Sturbridge Political Watch - Selectman Thomas R. Creamer

National Grid's Vegetation Management Program

2012-01-13T11:21:00.001-05:00

Greetings All,

National Grid has announced that it is implementing Tree Trimming within the Town of Sturbridge in an effort to conduct some pro-active and preemptive maintenance. This is certainly welcomed news. You may recall from previous correspondence that during my sworn testimony to the Department of Public Utilities I specifically called out National Grid for a lack of "vegetation management" and requested their vegetation management records for the Town of Sturbridge for the last 10 years. Equally, in an official letter authored by Selectman Priscilla Gimas and myself - which is now part of the Public Investigation Record - we again reiterated the lack of preventative vegetation management program and again called for release of all vegetation management records for the last 10 years.

Whether this official testimony - provided both verbally during hearings and by way of an official letter - has anything to do with the implementation of this "preventative vegetation management program" or is merely coincidental in its timing is an unknown; regardless, one would agree that this proactive and preemptive approach by National Grid is welcome news. The information released is as follows:

Lewis Tree Service, working under contract for National Grid will be trimming trees for utility line clearance on the following streets beginning on or about January 24th and continuing until completed.

Residents who have questions regarding this tree trimming are encouraged to contact the phone #'s that were printed on the door hangers left by Lewis Tree over the past few weeks. Pruning guidelines to be used by Lewis Tree were approved by the Tree Warden.

Tree Trimming streets:
Holland Rd and all side streets
Brookfield Rd (Rt 148) and all side streets
Arnold Rd and all side streets
Cedar Street and all side streets
Stallion Hill Rd, North end of Leadmine Rd and all side streets
US RT 20 from Stallion Hill Rd west to Brimfield Town Line and all side streets.

A Series of Debates for Selectman

2012-01-12T19:47:00.002-05:00

Earlier today, I spoke with our Town Moderator who consented to moderating a series of 3 televised debates between candidates for the office of selectman.

The debates themselves will vary in format and will include questions pre-submitted to the Town Moderator the evening of the debates, phone-in questions from TV viewers, direct questions from those in attendance, as well as questions posed by the candidates to one another in a modified Lincoln-Douglas debate style. All will allow for direct rebuttal by candidates.

These formats will allow for substantive and meaningful dialog on all issues of concern and/or importance to the residents of this community, while providing a significant opportunity to truly vet candidates seeking your consideration.

I welcome the opportunity for critical review of my service to our community and I am certain that any candidates seeking election/reelection to the office of selectman will welcome this as an opportunity to advocate for their candidacy.

Tentatively, the debates will be scheduled in late February, mid-March and early April, thus providing opportunity for all residents to view, review, research, deliberate and determine who they believe best represents their hopes, dreams, and viewpoints.

Regardless of the outcome of the election – in terms of my own candidacy, I am proud to be organizing these debates on behalf of the community, as I believe that residents have the right to expect all candidates requesting the honor of your vote, be willing to participate in a process designed to provide residents with such an opportunity.

In organizing last year’s televised debate, I committed to a series of more comprehensive debates during the next election cycle - whether I were to be a candidate or not. As the time has now arrived, I look forward to fulfilling that commitment and participating as a candidate respectfully seeking your support. More information is forthcoming.

TRC

With Great Humility, I Seek the Privilege of Serving You Again.

2012-01-11T23:43:00.001-05:00

Greetings All,

After detailed and deliberate consideration, and in recognition of the great privilege I’ve been extended these past three years, I have - with deep humility - decided to seek your support for another term as a member of your Board of Selectmen.

As many who know me can attest, and as reflected in many public statements made over the past 3 years, I have steadfastly maintained my focus as a one-term selectman, believing it vital to preserve a sense of urgency in fulfilling my obligations as an elected official responsible to each of you in this community.

I have always recognized and continue to do so with absolute certainty that I work for, and serve at the pleasure of, the residents of this wonderful community. To that end, I have always believed that any personal thoughts entertained by me in terms of reelection would serve as a disservice to Sturbridge residents, while equally proving to be quite selfish and presumptuous on my part. I firmly do believe in the words of Thomas Jefferson that "When a man assumes a public trust he should consider himself a public property". In that vein, I have always understood that the office I hold is yours and the privilege of holding it comes solely by way of your discretion.

That the time has now come wherein a decision is required, I am cognizant of the fact that the greatest honor I have been blessed with during my life has been in service to the residents of this community. Not a day has passed during these past 2 years and 9 months that has been absent of efforts by me on behalf of the residents of Sturbridge. This stems from my recognition that the honor of serving as one of your selectman is not one limited to Monday evening meetings, but rather an obligation and commitment requiring efforts that span 7 days each week, 365 days each year. I truly hope that despite any differences one may have with decisions I've made, that one has never felt a lack of commitment or effort on my part.

I am proud to live in this community and realize the great trust placed in those who are allowed the honor of serving its residents. Understanding such, I have - each and every day - undertaken my obligations and responsibilities to ALL residents with principle, integrity, objectivity, equity, and respect. I believe that those unwavering standards have contributed to a local government that is more transparent in its dealings, more accessible and responsible to all residents, more committed to decisions based upon honest and fully inclusive deliberations, as well as leadership that is cognizant of its responsibilities to ALL residents, as opposed to any particular few.

Thus, it is with great reverence for the office you have privileged me with holding these past 3 years that I announce my candidacy for reelection and humbly request your consideration in allowing me the honor of continuing service as one of your selectmen.

I invite you to contact me with questions, concerns, criticisms, and/or any thoughts you might have at trcreamer@gmail.com or by phone at 774-696-0903.

Sturbridge Trails Survey

2011-12-30T10:01:00.001-05:00

The Town of Sturbridge is developing a town-wide Master Plan for our trails system and we are seeking your input in terms of developing that plan.

We invite you to take a few short moments of your time to complete the on-line survey so that your thoughts, ideas, and hopes can be considered. You are NOT required to provide your name or address. The survey can be accessed by clicking HERE or at the following link: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/sturbridgetrailsurvey

The survey will be open until January 20th, 2012.

Thank you!

My Hopes for You this Holiday Season!

2011-12-21T17:31:00.001-05:00

With the Holidays upon us, I’d like to extend my sincere wishes to all residents for a very Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. Regardless of the spiritual beliefs or religious affiliations that guide many over the next two weeks, or the manner by which we identify ourselves, be it Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Agnostic, Neopagan, Wiccan, Atheist, etc., the common thread among all during this period is one of Hope and new beginnings. It is a time when some will reflect upon the last year, others the last 2000 years, with the anticipation of new beginnings, opportunities and hopes for brighter days. There is little doubt that this past year has tested the spirit and soul of many, while challenging our patience and resilience as individuals and a community.

Despite the trials and tribulations experienced, we have equally witnessed incredible compassion, generosity, selflessness, and fellowship. Neighbors, family, friends and even political foes have banded together, along with strangers from far and wide to bring relief, comfort and compassion to so many within our community. This, in and of itself is cause for great celebration during this holiday season as it reflects so genuinely the hope this period represents to many. It is undoubtedly the very essence of the religious or secular observances that fill the hearts and minds of disparate beliefs in the most communal of ways.

As I reflect upon what this period represents to me as a Christian, it is with immense gratitude that I extend my earnest hopes to all Sturbridge residents that this Holiday season will be one that reflects the hopes and dreams each of you holds so very dear. May it also be a time wherein you will experience the joy and peace we all long for, and that our community will be graced with respite where there is turmoil, relief for those who suffer, compassion for those in need, understanding for those we differ with and a time of prosperity for all – be it financial, spiritual, or emotional.

Though we do, and will continue to differ on matters, both individually and collectively - such is after all, the very nature of individual thought and an important aspect of community - it is my sincere hope that we will all find more we can agree upon, as opposed to those things we may differ on, for there exists little doubt that the things that unite us are ever more critical than those that may divide us. In the end, we are all truly interconnected and interdependent upon one other in the journey of life. The past year has certainly proven this to be true.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all.

TRC

Letter to the Department of Public Utilities

2011-12-20T19:13:00.000-05:00

As previously committed, I offer the following update to efforts regarding the Department of Public Utilities investigation specific to National Grid's October storm response.

Today, Selectman Priscilla Gimas and I, submitted a letter to representatives of the Department of Public Utilities representing our individual official analysis of National Grid's management of of its emergency response plan. This letter was based upon our own individual experiences and interactions during the power outage, as well as information received from various members of the Town's Incident Management Team and was conveyed in support of our efforts to address and rectify the shortcomings experienced as a result of failures associated with National Grid's executive management staff. The letter was separately addressed and sent to Mark D. Marini, Secretary - Department of Public Utilities, Ann G. Berwick, Chair - Department of Public Utilities and Jennifer M. Murphy, Hearing Officer - Department of Public Utilities, all of whom will play a role in the "adjudicatory phase" of the hearings. To be clear, the letter does not reflect any official collective position of the Board of Selectmen, but rather the individual official position of the two members signing it. The letter reads as follows:

On behalf of the Town of Sturbridge and its residents, the following official statement is offered to the Department of Public Utilities by Thomas R. Creamer (Chairman of the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen) and Selectman Priscilla C Gimas. We write to convey our deep sense of frustration and dissatisfaction with National Grid’s storm response management in the aftermath of the October Nor’easter. It is important to emphasize that the comments offered in this testimony are solely directed at National Grid’s executive management team and not the hardworking men and women in the field who labored significantly and diligently on behalf of those without power.

In reviewing the implementation of the emergency response plan initiated by National Grid, it is clear that their efforts were disorganized, disjointed, and lacking a level of credible coordination with local officials. Despite having a liaison from National Grid assigned to our Incident Management Center, there was a distinct failure on the part of National Grid’s executive management staff to properly prioritize their restoration efforts in a manner consistent with the Town’s emergency response protocols. As Town crews were clearing areas of concern prior to the arrival of National Grid field teams - in an effort to assure access for them - conflicting dispatch orders were generated via National Grid’s management team directing crews to areas inconsistent with local emergency response efforts. This coordination failure on the part of National Grid’s management team resulted in needlessly extended delays, as well as inconsistent and disjointed power restoration efforts that necessitated a speculative approach on the part of our Incident Management Team in its attempts to establish an organizational plan designed to address anticipated needs or long-term delays. Illustrating this rather starkly was the decision-making process as it related to the cancellation of schools.

With no credible information coming from National Grid or its information centers, our community was forced into a day-to-day decision-matrix in terms of school closings, which placed parents and children in an untenable situation, preventing them from making plans or arrangements to exit the area for more appropriate accommodations. So too, vulnerable members of our community, young and old, immunosuppressed or ill, were forced daily, and in some cased hourly, to evaluate their conditions and situation due to the absence of time-critical and credible information. Additionally, updates provided by our liaison as well as those received during joint conference calls, offered little in terms of reliable or useful information, thereby further inhibiting the release of definitive and dependable information to our residents. Equally, information received by residents via phone calls to National Grid customer service centers proved to be anything but trustworthy. These communications failures created unnecessary emotional stress and physical challenges for the entire community.

In addition, we contend that a significant lack of vegetation management undertaken by National Grid as well as the dependence upon outdated and poorly maintained infrastructure were, and will continue to be significant contributing factors in terms of the magnitude and duration of the October outage, as well as those one might experience in the near future. Despite National Grid’s contention to the contrary, we challenge their testimony provided during the public hearings held in Brookfield that they have not reduced their vegetation management program, nor would such have had any impact upon the outcome. To the contrary, we believe there has been a general lack of vegetation management in our community and that National Grid’s failure to properly address such resulted in a greater loss of community-wide power. Equally, National Grid’s call for residents with power to leave an outside light on so that they could determine who was still without power demonstrates an archaic approach in an age of abundantly sophisticated technology. In recognition of such, we formerly request the DPU to order the release of National Grid’s records in terms of all vegetation management efforts within the town of Sturbridge, as well as infrastructure preventative maintenance and upgrades specific to same within the next 60 days.

Additionally we call upon DPU to conduct an extensive review of National Grid’s Emergency Response Plan and to include review of same by emergency managers throughout the state to ensure that said plans are compatible with and complimentary to local emergency response plans, procedures, and priorities. Recognizing the significant financial burden the extended power outage had for residents in terms of lost perishable foods, added outside meal costs, hotel/motel stays, loss time at work, etc., we encourage DPU to levy appropriate and worthwhile fines upon National Grid and to ensure that said costs are not passed to the ratepayers.

Finally, we call upon DPU to support legislation that would reduce the impediments to the establishment of more municipally owned and operated power entities. It is our hope that the levying of fines and greater competition by way of municipal power companies are the surest way of establishing a more competitive and proactive customer service approach by National Grid.

Respectfully Submitted,

Thomas R. Creamer, Chairman

Priscilla C. Gimas, Selectman

In addition to the path available to us via the Public Hearings, a meeting is forthcoming after the holidays with members of National Grid's executive management staff and some representatives from our community to better identify the challenges faced, develop cooperative efforts to address, and to foster a coordinated approach to any future events.

