To the editor:
Recently, I received a 2-page flyer that Stockbridge’s most vocal Trump supporter wrote about the upcoming election. He began the flyer by asserting that there is a “small group-16 of them” who “only care about their personal agendas” and who make “shady efforts” to sway the town’s elections. After making brief comments in support of several current candidates, he went on to criticize one particular candidate for his “selfish and personally motivated actions/inactions,” without providing any evidence of selfish acts or personal motivation. He also decided for some strange reason to include my name in an inaccurate reference to a Select Board decision to have Town Counsel investigate certain purchases made for a town department. I’m not running for office, so why involve my name? It is important for all of us in Stockbridge and in the nation to avoid trying to influence voters and officials by carelessly attacking the motives and integrity of people who oppose us on issues. The truth is that there is no cabal, no conspiracy of 16 selfish people.
In the past, the flyer’s author has argued that a small minority in town has been nefariously trying to ruin the town by using our zoning bylaws to stop development, thus endangering the town’s well-being. The truth is that our current bylaws were created and sustained by a long list of elected planning board members, and the bylaws were approved by Town Meeting voters. Indeed, for decades, the majority of townspeople have supported them for protecting the financial value of their property, and for maintaining the beauty and tranquility of Stockbridge’s small-town way of life.
There are still many people in town, who do not want to see a massive increase in the town’s density of buildings and population. They reject the narrative that we are facing a revenue crisis, and they point to the long-standing and continuing growth in our total property valuation, which has and will continue to keep our taxes relatively low, under our current bylaws. The decision facing the voters in the upcoming weeks is between planners whose emphasis is to make Stockbridge “developer friendly” by making major changes in our bylaws, and planners who want to retain our current bylaws with minor changes, in order to protect our current way of life. This is the legitimate focus of the election and town meeting. Character assassination and conspiracy theses have no place in our discourse.
Terry Flynn
Stockbridge
