Letter to the Editor: Williams Will Not Kick the Can on Town’s Obligations

By Leave a Comment

Photo: A family of Jim William campaigners,

To the editor: 

Belmont has a clear choice this year for the Board of Selectmen.  The best choice is Jim Williams.

Belmont made a commitment this year both to town employees and to school employees (both teachers and non-teachers). It’s a promise the town has little chance of keeping.  The promise is to pay benefits called “OPEB,” Other Post-Employment Benefits, referring to post-retirement health care benefits. OPEB is in addition to any pension that employees may earn.

Every two years, the Town prepares a study of how much it will cost to pay all of its OPEB commitments. The most recent analysis found that Belmont owes roughly $196 million in OPEB benefits.

Under Belmont Selectman and candidate Andy Rojas, Belmont appropriated roughly $265,000 toward its OPEB obligation for fiscal year 2015. While Rojas claims that this contribution would put a small dent in the unfunded OPEB obligation, that’s not at all true. In 2013, the annual interest alone on the unfunded OPEB obligation was $2.175 million. The town’s payment, in other words, was just over 10 percent of the interest alone on our unfunded OPEB liability.  

All of the unpaid balance, and 90 percent of the unpaid interest, in other words, went into an amount to be paid sometime in the future. The annual interest, alone, on the unfunded OPEB amount balance has more than tripled in recent years, from just under $700,000 to $2.17 million.

Belmont’s current treatment of OPEB is, in its essence, a form of deficit spending. The town delivers services today, and residents use those services without completely paying for them. When OPEB obligations are deferred to the future, the effect is to push onto our children and grandchildren the costs of providing today’s services.  

Accordingly, herein lies the choice. 

Rojas proposes to kick the can down the road in the hopes that “the state” will bail us out at some point in the future. In the meantime, while the interest and principal continues to accumulate, future OPEB payments will seriously impede Belmont’s future ability to deliver basic municipal services. Since an ever-increasing proportion of Belmont’s future budgets will be needed to pay the OPEB obligations, less and less of those budgets will be left-over to pay for things like paving streets and hiring teachers.  

Williams proposes real solutions. While those solutions not only may, but will surely evolve as they work their way through the political process, unlike Rojas who merely proclaims his leadership, Williams is exhibiting leadership by actually grappling with the problem.  

Belmont faces a real choice this year. Williams is my choice.  

Roger Colton 

Warwick Road

Letter to the Editor: An Insider’s Reason for Vote ‘Yes’ on the Override

By 1 Comment

Photo: Yes campaigners.
To the editor:
We all have been inundated with reasons for and against the override vote on April 7.  I’ve see the needs as a resident and an insider, as a parent and a decision maker.
I have lived in Belmont for 19 years, and on either side of Belmont for another nine.  My six years on Belmont’s School Committee (which included, as the School Committee rep, two years on Warrant Committee and two on Capital Budget Committee) have given an enlightening view into many parts of town government. I’ve been lucky enough to work with professionals in Town Hall, School Administration Building, and each of the schools, I and am sometimes awed by what they can produce for us with limited resources.
Here are the key points that make me an enthusiastic supporter of the proposed override:
Big Picture on School Spending
I’m a fan of allocating a reasonable amount of resources for a given function, then letting the professionals manage within that limit.  Clearly, Belmont Public Schools’ per-pupil spending shows that we get a lot of value for our money. It is about 12 percent below state average and far less than nearby towns such as Newton, Lexington, and Watertown. The state Dept of Ed breaks that spending into major categories, where we can see that our per-pupil spending on teachers is 11 percent below state average and administration is a whopping 30 percent below. Yes, 30. To me this negates squawking from the “no” side about some individual teacher salaries being high.  Yes, some are indeed high. But some are low for what we get. Most are within reason for the professional tasks they do – just like at my own company, and probably yours.
Financial Task Force Cred
One of Belmont’s faults over the past few decades is its lack of planning and reluctance to look ahead, whether for finance or infrastructure. The Financial Task Force, appointed in 2013, is a serious effort address exactly that. Members should be applauded, and their findings taken seriously. This override is a reasonable step to address Belmont’s needs. Names like Paolillo, Carmen and Mahoney are hardly associated with irresponsible spending or caving to special interests.  The additional money won’t fix everything – it is necessary, but not sufficient – and there is still a ton of work to do across Town and Schools for the long-term well-being of our entire community, kids and adults, infrastructure and people.
The “No” Side
I should know better than to be surprised by the ideological intransigence of the “No” side, but I still am.  From my six years on School Committee, and observations the years after, this summarizes the patterns I see from some individuals who are or were on the Warrant Committee:
The disregard of the FTF’s findings is very disappointing, and even disrespectful. It seems they’ve chosen to simply ignore the facts, even in their rhetoric. But then they are trying to position themselves as the eventual saviors, sharpening pencils and tightening belts, or whatever trite phrasing you want. It is as if the professionals who work for the town have not tried and do not know their jobs better than those Warrant Committee members. Every committee has wanted the thorough, factual look that the FTF has produced, and I assume the No side did too.  But I think they did not get the answer they wanted, and are now ignoring and talking over the findings.
The Warrant Committee is often called the “fiscal watchdog,” but too often some want to micromanage departments’ internal spending, and even intrusively try to manage policy. For schools, I have seen them question curriculum offerings, like whether to offer art at all (since it’s not required by the state), advanced language classes, and even support for college counselors. 
Please join me in voting Yes on April 7.
John Bowe
Elizabeth Rd