Department of Public Utilities Hearings on National Grid's Storm Response

2011-12-14T10:02:00.001-05:00

I wanted to take a moment to update residents on the State's investigation into the October storm response by National Grid. As previously conveyed, the State has been holding Public Hearings in various communities throughout the region to take sworn testimony from public officials and residents specific to National Grid's October storm response. Tonight, I attended the Department of Public Utilities Public Hearing in Brookfield on behalf of our community, as did our Town Administrator, and provided sworn testimony outlining our experience, concerns and dissatisfaction with the efforts undertaken by National Grid's executive management team. As this was a Public Hearing and Investigation relative to National Grid's response, speakers who desired their comments to be reflected in the investigation's Public Record were required to be sworn under oath prior to providing testimony. To be clear, the testimony offered by the Town Administrator and myself was specifically directed at National Grid's executive management staff and information coordination centers - not the utility/line crews working on the front lines, as these hard working individuals who themselves sacrificed much during this event are not responsible for the poor coordination, communication, and execution of National Grid's emergency response plan; the accountability for planning and execution of said plan rests squarely with the upper management levels of National Grid.

Senator Brewer and other State Senators were in attendance as were representatives from the Attorney General's Office, elected and appointed officials from surrounding communities, as well as residents from same. In terms of Sturbridge, one resident who was in attendance also provided sworn testimony that delivered a powerful and heartfelt message to those in attendance at the well attended Public Hearing.

The genesis of my comments were based upon public discussions the Board has previously entertained and were directed at the lack of appropriate preparation and pre-storm maintenance, the lack of a coordinated approach in terms of National Grid working cooperatively with our Incident Management Team (IMT) to prioritize and effectively direct power restoration, the lack of timely and trustworthy information provided by National Grid to our IMT and residents alike, as well as the failure of National Grid's management team to fundamentally address the challenges they were faced with in an effective and organized manner. I also strongly encouraged Senator Brewer and his colleagues to work collectively to reduce restrictions/roadblocks to the establishment of Municipal Power Companies thereby affording more local communities the latitude to establish their own municipal power entities (similar to those in existence in other communities), so as to provide alternatives to and a greater competitive edge against National Grid's monopoly in this region.

The Town Administrator represented the community extremely well and provided corroborating testimony that reflected the concerns and frustrations experienced by the Town's Incident Management Team in terms of the lack of credible and timely information, as well as the overall lack of coordination and cooperation as it related to National Grid's addressing our identified priorities and needs. Noteworthy is the fact that Town Administrator Shaun Suhoski was the only appointed municipal administrator/manager in attendance. Again, we were specific to note that our dissatisfaction with National Grid's response was directed at the executive management level and information coordination/distribution centers, not the utility/line crews who performed admirably under extremely difficult conditions.

The Department of Public Utilities (DPU) will be accepting written comments until December 22, 2011 and the Town Administrator and myself will be drafting separate letters for consideration by the Board of Selectmen as part of additional testimony to be offered on behalf of our community. Equally, as DPU is now transitioning to the "adjudicatory phase" as the next step in their public investigation, there is an opportunity for the Town of Sturbridge to become a party to DPU's "petition to intervene", which must be submitted by 22 December, 2011.

In order for a community to actively participate in the evidentiary hearings "...where witnesses, primarily from the Company, will testify and be subject to cross-examination by DPU and the Attorney General, it must submit a petition to intervene. Although members of the public may attend the evidentiary hearings, only parties to the proceeding may participate". I will be discussing this process with DPU Hearing Officer Jennifer Murphy over the next day or so in an attempt to better evaluate the potential benefits for our community, so that appropriate information can be provided to the Board of Selectmen for possible discussion during our meeting of December 19, 2011.

There may be value in remaining fully engaged in the "adjudicatory phase" by way of demonstrating our resolve as it relates to the need for National Grid's executive management team to work more effectively, efficiently, proactively, and collaboratively with our community. That said, on a separate but hopefully more beneficial and immediate track, I spoke with National Grid's Massachusetts President Marcy Reed and Regional Liason Aleta Fazzone this evening and I will be facilitating a meeting between members of their executive management team and representatives from our community in the hopes of establishing a framework for a more robust and productive relationship that will hopefully foster the most favorable outcome for all Sturbridge residents.

Additional information will be forthcoming as appropriate.

Honoring Those Who Have Honored Us with Their Service

2011-12-08T22:57:00.001-05:00

There are those among us, who have stood not behind the wall of Democracy and freedom, but rather have stood sentry on the wall, ever ready and willing to ensure the privileges and freedoms we hold dear are protected. Whether on the battle field or at a base on the home-front, they are a "force in readiness" whose superior training, courage, and heroism serve as a determent against those who would do us harm or threaten our way of life.

Each year on Veteran's Day or perhaps even Memorial Day - somewhat ritualistically - many of us pay homage to these brave men and women, perhaps hanging a flag outside our home or attending a local memorial or parade. Many will take a moment to reflect upon the selfless sacrifices made by these common men and women during some of the most uncommon and unpredictable times in our history.

Most of us will never understand the physical, emotional, and spiritual challenges these men and women are burdened with, nor the toll that service to our nation can take upon an individual whether serving on the front lines or providing support or "peace-time" operations necessary to remain a "force in readiness" able to deter - in a moment's notice - threats to our freedom.

Here in Sturbridge, we have an opportunity as a community to support an effort that honors our veterans year-round, while equally demonstrating our gratitude on a daily basis for the sacrifices they have made on our behalf. Our local veterans are undertaking fundraising efforts in the hopes of restoring the Veterans' Honor Roll that had previously stood in recognition of their dedication to our nation and our community. You can help and I ask that you consider this effort by reviewing the information below, recently released by our local veterans and their supporters.

Help to Build The Sturbridge Veterans’ Honor Roll:

Purchase one or more engraved bricks at $100.00 each. This is a wonderful way to honor a friend or loved one or to recognize your company or organization. Not only will you be helping to build the Veterans’ Honor Roll, your brick will forever be a part of the Town’s history. Target Dedication Date: May 28, 2012 (Memorial Day). More information about the Veterans' Honor Roll can be found here.

The Essence of Democracy

2011-12-07T11:28:00.001-05:00

Monday's Special Town Meeting was- based upon the numbers of those in attendance - quite significant in terms of the discussions undertaken and the votes counted. The final numbers - as certified by the Town Clerk - for attendance at Monday's (12/05/11) Special Town Meeting were 343 registered voters, which represents just slightly north of 5% of the total registered voters as of 11-25-11 (cutoff date to be eligible) which stands at 6451 voters.

By way of comparison, the final attendance numbers at the adjourned Special Town Meeting of 11/07/11 were 213 registered voters in attendance. Thus, the adjourned date resulted in an increase of 130 registered voters in attendance and every one of those 343 attendees mattered immensely as it relates to a couple of significant articles on the Town Meeting Warrant.

Over the last 6 years, the average attendance rate at Annual Town Meeting has been approximately 5% of registered voters compared to an approximate 4% attendance at Special Town Meeting. Those numbers are skewed however in that a significant issue at the 2008 Annual Town Meeting - the new Wastewater Treatment Facility - resulted in an 8% attendance total, and the October 2009 Special Town Meeting - Burgess School Renovations - resulted in a 9% attendance total. If you extract those anomalies, the attendance averages shift to a 4% attendance rate at Annual Town Meeting and a 3% attendance rate at Special Town Meeting. Thus, the 5% attendance figure for Monday's Special Town Meeting was unique and very welcomed.

That said, based upon the discussions manifesting with respect to the Special Town Meeting Warrant, one could logically surmise that the attendance was primarily driven by 3 Articles, which generated the most dialog; those being Article 48 dealing with the Shepard Parcel (defeated 163 - 153), Article 52 dealing with adoption of the Energy Stretch Code, which was defeated by an overwhelming majority, and Article 54 dealing with a change to the day and time of Town Meeting to Saturdays, (defeated 116 - 115). You will note a disparity in the numbers as it relates to those in attendance and the final vote tallies on Warrant Articles, as some in attendance abstained on certain articles (myself being one, as I abstained on Article 48), while others left after the vote on a particular article had been counted.

Beyond the numbers, perhaps the most encouraging aspect of Monday's Special Town Meeting was the demographics, which - based upon no science at this point - suggested to me at least, an attendance that was more reflective of the overall demographics within our community. There were more seniors, more single parent as well as non-parent couples, and there appeared to be a greater diversity of younger parents providing what I believed to be a more representative demographic of the Town. This is noteworthy because regardless of where one stands on the issues as presented on any Town Meeting Warrant, the inclusion of a more diverse Legislative Branch (the voters at Town Meeting) provides a greater opportunity for the exchange of ideas, concerns, hopes, and perhaps a greater understanding of all sides of an issue. This, in the end I believe, lends itself to a wider and more thorough discussion of all issues and ultimately a greater sense of validation for those who attend that their presence truly matters. If you look at the close votes on some of the issues addressed Monday night, it is clearly evident that a few more or less attendees either way, could have resulted in different outcomes. This is the true essence of Democracy as every vote counted Monday evening mattered immensely.

As a member of the Board of Selectmen, though I may have a particular viewpoint one way or another as it relates to the issues before us at Town Meeting, the bottom line is that the Sturbridge Town Charter clearly dictates that members of the Executive Branch (BOS) "...cause the laws and the orders for the government of the Town of Sturbridge to be enforced", and as the Town Charter identifies the attendees at Town Meeting as the Legislative Branch, the Board of Selectmen are obligated to ensure that the will of the voters at Town Meeting be enforced. Thus, ultimately, despite any position an individual Board member may maintain, once the vote is taken, we are now bound to support and enforce the will of the people.

Having more voters in attendance sharing diverse viewpoints and disparate positions makes for a stronger Democracy and a more representative discussion by all. It also ensures that each member of the Board of Selectmen develops a deeper appreciation for the viewpoints of those on the prevailing side of an issue, but also and vitally important, those on the non-prevailing side, as we are not district representatives assigned to a particular constituency, we are representatives of all residents within the community, by they supporters or otherwise. After all, our oath of office compel us to "...solemnly swear to perform our duties faithfully, impartially and to the best of our ability, so help us God". That's Democracy.

Operation Re-Leaf

2011-11-28T09:41:00.002-05:00

All,

The Town of Sturbridge is seeking residents to participate in "Operation Re-Leaf" ... an enhanced tree re-planting program scheduled for the spring of 2012.

The annual tree planting program has been coordinated by Tom Chamberland and the Tree Warden Advisory Committee. Due to the tornado, and the goal to re-vegetate impacted areas, last month I met with the Tree Warden, Town Planner and a representative of the TWAC to proactively coordinate efforts. Thus yielded "Operation Re-Leaf."

The program builds upon the efforts of the Tree Warden and TWAC which have organized volunteers and resources to plant over 80 trees in the past two years. The FY12 approval of $4,500 in total Betterment Committee funds for tree plantings, together with an expected state commitment of $10,000 in further assistance due to the tornado, has allowed the Town to take an aggressive and vigorous approach towards re-greening the community.

Due to the ordering schedule for tree suppliers, we need to have some good numbers by the end of December.

Questions should be directed to:

Tom Chamberland, Tree Warden @ tchamberland@town.sturbridge.ma.us Phone: 508-347-2044 ext-2
Joe Kowalski, Deputy Tree Warden @ joseph@ganeshtree.com Phone: 508-347-5001

Burgess Pre-School Supports the Troops

2011-11-27T23:09:00.001-05:00

Greetings,

I hope you all had a wonderful Thanksgiving and that the holiday provided respite for all. The following correspondence is sent on behalf of the Burgess Preschool in support of their efforts on behalf of our troops.

Remember how cold we were the first week of November?

Our troops are cold everyday in Afghanistan, and in need of warmth and comfort at Army Reed Hospital. Let’s show them how much we appreciate their sacrifices!

Burgess Preschool has begun their 4th annual collection* for our troops overseas through the national organization, Operation First Response (operationfirstresponse.org).

Please help the Burgess Preschool make this a big success!

This year Operation First Response is in need of: sweatshirts and sweatpants (blue, black or grey in M, L, XL) as well as cards and letters to lift the soldiers’ spirits

Collection boxes are at the following locations from:

Burgess Elementary School
Sturbridge Town Hall
Shaw’s plaza, Sturbridge
Old Navy, Sturbridge
Village Music, Sturbridge
Sturbridge Coffee House
Yankee Spirits, Sturbridge
YMCA, Southbridge

Collection through November 25-December 16, 2011

Monetary donations are also very much appreciated. Please make checks out to "Operation First Response" and mail to:

Burgess Preschool, 45 Burgess School Road, Sturbridge, MA 01566.

Please do not place checks in the collection boxes!

Thank you in advance for all your support!

