in Belmont to promote new growth and increase the tax base. What is your vision for future development in Belmont? Where do you think those opportunities exist within the town?

Andy Rojas

Belmont’s development future must be guided by the needs of our residents, the expansion of our commercial tax base and the enhancement of Belmont’s physical character. My entire adult life has been spent managing development so it fits the neighborhood and environmental context contained in each proposal. Applying my professional experience to town service has demonstrated my commitment to sensitive development that respects and enhances Belmont.

Belmont’s budget struggles often end up imposing a financial burden on the primary revenue generators — residential taxpayers. Well planned economic development in our business districts can change that; commercial taxpayers typically use fewer town services and therefore, have fewer negative impacts on town expenditures.

New development potential exists in Cushing Square, Waverley Square, Belmont Center, South Pleasant Street and Brighton Street among other key business areas. Transitional commercial areas such as Benton Square, Palfrey Square and other small neighborhood commercial areas also have potential for suitable contextual development.

Planning and design must provide necessary commercial services while limiting and mitigating traffic, mass and density impacts. Residents and neighborhoods must be protected with appropriate controls including overlay districts, zoning laws and demolition delay among others.

  • I have worked on revitalizing Belmont’s business districts — large and small — for the past decade and can combine my professional expertise with the Belmont background and experience needed to make these projects successful.

Fitting development to Belmont’s needs can be done most effectively by creating thoughtful overlay districts in key areas. My experience with Belmont’s overlay districts, zoning laws and demolition moratoriums will let me move Belmont forward.

The Cushing Square Overlay District (CSOD) should be updated in light of the Cushing Village developers’ interpretation of the by-law; tighter controls on mass, height and density are needed. CSOD allows for additional development; I will work with the Planning Board and the neighborhood to update and clarify the by-law’s requirements so future development adheres to better targeted, community-based standards.

New overlay district by-laws should be considered for Waverley Square and South Pleasant Street, which will likely see increased development pressure. Partnering with surrounding neighborhoods is critical to their success and effectiveness as important, protective planning tools. I am committed to leading this effort and to using my expertise and Belmont know-how to make them work.

Business district revitalization has begun with restaurants and stores such as Savinos, Il Casale, Spirited Gourmet, Vintages, Craft Beer Store and El Centro; they have opened because Belmont has issued more restaurant and alcohol licenses. The Belmont Center Reconstruction Project, Trapelo Road Reconstruction Project, Macy’s building redevelopment and the construction of Cushing Village will provide even greater commercial growth that will help alleviate the residential taxpayer burden.

Expanding Belmont’s commercial tax base is vital to the long term financial stability of the town, will help mitigate the impact of residential taxes that currently comprise approximately 94 percent of Belmont’s revenue, and will provide the vibrant shopping and dining environment residents deserve.

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

Jim Williams

Belmont is as close to fully developed in terms of available land as any town I know. We have an interesting conundrum here in that we aim to preserve a small-town, community feel, while continuing to advance the growing needs of our community.  

Selectman+Williams+2015-03-08+0001 (1)-2-2

I truly believe that development opportunities reside in Belmont’s commercial centers – Cushing and Waverly Squares, Belmont Center, and along Belmont Street – in order to capitalize on increased revenue (from taxes). Encouraging mixed-use development such as the Cushing Square development plan would promote a business- and commuter-friendly eco-system, while increasing our revenue. Because trains and buses serve the centers, there would be an inherent increase in foot traffic desirable to our local businesses.

Thriving commercial centers promote a sense of community and energy, while increasing engagement in the town.  On the flip side is the fact that our public services are overwhelmed and underfunded, which need to be addressed before expanding our tax base for the sake of revenue while increasing costs to serve the needs of our newest residents.  This balance is best achieved by a fully-functional town management that prioritizes fiscal responsibility and servicing our community and infrastructure. I consider development part of a larger solution within the plan I have offered our beloved Belmont.

‘No’ Committee Gives Reasons to Why It Opposes ‘Mega’ Override

By 4 Comments

A committee formed to oppose the Proposition 2 1/2 override on the April 7 Town Election ballot stated it does not believe the $4.5 million increase in taxes is not in the best long-term interest “of the residents, the schools or the town,” according to a press release from the group.

The statement (which is in its entirety below) from the Vote NO on Ballot Question 1 Committee sets out in a series of highlighted paragraphs its argument against the override measure to be decide in less than two weeks. 

Dubbing the ballot question “the mega override,” the committee – headed by chair Elizabeth Allison and treasurer Raffi Manjikian – argues the override, which is a recommendation from the Financial Task Force in January and placed on the Town Election ballot by the Belmont Board of Selectmen in February – believes its passage would cripple the currently level of diversity in town by forcing middle-class families to abandon Belmont due to the spike in real estate taxes.

The committee also question many of the fiscal assumptions made by the Task Force underpinning  the override; instead supporting “good alternatives” which contend the town can raise the necessary funds to fill major funding gaps facing the schools – the School District state due to skyrocketing enrollment and other expenses the town’s schools face a $1.7 million deficit in fiscal 2016 – as it has in 10 of the past 13 annual budget cycles. 

The press release from the committee: 

A group of committed town volunteers and Town Meeting Members has formed a ballot question committee, “Vote NO on Ballot Question 1 Committee” and provided the following statement:

“We have come together because we cherish this town and do not believe that the mega override of $4.5 million is in the best interest of the residents, the schools or the town.  We have formed the “Vote NO on ballot Question 1 Committee” to:

Highlight the impact on the town’s character of the likely tax increases.  Of the many things to cherish about Belmont, one of the best is the true diversity of the town.  Inequality may have triumphed elsewhere, but Belmont still affordable with great public services that all enjoy equally.  Doubling tax bills over the next twelve years will change that forever.

Lay out the full financial costs of the tax increases that for the average homeowner both next year and thereafter.   Starting in fiscal year July 2016 (begins July 1, 2015) the average homeowner’s tax bill will increase by $206 without the override but by $854 with – a 4x difference.  With  no commitments to manage costs, another mega override will be required in 2017 -18, and again in 2020 -21. These increases do not include the costs of debt overrides that will be needed to renovate our high school, build a police station or a new DPW building that meets minimum standards. 

Provide voters with solid facts and research on the financial situation of the town and the current state of the schools. For example, very few residents, just listening to what’s being said about surging enrollment, would realize that over the last three years, the school budget has grown at a rate 50% higher than enrollment (annual 3.9% budget vs. 2.6% increase in enrollment.  Similarly, the Financial Task Force projection of looming deficits assumes state aid declining by -1.1% per year  while over the last 10 years it has grown at 2.4% We want to help voters judge whether this is a real crisis or “a crisis of assumptions.” 

Show that there are good alternatives to a mega override that protect the schools and preserve the town.  For 10 out of the last 13 years, the early draft of the town budget showed a major gap between the needs of the schools and available revenue. In 2011, for example, the gap was approximately $2 million in early spring. It was closed by identifying $1.3 million in additional revenue and $564,000 in cost savings. We will show how this approach can be applied again.

Remind voters that the ballot question is on the back of the ballot. Voters need to turn over the ballot and vote (ideally No) to have a voice.