Letter to the Editor: Let’s Not Lose Our Sense of Community

By Leave a Comment

To the editor:

Why do we live in Belmont?

We all know that we could use better roads: ours are bumpier, rockier, and rougher than neighboring towns, and we could use the funds to fix them.

But we came to Belmont for the sense of community, and for the opportunities the town provides, for children and for families: playgrounds, recreation centers, sports and music and, of course, our schools.

Belmont’s schools — not just test scores, but student experience — have been a reason to move here, to stay here, to buy and hold on to a home here.

But that could change. For year after year the town and the schools have been asked to do more with less. And we have. We’ve given our high school students free periods when they used to have classes, and we’ve filled the halls with benches so that students with no classes to take have someplace to sit. Our student-teacher ratio (17 to 1) is already higher than almost all similar towns. We’ve lost a whole year of middle school language instruction. Our entering classes are larger than those before them, with many more kindergarteners than high school seniors, and we’ll have to hire more teachers just to keep up. A task force of experts worked with the town, studied the problem for a whole year, and concluded, unanimously, that we need an override now. 

When similar towns have faced similar challenges, they have decided to pay for what they need. Arlington, Sudbury, Lexington, Winchester, Newton — all passed overrides since 2002, in greater amounts than the one on our ballot this year.

We could join them and keep our schools as good as they have been. We could vote Yes on April 7.

Or we could vote No, and see who moves away.

Please do remember to vote on April 7, and please vote Yes.

Stephen Burt

Trowbridge Street

Letter to the Editor: The Steak and Potatoes of Voting ‘Yes’ for the Override

By 7 Comments

Photo: Young “Yes” campaigners in Cushing Square on Saturday, March 28.

To the editor:

To the “distinguished” gentleman in the Lexus who gave me a thumbs down this morning [Saturday, March 28] when I was holding a YES for Belmont sign in Cushing Square:

Congratulations on your success.  I’m sure you worked hard for it.  As my 84-year-old father would say, you are driving the “steak and potatoes” of cars.

Maybe you own a house in Belmont. Maybe you bought it long before I bought mine in 2005, when home values were not so high. Maybe you had kids in the Belmont School District, a steak and potatoes school district if there ever was one.

And maybe your kids have done well too, partly as a result of that school district.  I congratulate you.

But the failure of the last override has already taken some steak and potatoes from my son, who did not enjoy fifth-grade foreign languages as those who preceded him in the school system had.  He wants to be an engineer some day; speaking Spanish will help.

My son is in sixth grade, and I purchased my condo in Waverley Square in great part to give him a steak and potatoes education.  I love Belmont and intend to spend the rest of my life here.