My Thanks to All

2011-11-22T17:19:00.000-05:00

Greetings All,

As many of us make last minute preparations during this period of thanks, I wish to extend my heartfelt gratitude to all for extending me the privilege and honor of serving as an elected representative on your behalf; there is not a day that I do not recognize the great responsibility attendant to such an honor. Service on your behalf has never been a one day a week commitment for me, but rather a way of life that includes communications with residents regularly via phone, email, text messages, Facebook, Linked-In or face-to-face Sundays through Saturdays, and I am continually thankful for, and humbled by, the outreach extended me this past year. I recognize that your willingness to contact me, even to offer me some well deserved criticisms, demonstrates a level of trust, in that you believe that whether we agree or otherwise, we can engage in communication; I view that as a gift from you and for that I am thankful.

This past year has no doubt been an extremely difficult one and one that has exacted a significant toll from many - physically, emotionally, and sometimes spiritually. Each of these challenges was met with firm resolve by the residents and public safety officials of this community, as incredible efforts - both individually and collectively - were witnessed under some of the most demanding conditions this area has experienced. As I reflect upon the last year and consider all that has transpired, I am filled with a great deal of gratitude in knowing that despite the unrelenting challenges we as a community have experienced, I have been witness to forces no less powerful than Mother Nature, those being the endless compassion, selflessness, and generosity that have endured.

Despite the differences any of us may share regarding the politics of government, there is great unanimity in terms of our collective resolve and willingness to meet the challenges within our community. That is truly what matters most in the larger scheme of things, for that is after all, what truly reflects the heart and soul of who we are as a community. For the many lessons I have learned this past year, I extend each of you my gratitude and my wife Jeannine and I wish you and yours a very peaceful and Happy Thanksgiving.

Equally, we extend our gratitude to our military men and women in uniform for the sacrifices they and their families make our on behalf, as well as to our local public safety officials whose efforts each day help to maintain our safety and our services.

Many thanks to all,

TRC

The "Agreement"

2011-11-16T23:50:00.002-05:00

A recent article referencing the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen “denying” the placement of a warrant article forwarded by the Tantasqua Regional School Committee (TRSC) outlining a new Regional School Agreement, has failed to provide a more comprehensive accounting of the discussion or the issue. This is clearly due to space constraints within a newspaper, which is unavoidable when considering the number of articles competing for limited space in a daily paper. Thus, I will offer my position as an individual member of the Board of Selectmen, while referencing previously and publicly discussed items, while summarizing the majority view of the BOS as publicly articulated during televised meetings of same.

The term "Agreement”, in my personal view, is an inaccurate reflection of the document as it was not agreed to by the Board of Selectmen, nor was the Board of Selectmen ever asked to review and respond to the dictates within an “Agreement” that would bind the Town of Sturbridge to a contract within the district. I am unclear as to who actually drafted the “Agreement”, as the Sturbridge BOS was never asked to participate, review, or provide an official response to a document that would fundamentally alter its role in the appointing process.

The Board has twice publicly stated that the "Agreement" would be placed on the 2012 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING Warrant, once the Board has had ample time to review the document, publicly discuss and deliberate on it, while inviting public comment and engaging in dialog with representatives from the School Committee. This would be and has historically been the normal process of review prior to submitting Agreements to the Legislative Branch for further discussion, deliberation, and action on items that impact the community’s rights/roles and/or bind the Town of Sturbridge or its political entities into agreements.

The Town Charter identifies the BOS as the Executive Branch and as such collective bargaining agreements, vendor agreements, service agreements, contracts, etc., as well as any regional agreements that bind our community to a contract or a particular course of action, must first be reviewed, vetted, and subject to collaborative and collective discussion between those seeking to enter into an agreement with the Town. Once appropriate review, public discussion, and collaboration with the parties to the agreement have been adequately addressed, the document is then placed before the Legislative Branch for its final determination. The "Agreement" sent to the Board of Selectmen by the Tantasqua Regional School Committee has not been publicly reviewed, discussed, nor deliberated upon by the Sturbridge BOS, nor has the appropriate public vetting, consistent with every other agreement that binds our community to a contract, been initiated prior to its placement before the voters for action. In addition, it is worth noting that even the School Department budget which is part of the overall Town Budget presented at Annual Town Meeting, is a component of the line by line review conducted by the Board of Selectmen and Finance Committee months prior to any recommendation at Town Meeting by either entity.

In consideration of the aforementioned, it would be - in my view - irresponsible for the BOS to forward an "agreement" that has not yet been fully reviewed, publicly discussed, and deliberated upon so as to ensure the best interests of our community are preserved or advanced. Such is the case with all agreements the Board of Selectmen puts forward for consideration, just as it is the case with every article that is eventually placed on the Warrant for voter deliberation. Noteworthy is the fact that even those articles placed by way of a Citizen’s Petition, which are allowed without reservation by our Town Charter, are first publicly discussed by the Board of Selectmen, along with the Finance Committee and those residents proposing said Citizen’s Petition prior to its placement. Equally, every other proposed warrant article undergoes the same process. How then could one argue any degree of logic or equity in placing proposed “agreements” in a manner inconsistent with the same degree of public review attendant to a Citizen’s Petition (automatic by way of our Town Charter) or that tendered to any other proposed warrant article? Perhaps, those requesting the placement of this article might find pause for a moment to reflect upon the larger issue, and in so, doing may come to recognize that we are all hopeful for an equitable agreement, but one that has undergone the proper process.

Perhaps, this explains why every other member community, with the exception of Brookfield, is holding this item for their ANNUAL TOWN MEETING. Perhaps, it is merely for the sake of time and convenience. Regardless of the individual or collective reason, there inexplicably appears to be an unusual amount of energy being expended in pursuit of the immediate execution of this “agreement” by the Town of Sturbridge, to the exclusion of other members.

The appropriate public vetting of the "Agreement" submitted by the TRSC – similar to that afforded every other proposed warrant article - would allow a comprehensive discussion as it relates to the equity of the “agreement”. For example, one might challenge what could be characterized as a distinct disadvantage specific to the “joint appointment” process in that the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen (responsible for advocating on behalf of its residents) is the only Board of Selectmen in the Regional District that would participate as a minority entity in the “joint” appointing process.

Consider the following make up of the regional Boards of Selectmen and the corresponding School Committees:

Brimfield: Board of Selectmen -3 members, Regional School Committee – 3 members
Brookfield: Board of Selectmen – 3 members, Regional School Committee – 3 members
Holland: Board of Selectmen - 3, Regional School Committee - 3 members
Wales: Board of Selectmen - 3 members, Regional School Committee – 2 members (one of which is also a member of the Wales Board of Selectmen, (the Wales Town Charter does not prevent Selectmen from holding additional elective offices)
Sturbridge: Board of Selectmen - 5 members, Regional School Committee - 7 members

In considering the numbers, a reasonable argument can be offered that it is truly not a "joint appointment" process as it relates to Sturbridge, but rather an appointment made solely by the School Committee with the Board of Selectmen in attendance. One could equally argue that the "joint appointment" in Wales is also not a joint appointment, but rather an appointment made solely by the Wales Board of Selectmen, with the School Committee in attendance. Now, I recognize that the School Committee configuration is dictated by enrollment figures, but those figures do not necessarily dictate the composition or the values attended to joint appointment votes. In recognition of such, the majority viewpoint on the Board of Selectmen - as publicly stated several times - is one of equity in the appointing process wherein, the joint appointment is truly a joint appointment. Perhaps such is achieved by agreeing that regardless of the numbers involved, each entity would be afforded the same number of votes during a "joint appointment". Thus, no entity would enter into the joint appointment process at an advantage or disadvantage.

On the surface this would level the playing field and perhaps ensure a real desire to seek collaboration and find cooperation in terms of any joint appointment? Currently, the Regional Agreement on record with the State Department of Education, as agreed to by all members of the regional district via Town Meeting, clearly identifies the Board of Selectmen as the sole appointing authority for elected vacancies with the regional school committee. Recognizing that the current agreement we are all bound to, is in itself, equally as inequitable as that presented by the Regional School Committee, the majority viewpoint of the BOS fully supports and welcomes a joint appointment process that is not dictated by one side or another; one however that truly is a joint appointment, as opposed to one that exists in name only.

An Assessment of Monday's Special Town Meeting

2011-11-09T18:53:00.002-05:00

Recent correspondence sent to the Board of Selectmen suggesting that the BOS, the Town Moderator, and in some cases the Finance Committee, engaged in collusion to “sham” voters out of an opportunity to vote on a particular article of interest, specifically Article 48, merits my response to you all as one member of the Board - acting solely in my capacity as an individual elected official. This correspondence is not meant to reflect the view of the BOS, nor suggest such. It stems solely from the disquieting behavior by a handful of adults at the most recent Town Meeting, as well as the vitriolic correspondence directed at the BOS, which in my view reflects a disconnect by some from fact or logic.

There is little doubt that for most, though not all in attendance that one could attest much of this "disconnect" to the unrelenting physical, emotional, and spiritual stress we have endured since the challenges of a 52” snow accumulation during a 3-week period last winter, followed by a tornado, a hurricane and ultimately an October Nor’easter, which resulted in power outages lasting 8 days. Clearly, such events play an integral role in testing the patience and adaptability of every one of us; we are all subject to limitations in terms of what we can reasonably withstand. That said it is important to note that we are all still part of a community and the need for balance, compassion, empathy, and reason must not be sacrificed nor jettisoned during times of stress as it provides fertile ground for the birth of illogical and non-factual reasoning.

There now exists a viewpoint that the BOS conspired with the Town Moderator and to a lesser degree the Finance Committee to “rob” voters of an opportunity to vote on Article 48, an article that many in attendance were in favor of, by requesting a 4 week recess. When one considers that the majority vote of the BOS by a 4-0-1 majority favor Article 48 and that the Finance Committee voted 4-3 in favor of Article 48, does it not then defy logic that these two entities whose majority votes clearly support Article 48, would then conspire to rob residents of a chance to vote on something that these two Board’s majorities support? Does it not also defy logic to suggest that if this were a “sham” perpetrated by the Town Moderator and myself that the majority members of the BOS and the FinCom would not have soundly and quickly intervened? To argue that two public bodies, who by majority vote favor Article 48, would engage in collusion to “rob”
themselves of something they support, or allow a sole member to do so, clearly defies logic.

Additionally, some have suggested that the motion was pre-determined and secretly decided. Well, the motion itself was "pre-determined" in that the BOS by unanimous consent, authorized me during a publicly televised meeting on Friday, November 4 to offer the motion, which was reported in a news story the following day. Equally, a Public Service Announcement that I emailed to over 700 residents on Saturday, Nov 5, titled Power Outage Update & Special Town Meeting specifically stated that “The Board of Selectmen has voted to support a motion seeking an adjournment (postponement) of this meeting for approximately 30 days”. Thus, to suggest something secretive or nefarious was afoot in terms of this motion is simply inconsistent with the facts and logic. Equally, to believe this occurred, despite the fact that it was publicly discussed, televised, reported in the news and emailed to over
700 residents, one would have to conclude that the majority viewpoint members of the BOS and FinCom were involved in a level of collusion to defeat themselves. Is this a logical presumption?

As it relates to the allegations that the Town Moderator did not open the meeting consistent with Parliamentary Procedure, this again is inconsistent with the facts. Parliamentary Procedure, of which I am well-schooled, dictates that in order to “open” a meeting, the Moderator must first determine the presence of a quorum and if present “call the meeting to order”. There are no additional requirements. In Sturbridge, there is no “quorum” threshold for Town Meeting beyond the required presence of the Town Moderator and the Town Clerk. Thus, if those two entities are present, the meeting requirements have been met and the Town Meeting may proceed once called to order.

Additionally, some argue that the vote was close and should have been counted on the floor. Though from my position on the stage it was clear the Town Moderator’s declaration was consistent with the vote, the simple fact is that no one spoke to that issue, nor did they challenge that vote until the results had been announced and the meeting adjourned. I specifically heard the Town Moderator ask several times if anyone else wanted to speak before the vote beyond the one resident who did raise her hand and approach the microphone spoke. There was no response, nor any movement towards the microphone. Immediately after the count was announced, I clearly heard the Town Moderator ask if there was “any other business to come before this body”.

Again, there was no response, beyond some inaudible grumbling in the rear, despite the fact that there were plenty of regular attendees at the meeting fully familiar with the process and their ability to intervene with a motion or substitute motion. With nothing forthcoming from the Legislative Branch, the Town Moderator adjourned the meeting. It is at this point that the yelling, screaming, and vitriolic attacks of a few individuals surfaced and were directed at the Town Moderator and the BOS while children sat in amazement watching this “model” behavior from adult mentors. Sadly, when one considers that this all manifested out of a motion designed to demonstrate compassion and empathy for those on both sides of the issue who had indicated a need for additional time to physically and emotionally recover from this most recent storm, one is left wondering just how deeply this past year has injured our community.

