Photo: The Belmont rink under construction

It was a long night at Belmont’s remote mid-summer Special Town Meeting – three-and-a-half hours long – Wednesday, July 23, ending with a mixed message from members. Supporters of the “Save the Skip” article, who sought to transfer the name of the former rink to the new recreation facility, claimed victory as the measure passed on a 128-56-44 roll-call vote, solidifying their assertion of a mandate to place the James “Skip” Viglirolo moniker on the new rink.

“With the rank nearing completion, it is more important than ever to affirm the name … and keep honoring his legacy, not only for him, but for a town that honors its history and the people that made Belmont the wonderful place it is to live, learn and experience,” said Gail Harrington, Viglirolo’s daughter and lead campaigner of the “Save the Skip” citizens’ petition.

While the “yes” vote was celebrated online, it has little real impact on the near-future naming of the $32 million facility, which is set to open in November. In answering the all-important question facing the citizens’ petition, Crowley said the results of the “Save the Skip” article would be deemed non-binding after a review by Town Counsel Mina Makarious of Anderson & Kreiger, and “advisory” rather than a directive to make the change. A new name will be dictated by the newly-installed Belmont Asset Naming Policy approved by the Select Board on July 7.

Despite the positive outcome, any request to consider naming the new rink after Viglirolo can not be taken up until June 2026, at the anniversary of Skip’s death, which is prescribed under the naming guidelines.

The advisory nature of the vote may have contributed to the high number of members-nearly one in five-who selected “abstain” as their preference, declining to vote either for or against the article. Adding those to the members voting against the measure, the ‘yes’ margin shrank to 56 percent.

“I didn’t want to be voting against Skip [Viglirolo],” said one abstained voter at a local coffee shop the morning after the vote. “But the town has a naming policy and that’s how it should done.”

Town Moderator Mike Crowley said holding a Town Meeting in the middle of beach and vacation season was indeed “an odd time.” Still, Massachusetts State Law requires municipalities to hold a “special” Town Meeting 45 days after the petitioners crossed a 200-signature threshold. 

“To be fair to the petitioners, they didn’t want to have it in midsummer but the fall special town meeting [in October],”said Crowley.

Before the debate, Crowley made a special appeal to members that while members “may have differences from time to time in opinions … we can be polite in our dealings with each other.”

In the days before the meeting, town and elected officials received communications and statements online attacking their perceived positions on the naming of the new rink. On Monday, July 21, Belmont resident Wendy Murphy wrote a provocative opinion piece in the Boston Herald alleging the “Selectboard” [sic] – dubbed “Belmont Royals” – as havinganimus towards Italians by supporting the new naming policy. That was followed by an email from the 8,000-member Italian American Alliance, which condemned the “Selectboard” for its “most questionable and insulting action” that, it contends, “is, quite frankly, viewed as Italian HATE.”

Crowley said he did not want that kind of divisive discussion during the debate, noting it was “disrespectful to both the petitioners and the town officials.”

Leading off the meeting, Harrington explains the history of the “Save the Skip” petition. After the former rink was taken down in 2023, the Select Board received many letters in support of placing the Viglirolo name on the new rink, said Harrington, but their requests to have the Select Board address their applications in 2024 and 2025 “were ignored.” 

Seeking a public discussion on transferring the name, Harrington and supporters submitted a citizens’ petition in early July with 258 signatures to show the broad support in retaining the name. Harrington emphasizes that the petition is not seeking exclusive naming rights to the rink, but rather to honor Skip’s legacy as an important, long-time Belmont Recreation Department employee, athlete, and coach, who created safe and accessible winter recreation options for all residents. Two such programs included creating a girls’ recreation hockey program in the early 1980s, as well as an inclusionary program for special needs children that evolved into the Belmont/Watertown SPORTS program.

“Legacies matter for individuals, for families, communities, and for the town of Belmont,” said John Feeley, a long-time resident who addressed Town Meeting. “No one could deny that ‘Skip’ Viglirolo’s legacy is immense and worthy of praise and admiration. It should be Belmont’s honor to continue paying homage to the legacy of ‘Skip’ Viglirolo. Please, let’s get this right, and please put his name on the new rink where it deserves to be seen again.”

However, before the meeting could discuss the article, it faced a late amendment. Submitted by Angus Abercrombie (Precinct 8), the amendment would eliminate the article’s language and replace it with a statement “expressing Town Meeting support for the town asset naming policy as amended by the Select Board at their July 7th meeting, and ask that it be applied to the Belmont Rink and Sports Facility.”

“What I want to avoid is the injection of Town Meeting into this process where it will just serve to take time and resources from other priorities while creating more divisiveness,” Abercrombie said. In a curious approach to debate, Crowley allowed members to speak on both the amendment and the main article simultaneously. 

Select Board member Elizabeth Dionne, the primary author of the new naming policy, presented a detailed timeline for 2025 during which no naming decisions was made during the winter, “as our focus is on complying with the MBTA Communities Act, taking state-mandated action on Accessory Dwelling Units, and preparing a balanced, revenue-based budget for Annual Town Meeting.”

