Elections

LETTER: Sustainable Watertown Supports the Community Preservation Act

By |

To the Editor,

Sustainable Watertown encourages Watertown to vote for the Community Preservation Act (CPA), Question 5, when you vote Tuesday. Question 5 is on the back of your ballot. The CPA will allow residents to Invest in Watertown with matching funds from the State to be spent as the community decides on improving parks, trails, and recreation; veterans memorials and historic sites; and to create more affordable housing. We would receive about $2 million a year. The state has already given out $542 million.

Community Preservation Act

LETTER: Community Preservation Act Will Allow Investment in Watertown

By |

To the Editor,

I believe that we should Invest in Watertown and vote in favor of Question 5 as so many other cities and towns in Massachusetts have done before us. We would get about 27 cents in matching funds from the State for every dollar paid into the fund. That’s a lot of return for about $124 per year for a family in Watertown. And it is a Watertown community committee that makes the local choices of how to spend the money. The issue of competition between the Community Preservation Act and any schools to be built in the future is a red herring, a diversion, with different sources of funding and many years of planning yet to come.

Elections

LETTER: Defeating CPA May Mean Voters Never Have Another Shot at It

By |

Editor,

Some of those who are urging a No vote on CPA, Question 5, are insisting that they do not oppose CPA but that this is just the wrong time for it. Their proposal that this should be postponed to a later date is in my opinion a false option. If the CPA is defeated for a second time, I believe it may be gone for good in Watertown; at least we will be missing its financial benefits for a very long time to come. Those who propose a delay to a future time are clearly not aware of the enormous time, energy, organization, and numbers of people involved in getting the question on the ballot and educating voters about it. The Town Council will also be reluctant to put it on the ballot after a second defeat.  It took 11 years after the 2005 defeat for a group to propose it again; a second defeat will seal it’s fate for the foreseeable future.

Elections

LETTER: Town Councilor Struggled with How to Vote on CPA, Chose Yes

By |

Dear Watertown Voter,

I understand it can be difficult to keep an open mind throughout a campaign, especially once folks become invested on one side of an issue. Emotions can run deep and opinions become cemented before understanding all of the facts. I am also concerned about underestimating the impacts of Watertown’s rapid transformation. When approached by the citizen-led Invest in Watertown Committee, I initially expressed concerns about adopting the Community Preservation Act (CPA) this November, given our school building needs and the timing of even a small surcharge on taxpayers, knowing it can be a tough sell any time you seek additional funds. I have attended most of the school-related meetings and community forums this year.

Elections

LETTER: Town Does Not Need CPA, Should Be Able to Pay for Projects With Budget

By |

Dear Watertown Friends and Neighbors,

Watertown is a well-run Town which is financially on stable ground with a 130 MILLION DOLLAR ANNUAL BUDGET to operate the 4.2 square miles which we call home. In the past decade we have built, or renovated, most our public buildings including the Police, Fire, DPW and Library. Our bond rating is among the best in the State of Massachusetts which allows our Town to borrow money at the lowest interest rates available. There is a lot to be happy about from a fiscal viewpoint and I applaud the elected officials and Town Employees who are responsible for that outcome. Unfortunately, proponents of the CPA, including five of our Town Councilors (Palomba, Dushku, Feltner, Falkoff and Woodland) don’t think that is good enough.

Community Preservation Act

LETTER: Resident Concerned With Incivility of Debate Over the CPA

By |

To the Editor:

Though reasonable people can disagree on the CPA, I urge my Watertown neighbors to exercise their civic pride and vote “Yes” on Question 5. Let’s give CPA a try and see what we can accomplish together to better our community. We can withdraw from the program if the results aren’t satisfactory. Presently Watertown is at a critical juncture when the physical landscape of our community is changing drastically. A strategic investment in preservation and open space will help us pass on a more livable town to those who follow.

Campaign Finance

Groups Opposing the CPA May Have Missed Campaign Finance Reporting Deadline

By |

It appears two groups opposing the Community Preservation Act may have violated the state’s campaign finance laws by missing the first deadline to report campaign contributions, but the law is long and confusing. 

For candidates for elected office – local or state – the reporting times are eight days before the election, eight days after, 30 days following the election and Jan. 20 of the next year. For political committees there are different reporting days. However, neither the Concerned Watertown Homeowners nor the Watertown Strong Schools group are political committees, since they did not form to support or oppose a candidate or ballot measure. They appear to fit under the Section 22 of the law applying to individuals or corporations making contributions.