Finally, despite charges to the contrary, the Town Moderator did not have a pre-conceived determination, nor did he misrepresent the count. Though he and I have disagreed openly on issues, I have never witnessed him pre-determine any vote. In fact, his approach is fairly consistent in terms of his Moderation of our Town Meetings. For those residents of this community who feel the need to express misplaced anger or blame for whatever misguided reason one might maintain, then let it be directed at me as I made the motion; thus it began with me. It is illogical and simply wrong to cast dispersions on the BOS and accuse them, the Town Moderator or the Finance Committee of any nefarious acts as the majority of them are in support of Article 48. Any objective and logical consideration of Monday’s meeting could only conclude that there is no “conspiracy”, no attempt to “thwart the will of the people” and no attempt to “steal democracy”. Again, I respectfully request that you direct your anger at me for having the "audacity" of making such a motion; a motion by the way that I have no reservations about having made, as I place integrity, principles, transparency, compassion and empathy above political expediency.

Now, recognizing that Article 48 will not change in the next four weeks, nor the support it enjoys from the majority of BOS/FinCom members, one is hopeful that we can reflect upon this past Monday and realize that nothing was taken in terms of your ability to address the Town Meeting Warrant; it will all be there for your consideration on December 5, at 7:00 PM. One could argue however that perhaps the pressures of this past year have exhausted some of our patience and compassion; that is certainly understandable. Hopefully, the next few weeks will provide us all the opportunity to recover.

GIVERS, TAKERS, and the FACTS about Monday's Special Town Meeting

2011-11-09T09:41:00.006-05:00

Over the past 24 hours, I have responded to a number of correspondences sent to the Board of Selectmen by residents concerning Monday's Special Town Meeting. As I respond to every email, phone call, text message, etc. regardless of the tenor of the correspondence, I thought it worthwhile to share a couple of those responses here - consistent with my OPEN BOOK approach to life, so as to provide the public at large with my views on the situation. There is nothing more for me to add at this point as 3 of my responses below provide clarity on my position.

For those who have followed me during the past 2 years and 7 months, I believe I have demonstrated without exception that my service is based upon strict adherence to my oath of office, which compels me to "...solemnly swear to perform my duties faithfully, impartially and to the best of my ability, so help me God". To do this, every decision I have made is based upon careful and objective review of the FACTS, consistent with my obligations under the Town Charter, local bylaws and laws, as well as State and Federal laws. I am a Constitutional Conservative and I do not stray from my belief system for anyone or anything.

To be a good representative of the people, one must truly be a GIVER as opposed to a TAKER. We have had our share of both and will continue to do so because "democracy is a form of government that ensures people are governed no better than they deserve". In April, we will surely see a few TAKERS step forward for election, most likely familiar names from the last two elections who were turned away by voters - thankfully so. And yes, they are TAKERS and I say that without equivocation. Hopefully a couple of GIVERS will step forward to ensure a choice. Then, whichever choices are made by voters will ensure at the very least "...that we are governed no better than we deserve".

If residents have listened to me these past couple of years they have heard me clearly reference that someone else would be in my seat at the end of my term. I never imagined, nor planned for reelection as I believe that people who do so, run the risk of making politically expedient decisions, as opposed to purely objective decisions that are grounded in PRINCIPLE. Equally, as previously stated, in order to be a good public official and provide sound leadership based upon endless hours of selfless commitment, which includes detailed and painstaking research, study, review, phone calls, letters, emails, coupled with constant and necessary communication with residents (as we do work for ALL residents in the community, not just those who are like-minded) complimented by the all too frequently occurring "disasters" (i.e. 52 inches of snow in three weeks this past winter, which required endless hours of effort focused on clearing rooftops for seniors, tornadoes, hurricanes, an October Nor'easter), one has to be willing to fully GIVE; that takes a lot, and I recognize that my supply of GIVING is becoming limited, particularly when juxtaposed against an ever-increasing list of REAL NEEDS within the community that are being overshadowed by an unlimited supply of TAKING. Those REAL NEEDS include an ever increasing tax burden as a result of over $50,000+ million dollars of incurred debt over the last 5 years, with no doubt, more to come, which is forcing all too many families and seniors OUT of Sturbridge. Equally there is a NEED for REAL economic development based upon appropriate planning and infrastructure along the Route 15 corridor, which includes WATER in an attempt to help facilitate REAL economic investment in that area, as well as the NEED to seriously consider streamlining and consolidating of some town departments to reduce costs. Again though, these REAL NEEDS are being overshadowed by an unlimited supply of TAKING.

This is the real picture we are facing as a community and until we as a Legislative Branch (the voters at Town Meeting) take action to truly prioritize our spending and definitively undertake sacrificing some of our wants, which we now seem to always consider NEEDS, we will continue to price residents and local businesses out of this community as a result of their inability to shoulder the burden of increased property taxes, water and sewer rates, local fees, rents, and personal property taxes. These are the REAL needs within our community.

That all said, Monday's motion to adjourn was not designed - as some now argue - to prevent residents from voting on anything they wanted (and to be clear, let us all have the courage to admit that are really talking solely about Article 48), as the majority view of the Board of Selectmen and the Finance Committee is completely consistent with the wants of those supporting what they truly came to Special Town Meeting for - Article 48. As such, it is illogical to assume a conspiracy to prevent a vote on something that has majority support from both the BOS and the FinCom. The motion, unanimously supported by the previously referenced Board/Committee, was designed to do one thing, provide an opportunity for the many who indicated they could not come because of the emotional and physical demands of the last 10 days, as well as the rest of us, an opportunity for respite. Was anything on Monday's Special Town Meeting Warrant so important and so critical that the extension of some compassion and time to those on both sides of the issue was not warranted?

Below, I have posted 3 responses out of many. I do ask with all due respect that those full of vitriol and anger that is being directed at the Board of Selectmen, the Finance Committee, and the Town Moderator, perhaps it is best to channel your energy towards me as I made the motion and that is where it started. My responses follow, separated by solid black line between each.
________________________________________________

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts; I am most appreciative. To be clear I am responding as an individual member of the Board and NOT on behalf of the Board.

In terms of an explanation, I will not presume to speak for the Town Moderator, thus any clarification you seek as it relates to his ultimate determination would need to be directed to him.

As it relates to your statement directed to the "distrust as to the way things get done behind the scenes", again, I can only speak for myself, but I believe this Board to more open and accessible than any previous Board that I have either served on or witnessed in my 9 years in Sturbridge. In fact, I can say with certainty that the present Board has been more deliberate in addressing issues publicly - often until late hours in the evening - than any previous entity. Thus, I would respectfully submit there are times when people see what they choose to see and any assertion that this Board is conducting business behind the scene is simply and flatly inaccurate.

As for "The talk amongst the crowd following the adjournment not [being] favorable towards anyone sitting on the stage", I would have to ask (rhetorically - not soliciting an answer), why then did only one resident clearly indicate a desire to speak to the issue, and why then did only that same one resident chose to approach the microphone? Equally and again - rhetorically, I would have to ask why no substitute motion was offered on the floor by any member of the legislative body (voters) to counter the Board's motion for a recess? Additionally and again - rhetorically, I would ask why the calls for a vote count came only after 20 - 30 residents had already left the room?

In a democracy, which I bear the emotional and physical scars of defending, there is a responsibility of the voters to participate in the process by understanding the process. Here is Sturbridge, that process means that the Legislative Branch of our Government is the voters at Town Meeting and they are moderated by a Town Moderator as dictated in the Town Charter. If you wish to be critical of anyone on the Board, I would ask that you please direct your criticisms at me, as I made the motion, believing it to be in the best interests of the many, as opposed to the desires of the few. As I reviewed the vote from my position on the stage, I find nothing inconsistent with what the Town Moderator did and I will not become party to challenging his moderation of the meeting when he clearly followed the dictates of Town Meeting Time (Parliamentary Process). One might query instead why the Legislative Branch (voters at Town Meeting) chose for whatever reason not to exercise their Parliamentary responsibilities and/or rights until after adjournment. There was no mystery that a motion to recess was forthcoming as it was publicly discussed during a publicized meeting of the Board of Selectmen this past Friday, and reported in the Telegram and Gazette in Saturday's new edition.

Again, please note that my comments are mine and mine alone and do not reflect the Board's position. Equally, as previously stated, in that I made the motion, I am the one who is most accountable to that portion of your frustration/anger. That said, should you have any further concerns or criticisms you would like to direct at me, I would ask that you do so directly via email or phone so as not to unnecessarily burden the Board.

_________________________________________________

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts; I am most appreciative. To be clear I am responding as an individual member of the Board and NOT on behalf of the Board. Also, please recognize that it is very out of character for me to take issue with commentary from residents as I whole-heartedly welcome criticism and have displayed a great deal of receptiveness to public criticism as I realize that I work for the residents of this community, to be more clear ALL residents. That said, I believe it important in this case to be as direct and responsive as appropriate in terms of my own personal assessment of your commentary.

To your stated position that "The town formalized the postponement with a cursory motion which when objected to with a request for vote count was ignored", let me offer that I will not presume to speak for the Town Moderator, thus any clarification you seek as it relates to his ultimate determination would need to be directed to him. I would however have to ask (rhetorically - not soliciting an answer), why then did only one resident clearly indicate a desire to speak to the issue, and why then did only that same one resident choose to approach the microphone? Equally and again - rhetorically, I would have to ask why no substitute motion was offered on the floor by any member of the legislative body (voters) to counter the Board's motion for a recess? Additionally and again - rhetorically, I would ask why the calls for a vote count came only after 20 - 30 residents had already left the room and the meeting had already been adjourned? To be clear, the motion should have come as no surprise as it was publicly discussed and agreed to by the Board of Selectmen in a publicly televised meeting, Friday, November 4, and reported the very next day in the Worcester Telegram.

I would like to respectfully remind you that in a democracy, which I bear the emotional and physical scars of defending, there is a responsibility of the voters to participate in the process by understanding the process. Here is Sturbridge, that process means that the Legislative Branch of our Government is the voters at Town Meeting. They are moderated by a Town Moderator as dictated in the Town Charter. If you wish to be critical of anyone on the Board, I would ask that you please direct your criticisms at me, as I made the motion, believing it to be in the best interests of the many, as opposed to the desires of the few. Once the motion was made and seconded, it was by way of our Town Charter and Town Meeting Time in the hands of the Town Moderator. As I reviewed the vote from my position on the stage, I find nothing inconsistent with what the Town Moderator did and I will not become party to challenging his moderation of the meeting when he clearly followed the dictates of Town Meeting Time (Parliamentary Process). One might respectfully query instead why the Legislative Branch (voters at Town Meeting) chose for whatever reason not to exercise their Parliamentary responsibilities and or rights until after adjournment. There was no mystery that a motion to recess was forthcoming for as previously stated it was publicly discussed during a publicized meeting of the Board of Selectmen this past Friday, and reported in the Telegram and Gazette in Saturday's news edition.

In terms of your position that "Tonite's decision ceratinly raises doubt about the capability of Town Management i.e. Board of Selectmen and I will remember come election time and be sure no one stays too long in these offices with my vote", let me very respectfully and sincerely applaud your level of scrutiny in terms of elected officials. As a Constitutional Conservative I share a healthy level of skepticism as it relates to elected and appointed officials, believing it is important to a stable and productive democracy. That said, I would respectfully ask if that same level of scrutiny is assessed to the FACT that this current Board is the most open, accessible, and public Board I have witnessed in my 9 year tenure as a resident here - barring NONE? I would also respectfully ask if that same level of skepticism is assessed to the outstanding leadership this current Board has demonstrated during two significant disasters - the tornado and the hurricane, which were both the subject of more hands-on leadership by this Board of Selectmen than any previous Board - period? I personally recall the lack of disengagement of local policy makers during the ice storm (a statewide crisis) of 2008, where absolutely no leadership was provided by the Board of Selectmen despite the fact that over 150 homes in the Stallion Hill, Leadmine Road, Finlay Road, Stearns Drive, and Leadmine Lane are were without power for 6 days during sub-freezing temperatures. The needs of these individuals were addressed solely by way of a volunteer effort lead by local residents.

I respectfully must ask if that same level of scrutiny was applied to the aggressive steps this Board took to correct the miscues of previous entities, which included failures to address the contamination issues on the Riverlands, which this Board has been mitigating for the past year, or the lack of access to the Town Hall and Center Office Building, which again having been ignored by previous entities were addressed very successfully by this Board of Selectmen? One would be obliged to ask if the same level of scrutiny has been applied to this particular Board's efforts to address long-standing and significant drainage issues in the Walker Pond, Walker Road, and Farquhar Road areas? These issues had been previously left unaddressed despite repeated attempts by residents to seek redress from their local government. All of these items are now being reviewed and addressed. May I respectfully inquire as to whether your level of scrutiny was applied to several attempts by residents to have petitioned articles placed on Town Meeting Warrants, which despite the lack of support this Board had for the particular articles, it extended itself to ensure they were properly worded to assure the desired discussion by the petitioners.

