Charlie Breitrose
Supporters of the CPA – including Jennifer Van Campen, left, and Councilor Lisa Feltner, right – look at vote totals in Town Hall after Tuesday’s election.
The second time was the charm for proponents of the Community Preservation Act in Watertown, which won with nearly 60 percent of the vote on Tuesday.
The ballot question will create a fund for projects in three areas: affordable housing, open space and historic preservation.
Jennifer Van Campen, one of the leaders of Invest in Watertown, the group that put the CPA on the ballot, said she was confident going into election.
“I actually welt that we were going to win all along,” Van Campen said.
The confidence came despite the fact Watertown voters rejected the CPA in 2005. Also, there was also an active “No” campaign from the Concerned Watertown Homeowners, who funding mechanism because it would hurt families and residents struggling to afford living in town.
The money for the CPA comes from a 2 percent surcharge added to Watertown’s property tax bills, and the town will receive some matching funds from the state. Low-income residents and low- and moderate-income seniors can apply to the town to get a waiver from the surcharge.
Also, the Watertown Strong Schools parent group urge voters to reject the CPA because there are school bond projects that will be on the ballot in the next few years.
Van Campen said she thought residents saw the benefits of the CPA this time around.
“We had a more organized campaign with more volunteers, and more importantly, so many other communities have adopted it and are doing great things with the money,” Van Campen said. “A lot of projects have been built and Watertown residents have been able to see those.”
Along with the volunteers from town, Invest in Watertown also got donations and help from Metro West Collaborative Development, of which Van Campen is executive director, and from the national group Trust for Public Lands.
Town of Watertown
A map of Watertown’s Districts: Peach is A, Red is B, Lime Green is C, Green is D.
The “Yes” on Question 5 not only won the total vote, it also won in all 12 precincts in town.
The closest vote came in Precinct 11 on the Westside of town, where Yes won by just two votes, while the largest margin came in Precinct 3 in the East End, where Yes won by 549 votes.
Precinct-by-Precinct Results for the CPA
| Yes on CPA | No on CPA | |
| Precinct 1 | 734 | 395 |
| Precinct 2 | 850 | 505 |
| Precinct 3 | 1040 | 491 |
| Precinct 4 | 1057 | 552 |
| Precinct 5 | 870 | 467 |
| Precinct 6 | 816 | 515 |
| Precinct 7 | 863 | 686 |
| Precinct 8 | 848 | 716 |
| Precinct 9 | 811 | 457 |
| Precinct 10 | 1024 | 877 |
| Precinct 11 | 666 | 664 |
| Precinct 12 | 706 | 571 |
| TOTAL | 10285 | 6896 |
So the CPA has passed. Now how do we heal the town after this most divisive of debates. From my vantage, much damage has been done.
Joseph, I’m not sure how long you’ve lived in Watertown… but this was by no means a damaging or divisive campaign, compared to many others we’ve had.
This is what happens in campaign.
John, I wasn’t around back then either, but the general feeling I am hearing from people on both sides of the CPA is that they are not pleased with the tone of this campaign.
John, I have no idea what has happened in the past. I have lived here eight years. What I do know is that this campaign was too personal and not focused enough on factual issues.
Such debate should not be about individuals, personalities or stereotypes (liberals, anti-taxiers), but more about what are the details and how might this work for the town or not. It should not be about old grudges, who has lived here longer, etc. It should not be about calling other people names or questioning their IQ or judgement, but about how can we better our community.
The personal stuff distracts from that. Some good independent journalism– a couple of articles–laying out the history of CPA and how other communities have used it and how it has worked–would have been helpful in turning down the noise. All the information was coming from either proponents or opponents, so each has its bias.
I grew up in a pretty tough neighborhood, so I can hurl insults with the best of them. But I came here to Massachusetts to get away from that small minded crap. I don’t mind a strongly framed argument, but it must be carefully thought out and based on careful analysis of the issues, not just “us vs. them” kind of arguments. And no need to question people’s motives, especially if you don’t know them.
Watertown is changing and the challenges will test our abilities. We cannot afford to deal with them with discussions conducted on a petty level.
We say hello when we see each other. We, at least try, to reach out to each other with kindness and generosity. We try not to hold grudges. We try to simplify the process so that families with lower incomes can easily be exempt from the tax. We work together to fund new schools. We do things better next time. We realize that each day, we are creating the world we live in.
Thank you, Candace. Exactly. We learn from the past and create a better future:-)
What I learned from this is that there is a lack of debates and real information on both sides. This is especially true given the fact that so many officials(who are in contact with residents) did not promote multiple debates with real pro/con questions and answers. The lack of information and questions answered for instance: Councilor Palomba sent out many many Yes on 5 post to social media, with many residents asking questions which went unanswered. This lack of answers and debates creates a climate of mistrust. Yes, debates take time and energy but this is how we create a transparent process. I would also like to say that the way the question #5 was done on the ballot was inferior and misleading. How is one suppose to remember if yes or no is what they want without this being spelled out like the rest of the questions on the ballot!?
Congratulations to CPA proponents on their victory.
Now it’s up to the Watertown to see that this revenue is spent wisely and that no new debt is ever issued to fund proposed CPA projects.
To those like myself who opposed. We fought a valiant fight to inform people, considering how much we were out spent, we garnered close to 7,000 votes. That’s more people than vote in a municipal election. That’s nothing to be ashamed of.
We live in a Republic, where we except the legal results of an election. We fight like our lives depended on it for our positions. But we accept any legitimate and legal results of an election. So I urge the various factions on this issue to now set aside differences and work together for the betterment of Watertown.