Dionne said the reason the Select Board did not answer calls from either the Viglirolo family or numerous others who pushed to have the rink or parts of the new facility named to honor important Belmont residents was that they “drafted a naming policy that is fair and balanced, that incorporates best practices from multiple sources.” To do otherwise, she said, would be “throwing due process out the window.”

She noted that supporters of the new naming process are not attempting to cancel either Viglirolo or James White, whose name was on the former High School Field House before it was taken down to build the new rink. “These names will have a prominent position in the new rink … preserves important aspects of Belmont’s history.”

Dionne “strongly encouraged” [Town Meeting] to support Belmont’s Naming Policy as it prioritizes the name of the Town of Belmont on assets. It also provides an opportunity for all voices to be heard through a formal hearing, honors the past through plaques, signs, and monuments, and “reserves and prioritizes sponsorship rights in a way that can ease the burden on the Town’s operating budget.”

On a personal note, Dionne said she “once again asks [residents] to give us an opportunity to at least consider naming the rink after a woman. Over half of the Town’s population is female, but in 2025, the vast majority of the town and school assets are still named after men. It will be decades before we have a similarly important naming opportunity. …Unfortunately, I doubt that our $32 million rink ultimately will be named for a woman, but please, please give us an opportunity to make our case.”

It was clear early in the hours-long debate that it was one based either on emotional and historic ties to a revered Belmont resident or on the perception of the naming of the facility to the Town’s chief executive body that oversees town policies. 

“This rink was named after Skip, and it was rightfully named after him, and 25 years later, there’s no reason to unnamedit. But that’s not what this is about. [The Select Board] took up the renaming policy and … have total control, and we’reactually looking for income versus our history. I feel like you guys are just throwing away our history to get a little money for a sponsorship, or to put a woman or someone else that property.” – Brian Keefe (Precinct 4)

“Naming rights for the rink have an important economic value. The 2022 Collins Center report said that [the Town] should examine and develop all sources of revenue to reduce the structural deficit. Yet here we are having a vote that would forsake a possible revenue source. I’ll state clearly that I think it’s completely unrealistic to think that we could name the rink [after] ‘Skip’ and then get a corporate sponsor. It will not happen. … I’m confident that the rink naming value is at least in the seven figures.” – Roger Fussa (Precinct 8)

“Some of us who support continuing Skip Viglirolo’s name on the rink have been described as old, nostalgic townies. What we are is residents who respect the contributions that Skip and others like him who selfishly made Belmont what it is, a better community. We do not want our history erased. We do not want the desire for vague amounts of cash and the limits of a 20 year window to determine what our buildings are named. Let’s do what’s right for Belmont, young or old, contemporary or nostalgic newcomer or townie … and keep Skips name on the skating rink. – Anne Marie Mahoney (Precinct 1)

“The important issue is good governance. Good governance prioritizes inclusive deliberation and thoughtful decision making, and in a town where we have little time, because it’s run by volunteers. Standard Operating Procedures is the right way to ensure that this is done. And the Select Board has created such a procedure. … What the petitioners reallywant here is to railroad through their wishes, and they don’t want to wait and participate in the democratic process. Disrespectful and divisive are names being called those people who won’t just let that happen. And it’s working, and I think that’s really worrisome.” – Claus Becker (Precinct 5)

“When a passionate group of citizens attempts to follow the available process [as perscribed in the 2018 naming policy] and that group of citizens is repeatedly, for whatever reason, not given a proper response other than be patient. And when the [naming policy is] changed, right after the group submits their application in good faith, I believe that turning to their Town Meeting representatives as constituents in order to get their voice heard is appropriate. I think community is never built with abstract, correct, well structured principles and processes. Community is built with heart and history andconnection. And so I believe that perfection should not be the enemy of the good, and that we should support the non binding resolution to affirm the 1998 vote to name the rink.” – Anne-Marie Lambert (Precinct 2}

“In 2018, seeing the many new public buildings coming, including the rink, I wanted to get a naming policy in place to avoid contentious and emotional debates like this by having a process with clear objective criteria, including waiting for a year after someone passes to consider their name. We have rules. This matter needs to stay with the Select Board. All of you and others out there can contact the Select Board and advocate for whose name you wish on your own. Of course, Town Meeting can vote to give a non binding opinion to the Select Board, but I doubt it’s going to be unanimous either way tonight, and it doesn’t change the fact that the Select Board has to make the decision under the policy. A split vote from Town Meeting, which is what we’re going to get, is honestly not really all that helpful.” – Adam Dash (Precinct 1)

After the Abercrombie amendment was defeated 76-138-10, Geoff Lubien (Precinct 7) called for the article to be “postponed “indefinitely while allowing the petitioners to resubmit the citizens’ petition with a new set of signatures so it could be debated in the October Special Meeting. The call to table the article narrowly failed 98-114-1. 

With the clock at a quarter to 11 p.m., most members had heard enough, and the meeting sped to the final vote. 

“So Article 3 passes, the non-binding resolution to preserve the name of the former skating rink for the new facility. It is quite late,” said Crowley.