As I previously stated, if you wish to direct your frustration towards anyone, then I offer myself at your disposal, but to suggest that you will remember last night in terms of the reelections of the other 4 members of the Board who have worked extremely hard for this community, is in my view, a very narrow approach. I must add that you are correct in terms of this being "sad commentary to say the least" and I couldn't agree more. To indict the full Board as you have, based upon one thing you disagree with juxtaposed again the many positive successes this Board has had, is indeed "sad commentary to say the least".

Again, please note that my comments are mine and mine alone and do not reflect the Board's position. Equally, as previously stated, in that I made the motion, I am the one who is most accountable to that portion of your frustration/anger. That said, should you have any further concerns or criticisms you would like to direct at me, I would ask that you do so directly via email or phone so as not to unnecessarily burden the Board.
_________________________________________________

Thank you for taking the time to raise your concerns. As I cannot address "disturbing news around town" void of specifics, I can offer my viewpoint, though bear in mind it is my viewpoint, thus worthy only of consideration if one is of the mind that I deserve such.

First, let me point out that the Board of Selectmen has no authority at Town Meeting, we are like all other attendees - members of the Legislative Branch, with the same rights and restrictions as all others. The meeting is controlled solely by the Town Moderator (per the Town Charter) and he alone manages the meeting and rules on all questions of order. Sadly, as very few people actually attend Town Meetings, except when there is something on the Warrant that is of significance to them, such as a larger wastewater treatment plant or a new school, etc, many do not understand how Town Meeting works. It is unfortunate, but also a fact of life as we all have many competing demands upon our time and choices are made consistent with such.

Thus, unlike a Board of Selectmen's meeting, where the Chairman manages the meeting and rules on all orders of question and in the case of this Chairman, residents are provided every opportunity to speak without restriction, the process for Town Meeting is dictated by the Town Moderator and Town Meeting Time, a form of Parliamentary Procedure designed to manage very large gatherings.

To that end, Town Meeting Time also has very strict procedures for making motions and acting upon them. In terms of last night, a motion was made by me on behalf of the Board of Selectmen (a motion that had been agreed to during a publicly televised meeting of the Board of Selectmen this past Friday and reported in the newspapers on Saturday), to adjourn the meeting for 4 weeks in an effort to allow residents who were unable to attend due to the physical and emotional stress of the last 9 days could - in some cases return home and in other cases simply have some time to de-stress. It was not, as some have suggested a surprise motion, as it had been discussed publicly during a televised meeting, reported in the news and part of a Public Service Announcement I sent out on Saturday.

Once the motion was made by me via unanimous consent of the Board of Selectmen, it was seconded by the Finance Committee and open to discussion by the Legislative Branch - voters at Town Meeting. Only ONE resident rose to speak and despite several requests by the Town Moderator, no one else rose to speak prior to or just after the vote. Once the Town Moderator determined the outcome as he saw it, he announced the results and then asked, if there was "any other business to come before this body", to which there was NO response. He then declared the meeting adjourned until December 5. Only he has that authority and despite claims that it was manipulated by him or the Board, I flatly reject that assertion because it is simply not the case, nor could it occur, as the Board, nor the Finance Committee have any ability to leverage a situation such as that.

It was only after the meeting was adjourned by the Town Moderator that calls for a recount were heard. Those calls however could not be acted upon as the Town Moderator had declared an adjournment and clearly 20-30 voters immediately left. Pehaps these were residents who are regulars at Town Meeting and understand the Parliamentary Process.

As a side note, this had nothing to do with recreational fields, nor should it be framed that way, though clearly that appears to be the case, as the majority position on the Board of Selectmen is in support of the Article 48. Thus, for residents to suggest that the majority view on the Board of Selectmen would sit idle and allow a process to be manipulated to their disadvantage defies logic. The motion was designed only to provide more time to individuals who are simply exhausted - mentally and emotionally.

At any point, prior to the Town Moderator declaring an adjournment, any voter present could have challenged the vote, though no one did, and at any point prior to adjournment any voter could have introduced a substitute motion, though no one did. In terms of an impartial person being present to count votes, that person is the Town Moderator - elected by the voters of Sturbridge as he or she serves as a Moderator during the meeting and not a voter. To that end, I find any suggestions that the Town Moderator had a horse in the race so to speak, simply untrue. I have had frequent disagreements with the Town Moderator and he and I infrequently disagree on issues, but have always found him to execute his duties objectively, impartially, and consistently, though not always as politely as some might like.

As well, I will add that the vitriol that was directed at him last night by some attendees was in my view, inappropriate and ill-conceived in light of all this community has endured this past year. So too, the insulting and demeaning comments made at him and members of the Board of Selectmen, were in my view, disgraceful. That said, I do recognize that everyone has a bit of a short fuse because of the stress we have all been burdened with and one realizes that many of us are unable to put our best foot forward when we have been beaten down by unrelenting and repetitive local natural disasters.

In my view though, the lack of empathy and compassion for those unable to attend due to the sheer exhaustion they are dealing with, regardless of what their position may or may not have been, was a poor reflection of the genuine compassion that has always existed in this community. For adults to react with such vitriol over the delaying of a vote whose outcome will NOT change in the course of 4 weeks, regardless of whichever of the 20 plus articles on the Town Warrant we will act upon, was not a shining moment for our community. Specifically when considering that the vote as I witnessed it was consistent with the declaration of the Town Moderator.

As someone who has served this community faithfully and selflessly at great personal and physical sacrifice over the last 2 years and 7 months, I do admit that it was a bit disconcerting to be accused of manipulating the process. I have never acted upon any issue based upon my personal proclivities, but rather consistent with detailed study of the issue consistent with the dictates of our Town Charter and State and local law. Yet, despite demonstrating selfless and tireless commitment to this community on a consistent basis, the anger last night and today directed at the Board and myself has so overshadowed any level of clarity for some that reason and logic have escaped the discussion.

These same individuals have sent scathing emails to the Board over the last 24 hours lambasting members for what occurred. Again, this defies logic as the majority viewpoint is strongly in favor of the Recreational portion of Article 48. Just as I have responded to all of those correspondences, I will respond in kind here, if individuals unwilling to extend compassion and empathy to other residents of this community during one of the most stressful 8 days many have ever experienced, then I respectfully request and suggest that they direct their anger at me, as I made the motion. Though I do not determine the outcome, I did raise the issue and make the motion, and thus willingly accept all blame, if it will reduce the unnecessary, inappropriate, and disrespectful commentary that is being directed at the Board of Selectmen and the Town Moderator.

I hope this addresses your questions/concerns and I do apologize for the length of my reply, as I am not one well confined to simple answers.
_______________________________________________

SPECIAL TOWN MEETING - NOVEMBER 7

2011-10-04T19:17:00.002-04:00

$50 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS. That's right, $50 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS. That figure - $50 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS - represents the amount of ADDITIONAL debt our community has incurred over the past 5 years. ADDITIONAL, as in beyond that which we have previously incurred and are STILL paying for.

5%, or approximately 280 plus or minus. That figure represents the number of voters annually in attendance at Town Meeting where voters have approved this additional debt, or, in those cases where debt exclusion from the levy limits of Proposition 2 1/2 were necessary, have voted in support of sending this additional debt to voters at the polls for final ratification. Debt exclusion from the levy limits allowed under Proposition 2 1/2 allows a community to "...assess taxes in excess of its levy limit or levy ceiling for the payment of certain capital projects and for the payment of specified debt service costs. An exclusion for the purpose of raising funds for debt service costs is referred to as a debt exclusion, and an exclusion for the purpose of raising funds for capital project costs is referred to as a capital outlay expenditure exclusion".

Every dollar we borrow, every penny of locally raised tax revenue, every bylaw passed, and every legislative decision made in our community is made solely by voters at Town Meeting, not the Board of Selectmen. As we compare our residential tax bills, along with our water and sewer rates over the past 5 years - all of which were determined by an average of 5% or approximately 280 registered voters at Town Meeting, we each need to ask ourselves a question; am I willing to continue to allow approximately 280 voters to determine my financial future? The answer to that question will help determine the corresponding course of action one might consider.

A Special Town Meeting is schedule for November 7, 7:00 PM at Tantasqua High School. The particulars of the Town Meeting Warrant will be posted online in the upcoming days and I encourage residents to carefully consider the importance of participating in the process that determines the most fundamental aspects of our every day life. No level of government has a more direct impact upon our taxes, our water and sewer rates, the fees we pay for services, as well as the services we receive than local government. In Sturbridge, the voters truly are the government as voters at Town Meeting serve as the Legislative Branch and therefore determine every aspect of our local future. Please consider attending on November 7, 7:00 PM at Tantasqua High School. If you need transportation contact me and we can work together on solutions.

Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness...

2011-09-30T11:39:00.001-04:00

Over the last several weeks, a petition drive has been circulated by residents to place an article on the upcoming Special Town Meeting Warrant that would ask voters to support a General Bylaw change allowing Town Meetings – now held on weekdays at 7:00 PM - to be held on Saturdays at 9:00 AM. As our Town Charter (Section 3-6), requires that “Petitions for insertion of articles in the warrant for special town meeting shall be signed by one hundred (100) or more registered voters”, these individuals set forth and obtained 112 signatures, which have all been certified by the Town Clerk. Unfortunately, the wording of their petition was not specific enough to fulfill the requirements of an acceptable Warrant Article in that it requested only “that all future Town Meetings be held during reasonable daylight hours on Saturdays”.

Though certainly the intent of the petition is clear, the Town Moderator – correctly so - pointed out that petition language was too ambiguous, in that it does not address specific language requirements that would sufficiently address a number of the Town’s General Bylaws. As such, the petition would create conflict between a number of the Town’s bylaws related to Town Meetings. There is little doubt that most residents would face similar hurdles in the drafting of petitioned warrant articles as the requirements for such are unfamiliar to those not accustomed to crafting them. The individuals drafting the petition in question naturally presumed that the specific language requirements would be addressed - as appropriate - once the petition was submitted and certified. Unfortunately, without the written approval of all 112 residents who signed, no individual or body has the authority to modify the current petition by trying to determine the intent of 112 residents as it relates to “reasonable daylight hours on Saturdays”.

A number of our general bylaws provide specific requirements mandating Town Meetings to be held at 7:00 PM, with Annual Town Meeting being restricted by both the Town Charter and the General Bylaws to the “first Monday in June or on such date as may from time to time be fixed in the bylaws of the town”. Thus, any warrant article seeking change to the timing of Town Meeting would be incomplete were it not to address the parameters identified in 6 supporting general bylaws. Undoubtedly, there exists a void in terms of readably available information that can guide residents through the process of petitioning for warrant articles and that is now being addressed via an informational handout I am crafting in concert with the Town Moderator. This “brochure” will explain the process of developing petition articles, guiding residents to the Town Charter, General and/or Zoning Bylaws, as well as the Town Moderator himself, who will provide guidance prior to petitioners soliciting signatures. In the short-term however this approach will do nothing to address the issue of the petition already submitted and certified requesting Saturday Town Meetings.

In light of such, and based upon my personal belief that the current timing of Town Meetings creates barriers that restrict/deter attendance by some residents, I introduced two motions to the Board of Selectmen this past Monday allowing for the placement of articles on the Special Town Meeting Warrant that would amend the General Bylaws as it relates to the timing of Town Meetings. These articles will allow voters an opportunity to determine whether or not the Town should move to Saturday Town Meetings. Both articles have been placed, allowing those who undertook the petition process an opportunity to bring their argument before the voters at the upcoming Special Town Meeting, thus salvaging their petition efforts.

Clearly this requested change has both its supporters and non-supporters. Those who favor it – including myself – view this change as important in providing greater opportunity for seniors to participate in the process of legislating their future. Over the last couple of years I have come to believe that the current scheduling of Town Meetings (during evening hours) creates situations whereby stress, anxiety, and in some cases fear, present overwhelming obstacles that deter seniors from leaving their homes and traveling in darkness to and/or from Town Meetings. There is little doubt in my mind that it is simpler for the majority of the populace to adjust schedules to accommodate Saturday Town Meetings – held at most 2 – 3 times a year, than it is for seniors to accommodate the stress and anxiety associated with nighttime travel. As such, I believe the current scheduling of Town Meetings has in fact created a situation whereby a significant number of seniors are unintentionally, though undoubtedly disenfranchised from participating in a process critical to their economic future. So too, I would submit that many voters who work long hours during the weekday, simply don’t have the opportunity to participate in a process that has the most direct impact upon their daily lives.

Arguments offered thus far against a move towards Saturday Town Meetings identify a host of concerns, the vast majority of which involve choices. By that I mean that they hinge primarily on things we have direct control over. It has been suggested that Saturday Town Meetings would interfere with sports activities, weekend chores, and perhaps some family gatherings. Clearly, these concerns provide food for thought, but ultimately, they hinder solely upon choices between attending a child’s game or not, or splitting the parental obligations that particular Saturday, as well as scheduling yard work that Saturday afternoon or even Sunday as opposed to the Saturday morning of Town Meeting. It might even involve a choice in terms hosting a family gathering on a different day or later in the same day. These again are all – in my view – choices, though others might clarify them differently. For example, It has been suggested that these “choices” involve value judgments – as in the importance or significance one places upon family time - and that it is perhaps unfair to categorize these as simple choices.