This morning [Saturday, March 28] he, an eighth grade friend and a tenth grade friend held signs in Cushing Square in support of the override (photo attached).

If this override does not pass, BHS juniors and seniors will be limited to five courses instead of seven.  This means almost two hours of “free time” in the school day! Chenery Middle School students will have larger class sizes and will lose the “small school within a big school” team teaching system that strengthens learning and helps them through the difficult early teenage years.  And elementary students will lose the intervention that helps struggling students catch up to their peers.

I urge all Belmont residents to vote YES April 7. Below is another way of looking at it. Belmont’s last operating override passed in 2002, 13 years ago. Since that time, similar communities have passed numerous overrides, totaling as follows:

$6.8 million in Acton
$12.5 million in Arlington
$6.2 million in Concord
$10 million in Lexington
$5.8 million in Milton
$7.6 million in Needham
$19.9 million in Newton
$10.3 million in Sudbury
$6.6 million in Wayland
$14.5 million in Wellesley
$5.9 million in Winchester

Belmont, $0

By the way, I drove over some nasty “hamburger and French fries” potholes this morning on my way to hold that YES sign. Those will be fixed too with this override!

Kate Searle

Beech Street

Letter to the Editor: Vote Yes on April 7

By 4 Comments

To the editor:

Vote “YES” on April 7th

The need is clear: rising enrollment and costly mandates necessitate additional funding if we are to continue to offer our children a quality K-12 education. The statistics are compelling: 

  • the total number of students has risen by 317 in the last five years.
  • Belmont High’s Class of 2014 had 270 students; there were 350 Kindergarten students last fall.
  • two sub-groups of students with higher needs and costly mandated services have increased rapidly: 
    • the number of English Language Learners has climbed from 95 to 222 in the last six years
    • the number of students needed specialized schooling outside the district has increased from 81 in June 2013 to 97 in January 2015 (the average annual cost for an out-of-district placement is $65,000). 

Patching the school budget with one-time funds as we’ve done in recent years is no longer a solution.  If we don’t pass an override to meet these new realities, the steps needed to balance next year’s budget and beyond will without question degrade the quality of Belmont’s Public Schools, including fewer teachers, increased class size, and cuts in programs and electives.

Passing the override will enable us to maintain our existing programs and address the enrollment increases. The override is designed to stabilize the budgets for at least the next three years; and the School Department and School Committee have every incentive to continue to work hard to control costs so that stable and predictable budgets extend well beyond that horizon.

Operating overrides are in Belmont a rare occurrence; and continued tight cost control will be necessary to preserve a stable and predictable budget outlook so that we can retain top teachers, key electives, and reasonable class sizes in the years ahead.

Please join me in voting “YES” for the override on April 7.

Laurie Slap

Long Ave. 

(Note: Slap is the chair of the Belmont School Committee.)

Letter to the Editor: Lobby to Preserve Tennis Courts in Belmont

By Leave a Comment

To the editor:

Our town once had three tennis courts at Town Field, ten at Belmont High School and four at Chenery Middle School.

We have lost two at the Middle School when they rebuilt it for parking. Six-to-eight courts at the High School leaving two to dilapidate.

There are two tennis teams at the High School which need to practice from March to the end of May and play their matches.

The town also removed four where the [Skip Viglirolo] ice rink is. There used to be four covered and lighted courts at that location before they made it into a hockey rink.

Tennis is a life-living sport. Grove Street Playground people fought to restore their courts.

We have lost 11 tennis courts to date. Please do not add to that number.

The public courts are used by the  school tennis teams, children taking lessons after school and other people. No reservations are made; people just go down and play so you do not have a count of who is playing.

Why is the cost so high? The courts must be totally restructured to allow proper drainage etc.

Last time it cost about $20,000 to $25,000 to rebuild them. I worked with Dick Bette when that happened. They have been patched many times and just painted two years ago.

Please consider what we have and do not eliminate another lifetime sport for all ages to play.

