My Turn

Over the past few weeks I've shared this blog with those that have definite, and opposing opinions on the CPA.  Every once in a while I get a request to post an opinion on a topic affecting all of us here in town, and I "cut 'n paste" it into place here on Thinking Out Loud In Sturbridge.  I also include the words, "Submitted by...".  This is very important.  If someone has an opinion they want to stand behind, and ask me for a chance to post it then they have earned the right to have their opinion attached to their name.  Since I did not initiate the topic, and have no feelings I've shared publicly, I also open these pages up to the opposing view as well.

Fair's fair.

These submitted opinions are totally unlike the comment section under the postings.  In the comment section people can post their opinions anonymously, or under a pseudonym, and still offer up and opinion, and fan the fire storms of controversy as well.  Most like this anonymity, but only a few are  brave, and steadfast in their beliefs to submit a posting in their name.

Throughout the past few weeks, I've let the parties submit their positions, advertise their presentations, and petition signing locations, and let the comments fly in both directions like so many mud pies in the wind.

Today, I would like to offer some common sense to the mix, 'cuz that's what I do.  I get beyond the rhetoric, and just offer up what is logical, and makes the most sense.  Sometimes it can turn both parties around, and  tear apart my position, but if I can get two opposing parties on the same page for just a moment, then there is hope they can adapt, and develop something meaningful together.

I believe that we need to save our land from over developing.  I grew up up in an era where land was diced, and sliced up in countless subdivisions, and industrial parks, and so many thousands of acres were lost forever due to poor planning, for that time, and the future.  Out of my being a witness to this history comes my desire to conserve our resources, and preserve our history.

I also believe most of us feel the same way.  

The next part, the manner in which local conservation, and preservation is planned, and paid for, is the current bone of contention here in Sturbridge.  I am not going to rehash just what the CPA is, does, or promises to do now, nor am I going to go on about how some consider the CPA a credit card to years of indebtedness.  All I am going to do is state some obvious truths, and from there either side can insert them into their argument where they may.

1. When a plan is made to purchase a tract of land, or preserve a bit of history, the entire plan is to be laid out.  All of it.  Every iota of the plan, and every bit of the arguments, explanations, and reasons for every part of the plan.  The plan should always include comparisons with other methods in order for the voter to make an informed decision.  Single pane vs. multi pane windows, passive vs. active recreation.  You know the drill.  Surprises should never be the epilogue to the best intentioned plans.
2. The plan, and cost,  for maintaining the land, or building preservation should always be spelled out with the original plan.  Will volunteers always be responsible for maintaining the land, or will the town actually form a paid Parks Department, and proper explanations for both.  Again, there should be no surprises later on.
3. And, finally, how is the project being paid for?  Town funds with 75-100% matching state funds?  That's easy.  Go for it.  Town funds with only 30% matching state funds, and paying for the project with a surcharge on property values over many, many years?  One needs to think twice about these choices.
4. If the project is worthy, and the money, or method of payment is not there, or feasible, then move on.  You may want an indoor swimming pool at your home, or drive a $100,000 car, but unless you have the money in savings, a rich uncle, or a way to raise the cash without costing you a lot more over time, then rein it in, and change your plans.

That is not only logical, but just common sense.

Now, for the final bit.  As I said, I am all for proper conservation, and preservation projects, and I fully support those folks that put projects like this before the town for consideration.  I am also for full disclosure, and planning.  Those very same people should not only offer up the idea, but the entire plan for acquisition, implementation, long term maintenance, and ALL methods of paying for the project with ALL costs projected outward in order for Sturbridge residents to make the best informed decision.  I don't feel that leaving out information is intentional most of the time in order to sell a particular issue to the residents.  I do believe that some folks, and groups, are capable of only planning so much that they are skilled at, and fall apart with other parts because they may not know how to plan further.  Their group lacks that particular skill set.  

And, then there are the times that some parties are just out to get their project passed come hell, or high water, and screw the opposition. That happens, too.

What is the main issue, at present, is there are some that do not want the CPA to be used for any more purchases.  They feel the debt is too great, and that if there are other projects that are to be considered in the future, then other methods of paying for them, other than the CPA,  are needed.  The other side feels the opposite.  They do not  feel  the debt is more than expected, or what can be comfortably be paid for.  They also feel that without CPA funds the land purchases we have made over the past several years could not have been made.  

Some feel that we take care of all these purchased projects first before going on another shopping binge like some people do with  access to the Home Shopping Channel  after a bad breakup.

Now, all sides have expressed themselves well.  Their beliefs are intense, passionate in fact, and those that have shared their name on these pages are committed to their side of the issue.  When the choice comes to decide on whether we will continue in this direction, or not, use all the information at hand to make your choice.

One more thing, a bit off the subject.  I've read that the Town Meetings are stacked in favor of one side of an issue, or the other, since few choose to go to Town Meeting on a weekday evening.  That's historically true everywhere, but not unfixable.  We need to change Town Meetings to Saturdays so that it would be easier for more residents to attend these important meetings, and offer fewer excuses for not attending.  Those that are not in favor of allowing for more participation in town government by the towns residents by accommodating them with something as simple as changing the time to a weekend day has a more nefarious agenda.  It's not rocket surgery.  

Times have changed.  Life is busier, and Saturday meetings would help solve many issues we now face, the current one included.  I know, we tried to change the meetings to Saturdays last year, and failed.  Try again, and move on with running the town in a positive direction, expending energy in a positive way, and doing the best for those of us that live here, and come to visit us.

Enough posturing.  

Think about what present and future reward a project is to give to the town, and then think on how much is that reward worth.  If the reward is worth the price, then next come up up with a plan to pay for it that will not take away from that initial reward that got you all hot and bothered.  If you can't come up with an acceptable way to pay over an acceptable period of time, then move on.  

It's that simple.