Succumbing to the argue of “value judgments”, were one to do so, would then force the question of exactly how much value we place upon our personal involvement and that of others in the political decision-making that impacts our overall quality of life. The choice to prioritize a sporting event or yard work at a level higher than ensuring decision-making access to a greater number of residents - whose futures are now determined by others – seems not to value the participation of those who built this community – our seniors. Though the vast majority of us can choose to make scheduling arrangements that would accommodate our attendance at a Saturday Town Meeting, there is little doubt that the stress, anxiety, and fear, which manifest for seniors as they contemplate attendance at a nighttime meeting and commuting home in darkness is not something that one can simply choose to reschedule or ignore.

It has also been suggested that changing Town Meeting to Saturdays should be so done via a Charter change, which would require a super-majority at Town Meeting for approval, followed by a vote at the ballot box. The argument here is that since a higher percentage of voters (approximately 25% per figures maintained by the Town Clerk) attend annual elections, it would allow more registered voters to decide the issue. On its face, this argument initially resonates in terms of the numbers of voters who would decide this issue as attendance at Town Meetings is 4%-5% and it would appear more meaningful for it to be done at the ballot box. Closer scrutiny however suggests a great deal of inequity in this approach as a full 20% – 21% of those voters who attend annual elections, DO NOT attend Town Meetings. Thus, a position that argues for the additional 20% of those voters who cast votes at the ballot box determining when the 4% - 5% of the voters who do attend Town Meeting should schedule or hold same, seems rather inequitable. Beyond this argument, the Sturbridge Town Charter definitively allows for Town Meeting to “be held on the first Monday of June or on such date as may from time to time be fixed in the bylaws of the town”. Clearly, the scheduling of Town Meeting via General Bylaw changes is allowed by our Town’s Constitution.

Perhaps the most disturbing argument offered – though one maintained outside of public discussion – is that shared with me by at least two public officials and a resident or two, which deals with an increase in attendance by Sturbridge seniors. Very simply stated, it has been offered that perhaps we are better suited by not having seniors vote at Town Meeting as they may tend to borrow less and spend less money thus jeopardizing some of the things we might want. Yes, despite having accrued well over $50 million dollars in debt over the last 5 years – that of course in addition to what we previously accrued and are still paying for – we have some who would prefer that seniors didn’t have the opportunity to vote at Town Meeting as they might not be inclined to support things we WANT. I am not sure what it is that We Might Want, whoever that We is, but I do know that what WE as a community and a country will always NEED is a commitment towards ensuring that all voices have the opportunity to equitably participate in the affairs that dictate their lives and that wherever barriers exist, we should work to reduce them.

As a constitutional conservative and a Lincoln Republican, I believe in our Declaration of Independence which serves as the very foundation upon which our U.S. Constitution is based. As a veteran and someone who has served my country for 32 years under an oath to “protect and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic” I am drawn quite often, as was Abraham Lincoln - considered by many historians as our nation’s greatest president - to two simple lines in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”.

Certainly, I am no Abraham Lincoln, but I, just as he was, am a devout believer in our Constitution and the document that gave birth to it. I am also a strict constructionist and do not take liberties with the Constitution, our Town Charter, or our bylaws for that matter. Thus, I am left to wonder as I reflect upon the promises of our Declaration of Independence, how can one truly maintain the unalienable right to life if one does not have the opportunity to participate in the most basic decisions in ones community? How can one truly enjoy or maintain liberty, if one does not have the opportunity to participate in the legislative gathering of voters at Town Meeting? And how can someone truly pursue happiness, if every financial decision that impacts their life is made by others?

Some might argue this to be an excessive position and not nearly as significant as I and others believe it to be. Surely, I agree that for those not faced with the anxiety/stress of nighttime travel, nor the fear of being on the road in darkness this appears hyperbolic; it is after all always difficult to empathize with a situation one does not or has not intimately experienced. That said and despite any assertions to the contrary, the inescapable fact remains that many seniors simply don’t have a choice when it comes to attending nighttime meetings and as such have lost their ability to participate in the most basic level of government. Equally, I am confident - despite any assertions to the contrary - that the vast majority of non-senior voter attendance at a Saturday Town Meeting would be one of making choices and maybe even a sacrifice or two, but such is a minor inconvenience juxtaposed against the anxiety and/or fear that keeps many seniors from attending evening meetings. Maybe it does after all, come down to values and how much we value the input of those who built our country and this community.

Center Office Building Front Door Variance Granted

2011-09-27T20:57:00.000-04:00

I am pleased to announce that I was contacted today by Mr. Thomas Hopkins - Executive Director of the Architectural Access Board - and was informed by him that the A.A.B. has “…granted the Town of Sturbridge variance relief to 521CMR Section 25.1 for the main entrance to the Center Office Building. Thus, we have now been approved to implement full access to the Center Office Building via the front doors, similar to that received two weeks ago for the Town Hall. This of course is welcomed news and brings closure to a nearly 3-year odyssey, which was sadly based upon inaccurate and incomplete information that has been associated with this issue since the inception of the renovation plans.

As previously stated in an earlier correspondence associated with the variance approval for the Town Hall, though this issue predates nearly all current members of the Board of Selectmen, it became our responsibility to rectify this issue once we became knowledgeable of its existence; to that end, there was uniform commitment among all members to have this issue corrected on "our watch". As such, I, as an individual member of the Board, extend my personal thanks to all members for the unanimity of resolve in bringing a successful conclusion to this challenge.

In addition, I extend my personal thanks to Executive Director Tom Hopkins for the proactive approach he took in addressing this issue on our behalf. His initial outreach, followed by a public meeting with the Board of Selectmen and his continued efforts in support of assembling and reviewing the required information prior to submission for determination by the Architectural Access Board provides a clear example of government at its best. Regardless of what the outcome may have ultimately been, Mr. Hopkins took the time to work with us and ultimately guided us to a successful conclusion. That said, I extend my thanks to Town Administrator Shaun Suhoski as well for working closely with Mr. Hopkins, while drafting, assembling, and presenting two variance requests that were viewed very favorably by the A.A.B. Shaun's efforts were commendable.

Moving forward, it is worth noting that the Board had previously instructed the Town Administrator to undertake the measures necessary to address the required hardware allowing for emergency access to the front of the Center Office Building and as that process is underway, we will soon be able to utilize same for all non-disabled access and egress.

Things are not always as they are reported.

2011-09-15T01:47:00.004-04:00

Greetings All,

Regrettably, this past Monday information was publicly provided to the Board of Selectmen and the Town Administrator that was neither complete, nor fully representative of an issue that has created concern within the community as it relates to the use of the Burgess Elementary School for local elections.

During the meeting, information was presented that indicated the Burgess School Committee had voted to “no longer allow use of the elementary school for elections”. It was further indicated that the School Committee had based this decision upon safety and security issues that have existed and have been raised for years. In response to such, I shared my displeasure with residents losing access to a $21 million investment, of which said residents shoulder the tax burden for, in that I fully recognize the ability to address security issues quite adequately via a number of appropriate measures.

The following day, Kate Alexander – Chairman of the Burgess School Committee - and I spoke about this issue and it became very clear that the information presented to the Board of Selectmen and by extension the residents of this community, was incomplete and did not fully represent the discussion that took place surrounding the Burgess School Committee vote. The fact is that the vote taken by the school committee was for the 2011/2012 school year and it involved a number of concerns, which are all valid and completely supportable.

Due to ongoing construction, the lack of controllable access during construction, traffic congestion, and the absolute lack of parking, the Burgess School Committee is extremely concerned with the potential for vehicle conflict between other vehicles, pedestrians, and students. In addition, legitimate concerns exist in terms of the difficulty faced when navigating vehicles, buses, and construction equipment in an area that places students in a potentially unsafe and vulnerable situation. Complimenting these challenges are the current limited means to adequately employ access control measures in the midst of the aforementioned items, all of which lead to a decision to restrict the use of the building by not hosting elections for the 2011/2012 school period. This, in my humble view, is a substantive number of concerns/challenges, all of which support holding our elections elsewhere, while construction is ongoing. Thus, I support the Burgess School Committee’s decision as it relates to the period represented by their vote.

To be clear, members of the Burgess School Committee were very concerned about restricting use in terms of the upcoming elections as they recognize the community’s investment in the new school. To that end, they specifically voted a 1-year policy and nothing more. Once construction has been completed, there will be a collaborative effort between the Burgess School Committee and the Board of Selectmen to address any outstanding safety/security concerns that may accompany the numbers of individuals on-site during elections.

It is unfortunate that the information conveyed to the Board/public Monday evening was not more fully representative of what transpired at the Burgess School Committee meeting. To that end, I personally apologize to all residents for any anxiety that has been unnecessarily created due to any failure by elected officials to fully vet the information publicly provided to us that evening. We as representatives of the people, perform a disservice when we fail to fully disclose – mistakenly or otherwise - all information associated with an issue we raise. In this instance there clearly has been a failure and again, as one individual member, I offer my apologies.

Ms. Alexander will be joining us briefly on Monday evening to provide a first-hand accounting of the discussion and valid concerns the Burgess School Committee has in terms of the 2011/2012 school year; I encourage you to watch the live or taped rebroadcast so that you can be more fully and accurately informed.

Legislating by the numbers.

2011-09-10T00:21:00.002-04:00

During my tenure on the Board of Selectmen I have frequently referenced the significant role Sturbridge residents maintain in terms of local governance. More so than in many communities, residents in the Town of Sturbridge are in fact the most important and the most definitive voice of our local government by virtue of their Charter designated role (identified in Article 3, Section 3-1) as the Legislative Branch. Simply stated, no spending of locally raised revenues, no borrowing or the tax increases associated with borrowing, no bylaws, and no determination regarding the Town’s budget can occur without the approval of the Legislative Branch – the voters at Town Meeting.

Contrary to a common misconception, the Sturbridge Board of Selectmen have no authority to spend locally raised revenues - be they property taxes, water/sewer fees, meal/hotel taxes, etc., nor does the Board have the authority to incur debt, create or change bylaws, increase water/sewer rates, approve projects that necessitate the use of locally generated revenues, determine zoning or a host of other significant responsibilities that impact our daily lives. At the risk of redundancy it is important to reiterate that such power rests solely and unequivocally with the Legislative Branch – the voters at Town Meeting.

The role of the Board of Selectmen is to ensure that the will of the Legislative Branch is fulfilled. To that end, Section 4-2c of the Town Charter specifically states that “The executive powers of the town shall be vested in the Board of Selectmen, and may be exercised by them jointly or through the town agencies and offices under their general supervision and control. The Board of Selectmen shall cause the laws and orders for the government of the town to be enforced, and shall cause a record of all their official acts to be kept, and for that purpose and to aid them in their official duties, they shall appoint a Town Administrator”. Thus, the selectmen are responsible to ensure that the laws and orders - so determined by the Legislative Branch- are enforced. To aid the Board in its official duties, it appoints a Town Administrator.

In considering the enormity of the role maintained by the Legislative Branch, it can be disheartening and perhaps even alarming when one reflects upon the number of “legislators” who determine the fate of our community. To that end, it is worth reviewing the attendance records for town meetings over the last few years where the most important decisions facing our community are made, while simultaneously contrasting them against the number of voters who cast ballots at annual town elections to select individuals whose roles and responsibilities are of less significance in our day-to-day lives.

On average, the attendance of registered voters (legislators) at Annual Town Meeting over the last 6 years (previously held in April, now held in June) stands at 5% or approximately 300 voters. During that same time-frame, attendance by registered voters (legislators) at Special Town Meetings has averaged approximately 4% or 250 voters. The significance of Town Meeting cannot be overstated as those decisions that impact our tax burden (i.e. Town Hall/Center Office Building Renovations, Burgess Elementary School Renovations, land purchases, our annual budget, etc.) as well as decisions that impact the rates users pay for water and sewer (i.e. Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrade/expansion, Route 131 water/sewer line upgrades, Well #4, etc.) are made by residents at Town Meeting. This is not to suggest that these were not necessary or worthy expenditures, but rather to demonstrate that the most important financial decisions we make, are being made by a very small percentage of voters.

To further illustrate this point, consider the past 6 years where voter turnout at annual elections for the Board of Selectmen, Board of Health, School Committee, etc. have averaged 25% of registered voters annually. Though these elected individuals are afforded no legislative authority, as their responsibility is to develop and enforce policy that ensures the will of the Legislative Branch is fulfilled, the ease with which one can cast a vote at the ballot box ensures a much higher and more respectable turnout. As an elected official who recognizes the importance of a strong voter turnout to ensure that those who would govern are selected by the largest percentage of voters possible, I welcome the turnout at annual elections. That said, I would be remiss were I not to identify that in the purest sense, the votes cast at Town Meeting have infinitely more impact upon our day-to-day lives than do those we cast for our locally elected officials.