Anyone who enjoys the sport of tennis, please read the article and lobby for their preservation.
Maryann Scali

Prospect Street 

Letter to the Editor: Concerns Continue with Proposed Cell Tower

By Leave a Comment

Editor’s note: This is a letter sent to Joseph Zarro, pastor of Plymouth Church on Pleasant Street that the author wished to share with the community as a letter to the editor.

Dear Reverend Zarro,

According to recent articles in the Belmontonian and the Belmont Citizen Herald, your organization is considering the siting of high power, cellular/mobile antennas in the steeple of the Plymouth Church in our neighborhood. According to the Belmontonian, your church would use the monthly payments from Verizon and AT&T to “support our lofty goals of our mission.” Further, one article quotes your spokesperson as saying “we would not have considered this move if we had concerns of health issues,” noting that there are other, existing cell tower installations in Belmont and he goes as far to conclude that in the 15 years that cell phone towers have proliferated, “there have been no adverse health impact.”

I fear that this may be a dangerous oversimplification of the problem. The “Telecommunications Act of 1996” which fast tracked cell phone tower siting is 18 years old. The studies that wireless proponents quote most often regarding the benign nature of cell phone towers and their effects on health were concluded before 2006. The iPhone wasn’t released until June of 2007 and the smartphone revolution that followed changed the entire cellular and wireless industry. Before 2007, cellular phone traffic was primarily for sporadic voice conversations. What data standards that existed at the time, were very slow. Over the last seven years, it has become commonplace to share photos, view videos and movies, and continuously stream music. Even when we’re not using our phones or tablets, they continue to communicate with the cell towers, alerting us of weather updates, emails, text messages, or other updates from social media. According to networking industry giant Cisco Systems, “Mobile data traffic in the U.S. will be 687 times greater in 2017 than it was in 2007.” This “687 times” represents an order of magnitude more data traffic and RF activity than when most quoted studies were concluded.

Moreover, the goalposts of what we measure for RF output appear to be moving, making comparisons to 2007 deceptive. Since then, a given tower’s antenna now divides the radio frequency into many more “channels.” Each of these channels carrying the “safe” amount of power one is told. However, in the aggregate, a given tower is putting out much more total power.

Many proponents talk about how the antennas are situated so high on a tower, and they are angled such that very little radiation reaches the ground due to the signal’s rapid attenuation. In the specific case of the Plymouth Church’s steeple, it’s not a hundred-foot tower looking down on flat ground. No, you’d be locating the cell antennas in your modestly high steeple, which in turn is located on a steep hill. Your steeple doesn’t look so high from directly across the street on Somerset Street. In fact, just up Somerset, your neighbors actually look down at your steeple. Have you considered the potential effects of cell antenna radiation from your particular, unusual situation on the families living there?

My point is that the science is incomplete and that the circumstances beg for an abundance of caution. We’re clearly in a new era and today’s concerns go far beyond cancer. Many are now concerned of the detrimental cognitive and memory effects this radiation has on people, and in children in particular. In fact, the Centre for Environment and Health at Imperial College in London just embarked on a $1.7 million study of the “effect of mobile phones on children’s cognitive development.” Also, Dr. David O. Carpenter, M.D. and Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University of Albany claims that “Human studies on the health impacts of Radio Frequency (RF)/Microwave (MW) radiation have found changes in brain function including memory loss, retarded learning, performance impairment in children, headaches and neurological degenerative conditions, melatonin suppression and sleep disorders, fatigue, hormonal imbalances” and much more.

It’s widely believed that due to the less-developed skulls in our children, they are far more susceptible to the harmful effects of RF waves than adults. Yet you would have the neighborhood children and the children of the Plymouth Nursery School, which is run out of your basement exposed to the continual bombardment of this RF energy?

Reverend Joe, this doesn’t make any sense. It doesn’t pass the “common sense” test and I ask you to reconsider. Your website talks of your commitment to the community. By latest count, your local community, as defined by those of us who live within a few hundred yards of Plymouth Church, are overwhelmingly (greater than 90 percent) opposed to the cell tower idea. Please listen to us.

Ronald A Creamer Jr
Neighbor, Concerned Parent