LETTER FROM SELECTMAN CUNNINGHAM: Herald Editorial Guilty of Revisionism
Dear Editor,
A couple of definitions of this word came to mind after reading last week's editorial: Revisionism - 'support of ideas and beliefs that differ from and try to change accepted ideas and beliefs especially in a way that is seen as wrong or dishonest' (Merriam-Webster online dictionary), and the second definition would be the editorial itself where the editor seeks to cast the GELD/Selectman spat as an example of a monolithic Town Hall attempting to impose its Station Ave. vision.
This, of course, is wholly inaccurate since GELD was very much part of the process in the planning for Station Ave. including their very generous underwriting of the costs of the planning professionals involved.
GELD has understood for some time that they would need a larger central facility to meet their needs and wanted to make sure that the expense of their re-location was covered by the sale of their Station Ave. [facility] for development. When that scenario did not occur and it became evident that the site development costs of the land next to the Rt. 40 substation would exceed $900,000, GELD made the decision to stay on Station Ave.
The editor fails to mention that in addition to the Downes' property that GELD purchased to improve siting of their new facility, the town is also conveying to GELD the former MacGregor property to assist in the layout of their new facility.
It is also the case that once GELD made the decision to stay on Station Ave., they received a fair and straight-forward review by the Planning Board which as the stewards of the town's master plan should have provided strong opposition if one is to believe the editor's view. That of course did not happen and the permitting obstacles GELD encountered were due more to conservation/wetland issues.
At the end of the day, the PILOT reduction of $15,000 by GELD is minimal and will not create a fiscal crisis for the town or result in a rate reduction for GELD customers. The fact that it occurred when it did is frustrating since it was a revenue number that was approved by the 2012 Town Meeting for the FY 2013 budget.
It would have made more sense for GELD to have imposed their reduction in time for this past Annual Town Meeting where it would impact the FY2014 budget and could be planned for. This was due in large part to the fact that GELD operates on a calendar fiscal year while the town operates on a more typical June/July fiscal year. Subsequent discussions with the GELD Commissioners have clarified this point.
It is important for townspeople to know that GELD and the town enjoy a very positive day-to-day working relationship. Much like two siblings, the squabble over the PILOT reduction is minor. The positive outcome is that the Selectmen and GELD Commissioners have agreed to a top-down review of the permitting process to see where improvements could be made and greater clarity provided to project applicants.
Sincerely,
Peter Cunningham
Selectman