Clearly, one recognizes that the exercise of one’s vote at the ballot box is more convenient and more easily accomplished than sitting through hours of an Annual or Special Town Meeting. Thus, there is no question that Town Meeting by virtue of its length (hours vs. minutes at the ballot box), timing (work/school night from 7:00 PM until…, as opposed to voting throughout the day from 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM at the ballot box), and location (Tantasqua Regional High School vs. Burgess Elementary School) create significant challenges for voters. Parents are faced with childcare concerns, seniors - the anxiety of nighttime driving and the discomfort associated with leaving and arriving home in darkness, while others are finishing a long day at work and simply need time to distress or tend to family matters with those who have eagerly awaited their arrival. These and others are valid reasons to be desirous of limiting the additional stress or anxiety associated with a late and perhaps long night at Town Meeting. That said, the validity of reasons for missing Town Meeting create a situation by which a very small number of voters are determining the fate and financial burdens we bear as residents.

As each of us review our personal budgets and develop strategies to address the mounting financial challenges we face locally, it is wise to consider the importance of our presence at Town Meeting. Despite the real hurdles that exist in terms of attendance, we must consider the judiciousness of allowing others to determine our fate. At no other level is government more “of the people, by the people, and for the people” than at the local level. In Sturbridge - due to its practice of Town Meeting Government, ultimate authority rests solely with the voters, not their elected officials. To that end, Sturbridge maintains the purest form of democracy that exists as we each possess the ability and the opportunity to truly influence the outcome of a warrant article.

It is critical that voters recognize and make effort to exercise the unequivocal authority granted them by way of their legislative power at Town Meeting. To that end, it is important to develop plans or formulate strategies that ensure attendance by at least one member of a family. Annual Town Meeting is a once a year commitment, while Special Town Meetings – when necessitated by budgetary requests or other needs - may require one or two (rarely) additional meetings. Notifications are generally provided months in advance, while the actual Warrant Articles (those issues to be determined by the Legislative Branch) are finalized and generally available for review14 days prior to Town Meeting via the Town Hall, the Town’s website, and local news outlets.

When considering the importance of these meetings, it is important to note that in the last 5 years alone, exclusive of (as in not including) any spending for various annual purchases, capital expenditures, various studies, or our annual operating budget of approximately $25 million, we have undertaken in excess of $50 million in additional debt, beyond that still owed on previous borrowing. This includes borrowing for the new Wastewater Treatment Facility, Town Hall/Center Office Building renovations, Route 131 water and sewer line upgrades, a new well and the Burgess School renovations.

As previously stated, this is not to suggest any lack of merit in terms of these projects, as that is a matter each of us must individually contemplate. I reference these particular projects merely to illustrate the significance that Town Meeting plays in our lives and how imperative it is that we all take a more active and participatory role in determining our future. To continue to allow 4% – 5% of registered voters to legislate our lives, whether we support projects of this nature or not is an unwise course of action, as the opposite holds true as well, in that projects or warrant articles one might have supported, may well have failed or will fail due to the small percentage of legislators considering the issue at any given Annual or Special Town Meeting.

A Case for Town Meeting - A Guest Post

2011-09-07T21:04:00.001-04:00

The following is a guest post:

Dear Sturbridge Residents,

Recently, 114 residents signed a petition requesting that Town Meetings be moved to Saturdays. The petition started at the Sturbridge Senior Center in an effort to increase senior citizen attendance; however, many residents who commute, travel, or work long hours and cannot attend late night meetings during the week have also signed this petition. Local statistics show that attendance at our Town Meetings in the last six years ranges from one to nine percent of the town’s population; the average is four percent attendance with a statistical mode of two percent. This means that between two and four percent of the population in Sturbridge is making decisions that affect everyone’s property taxes.

There are a total of two Town Meetings that take place in Sturbridge: the Annual Town Meeting and the Special Town Meeting – these are not the same as the Town Elections or the weekly Monday evening Selectmen’s meetings. Rather, Town Meetings are the only opportunity available to residents to vote on issues that directly effect property taxes, water and sewer rates, and other community-related costs that are solely decided and borne by the residents in this community.

In recent years, we have experienced steady increases in property taxes. As well, users of public water and sewer are seeing increases due in part to expansion/upgrade of the sewer treatment plant. There’s a simple explanation for these increases: the projects were approved by residents who attended Town Meetings. So, although increases in water and sewer rates are borne solely by users of those public utilities, all residents who attended town meeting voted on that issue.

If there was ever a time when it is important for residents to attend Town Meetings, it is now. Our property taxes increased 43% from $11.32 in 2008 to $16.19 in 2011. The projected tax rate for 2012 is $17.76 (per 2012 Finance Committee report.) However, the actual rate may be even higher and is not yet set by the MA Department of Revenue. Why the projected 57% increase? Because voters at prior town meetings approved projects such as: Town Hall and Center School renovations, Burgess Elementary School addition/renovation, Tantasqua Regional High School addition/renovation, and the conversion back to a single tax rate from a split tax rate, to name a few.

At the upcoming Special and Annual Town Meetings, voters may be asked to fund millions of dollars in new projects, thus affecting our tax rate. Please, watch for newspaper articles about the upcoming fall Special Town Meeting; watch for signs around town that announce the date; and check the town’s website for an announcement: http://www.town.sturbridge.ma.us.

I strongly urge taxpaying residents to attend Town Meetings. This is your opportunity to voice your opinions and cast your votes – it is a civic duty and it is your right. If you signed the petition, or would like to see Town Meetings moved to Saturdays, please attend the fall Special Town Meeting and vote accordingly.

Sincerely,

Carol Childress
Sturbridge resident

MEMA Situational Awareness Statement #3

2011-08-25T14:46:00.000-04:00

Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency

Hurricane Irene Situational Awareness Statement (SAS) #3

Date: August 25, 2011
Time: 11:30AM

Situation:

Irene's projected track has shifted significantly westward since yesterday; it now shows the center of Irene passing over the Outer Banks on Saturday, making landfall on western Long Island Sunday evening, and passing through central and western Massachusetts Sunday night and Monday morning as a Category 1 or 2 storm, or possibly a weak Category 3. Irene is still several days out, however, and the projected track could potentially be off by as much as 200 miles and the projected timing by 6 to 8 hours.

Weather Forecast:

There is a risk of severe thunderstorms this afternoon and evening, with associated damaging winds, rain, and hail, as well as a small chance of isolated tornado activity.

Precipitation: Rains associated with Irene may begin as early as Saturday afternoon, with the bulk of precipitation coming Saturday night through Sunday night. As much as 6 to 12 inches of rain are possible to the left of Irene's track. There is a significant risk of stream and river flooding left of Irene's track, but it is too early at this time to identify which basins are most at risk.

Winds: The most damaging winds will be located to the right of Irene's track. Winds in Massachusetts are currently forecast to be Category 1 (74-95mph) or Category 2 (95-110mph) but Category 3 (110-130mph) winds are not out of the question. If Irene takes a more westerly track and weakens as it passes over land, wind intensity will decrease. Exact timing of the arrival of damaging winds is highly dependent on Irene's forward speed; Sunday through Sunday night are most likely, but an increase in Irene's speed could bring significant winds as early as Saturday night. There is also a risk that Irene may spawn tornadoes Saturday night into Sunday, especially in its northeastern quadrant; if Irene takes a more westerly track, the risk of tornadoes will increase.

Coastal Flooding: The magnitude of coastal flooding will depend on Irene's exact track, speed, and intensity as well as its timing with respect to high tide. The high tide cycles occurring on Sunday and Sunday night are of particular concern due to the astronomical high tide. The most severe flooding will occur along south-facing coasts, but some flooding is also possible on east-facing coasts if Irene arrives near high tide.

Marine/Beaches: There is a moderate risk of rip currents today. Risk will increase starting Friday and is expected to remain high through the beginning of next week. Depending on Irene's forward speed, seas may begin building Saturday night and by Sunday could reach 25-35 feet near shore and 40 feet further out to sea, with the highest seas being to the right of Irene's track.

State Actions:

Beginning this morning, the State Emergency Operations Center (SEOC) in Framingham is at a Partial activation level in order to facilitate pre-landfall planning efforts. The following functional planning groups have been established:

Federal/MEMA Integration
Joint Information Center
Legal
Commodities
Space Assignments, Facilities, Fleet
Air Operations
Communications
Debris Removal
Emergency Management Assistance Compact
Energy/Utilities
Rapid Impact Assessment Teams
Urban Search and Rescue
WebEOC/Resource Requests
Evacuation and Transportation Support
HQ/Regional Staffing
Mass Fatality
Medical Care / Mass Care
Sheltering, Staffing, Supplies
Situational Awareness

The below agencies and organizations are present in the SEOC. Additional agencies and organizations may be called in to the SEOC as Irene's landfall approaches.

American Red Cross
Civil Air Patrol
Coast Guard
Coastal Zone Management
Dept. of Agricultural Resources
Dept. of Conservation and Recreation
Dept. of Environmental Protection
Dept. of Fire Services
Division of Energy Resources
Dept. of Public Safety
Dept. of Public Utilities
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Executive Office of Public Safety and Security
FEMA Incident Management Assistance Team
FEMA State Liaison Officer
Grainger
MA Environmental Police
MA National Guard
MA State Police
MA Search and Rescue Task Force 1
MA Volunteer Organizations Active in Disasters
Mass 211
MassDOT
Massport
MA Dept. of Public Health
Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency
National Weather Service
NEDRIX
Operational Services Division
Poland Spring
Salvation Army
Secretary of State's Citizens Information Service
State of MA Animal Response Team
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Coast Guard
Verizon

MEMA is closely monitoring Irene's progress via tools such as HURREVAC and the National Hurricane Center's website, and remains in close communication with FEMA Region 1 and other state EOCs. MEMA is conducting a daily conference call at 12:30PM with local Emergency Management Directors, twice daily conference calls at 8:30AM and 2:15PM with NWS, and is pushing out Situational Awareness Statements at least once daily and more often as necessary.

Information for EMDs:

The Sea, Lake and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) model is a computerized numerical model developed by the National Weather Service (NWS) to estimate storm surge heights resulting from historical, hypothetical, or predicted hurricanes by taking into account the atmospheric pressure, size, forward speed, and track data. These parameters are used to create a model of the wind field which drives the storm surge.

The SLOSH Display Program (SDP) is software developed as a tool to aid emergency managers in visualizing storm surge vulnerability. The SLOSH model and the SDP are two different tools. The SLOSH model is used by the NHC to forecast storm surge and model storm surge vulnerability; the SDP is the software provided to emergency managers and other users to visualize the data produced by the NHC.

Graphical output from the model displays color-coded storm surge heights for a particular area in either feet above ground level (inundation) or feet above a specific reference level (NGVD29 or NAVD88). If using NAVD88 or NGVD29, users will need to know the elevation, relative to the same vertical datum, in order to properly interpret the surge elevations. A sample output of the SLOSH model for Hurricane Ike can be seen at http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/ssurge/images/gl2_ike2008.png.

The SDP is intended to be used by trained emergency managers, FEMA personnel, and NWS forecasters. A username and password, which can be obtained at http://slosh.nws.noaa.gov/sloshPub/disclaim.php, is required to access the SLOSH Display Web Page and download the program.

At this time, MEMA urges local officials to monitor Irene's progress and predicted track closely, review existing emergency plans and procedures, update emergency contact lists, test communications equipment, and be prepared to participate with MEMA in more proactive planning and preparedness efforts if necessary. MEMA also strongly encourages local officials to review their SLOSH (inundation) maps, pre-identify areas particularly at risk from storm surge flooding, and consider issuing voluntary or mandatory evacuation orders for these areas if the need arises. Local officials are also reminded to verify their inventories of sandbags and procure additional supplies if needed. MEMA has emergency stockpiles of sandbags available if needed. Tropical storm force winds from Irene are forecast to arrive on Sunday, but given the possibility of Irene's forward motion increasing and damaging winds, rain, and associated flooding arriving earlier than anticipated, local officials should aim to complete pre-landfall preparations by late Saturday.

MEMA has created a WebEOC event for Irene called "2011 Hurricane Irene". EMDs should use this event for situational awareness and conveying requests for assistance related to Hurricane Irene. Users experiencing issues with logging on to or using WebEOC should contact their MEMA Regional office for assistance.

In order to assist local officials with preparedness and response to Irene, MEMA has made the following resources available on its website (www.mass.gov/mema) in the "Hurricane Information" section:

Links to online tools and resources
Hurricane safety information
Sea, Lake, and Overland Surge from Hurricanes (SLOSH) maps for coastal Massachusetts counties.

These are available as static maps in .PDF format, as well as interactive maps using Google Earth which will allow users to zoom in to neighborhoods and view projected inundations for category 1 through 4 hurricanes. Google Earth is available free of charge at earth.google.com.

