Sunday, May 25, 2025

News and Ideas Worth Sharing

HomeViewpointsLettersIn Stockbridge, vote...

In Stockbridge, vote ‘no’ on Article 23

The Planning Board has not made clear why an additional $40,000 is a necessary expense.

To the editor:

Stockbridge voters should vote NO on Article 23, which asks for the town to approve an additional $40,000 for part-time professional planning assistance to the Planning Board. The Planning Board was awarded $40,000 last year. The consultants stated at a public meeting that their work was done. When asked by the Selectboard to submit a list of further needs and priorities, the Planning Board did not submit a list that would necessitate spending another $40,000. Nor was the chairperson able to provide information about how much of the last $40,000 was spent. Why is an additional $40,000 a necessary expense? The consultants have written a draft bylaw and made their recommendations. Now it is time for the Planning Board members, with input from the Selectboard, town administrator, town counsel, and the residents of the town, to make final recommendations.

This past year, there was a clear lack of transparency in the actions of the Board. A three-member ad hoc committee controlled communication with the planners until the question of open meeting violations was raised. Then only, the vice-chair was permitted to communicate with the consultants, expressing her opinions not those of the Board or town. There was an apparent lack of understanding among some of the Board about the impact of the details written by the planners. Without public discussion, changes were made to details recommended by the consultants, such as percentages that control density. Why spend money on consultants if you’re not going to accept their recommendations?

The town sent a clear message that it wants more transparency by re-electing Gary Pitney and electing Carl Sprague to serve on the Planning Board. The town should know where the members stand. Planning Board members should all be involved in open discussion before making decisions that have a major impact on the character of the town. If they come to a point where they feel the need for assistance, they can bring their request to the Selectboard.

These are some of the reasons why Stockbridge residents should vote NO on Article 23.

Anita Schwerner
Stockbridge

The writer is the chairperson of the Stockbridge Democratic Town Committee.

spot_img

The Edge Is Free To Read.

But Not To Produce.

Continue reading

PETER MOST: Sampler platter — Fairview to fried chicken

Grazing and tapas can be satisfying, so let’s give this a shot. Hopefully, you will leave feeling sated.

Negligent corporate news media coverage of domestic economic effects of U.S. war contracting

Even the New York Times business section, The Wall Street Journal, and Bloomberg News fail to do any investigative reporting on both the short- and long-term corrosive effects (during my 77 years) on our domestic economy of the U.S.'s reflexive spending on war and preparation for war.

The dollars and cents of school choice, explained

The school-choice funding model in Massachusetts is based on the economic principle that the marginal cost of educating an additional student is much lower than the average cost per student.

The Edge Is Free To Read.

But Not To Produce.