Southern Massachusetts Hurricane Evacuation Study
Hurricane Evacuation Behavioral Assumptions for Massachusetts
The Cape Cod Emergency Traffic Plan

For additional information and resources, visit:

Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency at www.mass.gov/mema
Federal Emergency Management Agency at www.fema.gov
National Hurricane Center Website at www.nhc.noaa.gov
National Weather Service – Taunton at www.weather.gov/boston
National Weather Service – Albany, NY at www.weather.gov/albany
Mass211 at www.mass211.org

The next SAS will be issued at 5:30PM today or as needed.

MEMA Power Outage Safety Tips

2011-08-25T11:05:00.000-04:00

The severe winds experienced during hurricanes and tropical storms have the potential to cause power outages throughout the Commonwealth during this Hurricane Season. As we have experienced in recent years with many other types of storms, strong winds have the capability to topple utility poles and trees, as well as snap tree limbs causing them to fall on power lines and disrupt electrical service.
The Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) has the following tips for dealing with a possible power outage:

• Check flashlights and portable radios to ensure that they are working, and you have extra batteries on hand. A radio is an important source of critical weather and emergency information during a storm.

• If your water supply could be affected by a power outage (a well-water pump system), fill your bathtub and spare containers with water. Water in the bathtub should be used for sanitation purposes only, not as drinking water. Pouring a pail of water from the tub directly into the bowl can flush a toilet.

• Set your refrigerator and freezer to their coldest settings (remember to reset them back to normal once power is restored). During an outage, do not open the refrigerator or freezer door unnecessarily. Food can stay cold in a full refrigerator for up to 24 hours, and in a well-packed freezer for 48 hours (24 hours if it is half-packed).

• If you have medication that requires refrigeration, check with your pharmacist for guidance on proper storage during an extended outage.

• Follow the manufacturer’s instructions and guidelines when using a generator. Always use outdoors, away from windows and doors. Carbon Monoxide fumes are odorless and can quickly accumulate indoors. Never try to power your house by plugging the generator directly into household wiring, a practice known as “backfeeding.” This is extremely dangerous and presents an electrocution risk to utility workers and neighbors served by the same utility transformer. It also bypasses some of the built-in household circuit protection devices.

• In order to protect against possible voltage irregularities that can occur when power is restored, you should unplug all sensitive electronic equipment, including TVs, computers, stereo, DVR, VCR, microwave oven, cordless telephone, answering machine and garage door opener. (Review the process for manually operating your electric garage door.)

• Be extra cautious when you go outside to inspect for damage after a storm. Downed or hanging electrical wires can be hidden by trees or debris, and could be live. Never attempt to touch or move downed lines, and keep children and pets away from them. Do not touch anything power lines are touching, such as tree branches or fences. Always assume a downed line is a live line. Call your utility company to report any outage-related problem.

Maintaining Communications during power loss & Hurricane Preparedness Tips

2011-08-25T00:26:00.001-04:00

Greetings All,

Tonight (Wednesday) while meeting with residents impacted by the tornado, several measures were discussed to help ensure continued access to communications during a power outage. In light of the potential for significant weather associated with Hurricane Irene, the following information may prove useful:

As information may continue to be provided via Reverse 911 where warranted, residents can ensure access to such by forwarding calls from their land-line to their mobile phone. You would first have to ensure that your land-line service has a call forwarding feature. If so, use the following procedure to activate and deactivate.

To Activate call forwarding dial *72, then the 10 digit number you wish to forward to.
To Deactivate call forwarding dial *73.

Additionally, access to a NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration) Radio can provide residents with continuing information specific to storm response and weather reports. Most NOAA radios provide for solar and hand crank charging, thus eliminating dependence on power. Several links below provide information about the radios and purchase thereof.

LL Bean: http://www.llbean.com/llb/shop/62136?feat=2-SR0

Eastern Mountain Sports (EMS): http://www.ems.com/product/index.jsp?productId=4042811

Dick's Sporting Goods: http://www.dickssportinggoods.com/search/index.jsp?kwCatId=&kw=weather%20radios&origkw=weather+radios&sr=1

Additional preparedness information from the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) is provided below. MEMA's website is as follows:
http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=eopssubtopic&L=5&L0=Home&L1=Homeland+Security+%26+Emergency+Response&L2=Planning+%26+Preparedness&L3=Natural+Hazards&L4=Hurricanes&sid=Eeops

Family Hurricane Preparedness Tips

As we enter the 2011 Hurricane Season, which experts are predicting to be very active, the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) is offering personal preparedness tips for the all of the citizens of the Commonwealth.

“Every home and business should have a stocked basic emergency supply kit that could be used for any emergency, regardless of the time of year,” states MEMA Acting Director Kurt Schwartz. “Everyone should keep certain items around the house and workplace in the event you are isolated for three to five days without power”

Each kit will be unique to each family, but should include a portable radio, flashlight, extra batteries, a supply of non-perishable foods, along with bottled water, a first aid kit, extra prescription medication, and extra food and supplies for infants and pets.

“All families should develop a ‘Family Emergency Communication Plan’ to help ensure everyone is safe. You should contact your local authorities to learn about your community’s potential evacuation routes and the location of emergency shelters,” said Schwartz. “It is important to familiarize yourself with your Community’s Emergency Plans before an emergency situation occurs.”

Develop a Disaster Supply Kit ‘Go Bag’, with essentials in case you must evacuate quickly.

1. HURRICANE DISASTER SUPPLY KIT

Canned goods and nonperishable foods that do not need cooking:
Canned meats and fish
Canned fruits and vegetables
Canned soups and puddings
Canned fruit juices
Dried fruit and nuts
Bread, cookies and crackers
Peanut butter and jelly
Coffee and tea
Manual can opener
Bottled water (1 gallon per person/per day)
Prescription medication (2 week supply)
Extra eyeglasses
Pet food/supplies
Water purification tablets (halazone)
Disposable plates, cups, and utensils
Infant care items:
Disposable diapers
Baby wipes
Baby food
Formula
First aid supplies
Masking and duct tape
Flashlight or lantern, with extra batteries
Battery operated radio, with extra batteries
Watch or battery operated clock
Ice chest
Matches
Canned heat (sterno)
Portable outdoor camping stove or grill with fuel supply
A certain amount of cash
Important documents (Such as wills, deeds, prescriptions, passports, birth certificates, health record, proof of address, Social Security number)
Plastic trash bags
Plastic sheeting or tarp
Chlorinated bleach
Personal hygiene items
Other useful items:
Work gloves
Sun lotion
Insect repellent
Hammer
Screwdriver
Pliers
Wrenches
Handsaw
Razor knife
Ax or chainsaw
Rope caulking
Nails and screws
Rope and wire
Broom, mop and bucket
All-purpose cleaner
Ladder
Sandbags
Portable generator
Tree pruner
Shovel, rake and wheelbarrow
Sheets of plywood

2. FAMILY EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

Develop a Family Emergency Communications Plan in case family members are separated from one another during an emergency (a real possibility during the day when adults are at work and children are at school, camp or at a friend’s house). This plan should also address reunification after the immediate crisis passes.

Ask an out-of-state relative or friend to serve as the Family Emergency Communications Plan contact person. During and immediately after a disaster occurs, it is often easier to access a long distance telephone number than a local one. Also, calling outside a disaster area is usually easier than calling into the same area.

Make sure everyone knows the name, address and telephone number of the Family Emergency Communications Plan contact person.

Designate two meeting areas for family members – one within your community (your primary location), and one outside of your community (your alternate location). Sometimes an emergency could impact your neighborhood or small section of the community, so a second location outside of your community would be more accessible to all family members.

A Family Emergency Communications Plan can help reassure everyone’s safety and minimize the stress associated with emergencies

3. STAY INFORMED

Educate yourself and family about emergency plans for your community, place of business, your child’s school and camp. Know what potential risks your community and neighborhood are susceptible to in a hurricane, such as storm surge, flooding, etc. Carefully monitor the Media and follow instructions from Public Safety officials as hurricane approaches.

Additional storm information will be forthcoming as received via MEMA's Situational Awareness Statements.

MEMA Situational Awareness Statement #1

2011-08-24T17:20:00.001-04:00

Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency
Hurricane Irene Situational Awareness Statement (SAS) #1

Date: August 24, 2011
Time: 11:30AM
Situation:

Hurricane Irene, a Category 3 storm currently located in the Bahamas, is expected to impact Massachusetts as early as this weekend. As of 11:00AM today, the National Hurricane Center's projected track shows Irene passing by the Outer Banks on Saturday, making landfall on Long Island Sunday evening, and passing through Massachusetts Sunday night and Monday morning as a Category 1 or 2 storm, with the possibility of a weak Category 3. Irene is still several days out, however, and the projected track could potentially be off by as much as 200 miles and the projected timing by 6 to 8 hours.

HURREVAC 5-Day Forecast Map:

Weather Forecast:

Precipitation: Some isolated thunderstorms are possible tomorrow afternoon and evening. Rains associated with Irene may begin as early as Saturday afternoon, with the bulk of precipitation coming Saturday night through Sunday night. A total of 5 to 10 inches of rain are possible in Massachusetts. There is a significant risk of stream and river flooding, but it is too early at this time to identify which basins are most at risk.

Winds: The most damaging winds will be located to the right of Irene's track. Winds in Massachusetts are forecast to be Category 1 (74-95mph) or Category 2 (95-110mph) but Category 3 (110-130mph) winds are not out of the question. Exact timing of the arrival of damaging winds is highly dependent on Irene's forward speed; Sunday through Sunday night are most likely, but an increase in Irene's speed could bring significant winds as early as Saturday night.

Coastal Flooding: The magnitude of coastal flooding will depend on the exact track, speed, and intensity of Irene, as well as its timing with respect to high tide. The most severe flooding will occur along south-facing coasts, but some flooding is also possible on east-facing coasts if Irene arrives near high tide.

Marine/Beaches: The risk of rip currents will increase starting tomorrow and is expected to remain high through the beginning of next week. Depending on Irene's forward speed, seas may begin building Saturday night and could reach 20-30 feet by Sunday, with the highest seas being to the right of Irene's track.

State Actions:

MEMA is closely monitoring Irene's progress via tools such as HURREVAC and the National Hurricane center's website, and remains in close communication with FEMA Region 1, other state EOCs, and the National Weather Service. MEMA has requested FEMA Incident Management Assistance team (IMAT) support and plans a partial activation of the State Emergency Operations Center (SEOC) in Framingham starting tomorrow. Liaisons from Emergency Support Function (ESF) leads and other key agencies will be present in the SEOC starting tomorrow to conduct pre-landfall planning for Irene. Additional agencies and organizations will be called in to the SEOC as Irene's landfall approaches. MEMA will conduct at least one conference call daily with local Emergency Management Directors and will push out Situational Awareness Statements at least once daily and more as necessary.

Information for EMDs:

At this time, MEMA urges local officials to monitor Irene's progress and predicted track closely, review existing emergency plans and procedures, update emergency contact lists, test communications equipment, and be prepared to participate with MEMA in more proactive planning and preparedness efforts if necessary. MEMA also strongly encourages local officials to review their SLOSH (inundation) maps, pre-identify areas particularly at risk from storm surge flooding, and consider issuing voluntary or mandatory evacuation orders for these areas if the need arises. Local officials are also reminded to verify their inventories of sandbags and procure additional supplies if needed. MEMA has emergency stockpiles of sandbags available if needed.

MEMA has created a WebEOC event for Irene called "2011 Hurricane Irene". EMDs should use this event for situational awareness and conveying requests for assistance related to Hurricane Irene. Users experiencing issues with logging on to or using WebEOC should contact their MEMA Regional office for assistance.

In order to assist local officials with preparedness and response to Irene, MEMA has made the following resources available on its website (www.mass.gov/mema) in the "Hurricane Information" section:

Links to online tools and resources
Hurricane safety information
Sea, Lake, and Overland Surge from Hurricanes (SLOSH) maps for coastal Massachusetts counties. These are available as static maps in .PDF format, as well as interactive maps using Google Earth which will allow users to zoom in to neighborhoods and view projected inundations for category 1 through 4 hurricanes. Google Earth is available free of charge at earth.google.com.
Southern Massachusetts Hurricane Evacuation Study
Hurricane Evacuation Behavioral Assumptions for Massachusetts
The Cape Cod Emergency Traffic Plan

Online Resources:

For additional information and resources, visit:

Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency at www.mass.gov/mema

Federal Emergency Management Agency at www.fema.gov

National Hurricane Center Website at www.nhc.noaa.gov

National Weather Service – Taunton at www.weather.gov/boston

National Weather Service – Albany, NY at www.weather.gov/albany

Mass211 at www.mass211.org

The next SAS is scheduled for 11:00AM tomorrow or as needed.

Steve M. Staffier / MEMA
Communications Coordinator (COMC)
Primary # 781-307-1366
Secondary # 508-922-3355
Email: Steve.Staffier@state.ma.us