SHUTESBURY - A divided Select Board voted 2-1 Wednesday night to hold a second vote on building a new library, in a meeting that brought more than 200 residents out to the elementary school to hear arguments for and against the proposed facility.
The decision means that another town-wide vote on a new $3.5 million library will take place no later than Dec. 19.
The final vote was the stuff of high drama, with Chairwoman Elaine Puleo first signaling she was against a second vote before voting in favor of the question. An ardent supporter of the library, Puleo told the crowd that she was conflicted about opening the matter up to a second vote after voters rejected a Proposition 2½ debt-exclusion override Nov. 8.
"I cannot see a reasonable reason to open the vote except that I really want it," Puleo said. But she said she worried about the long-term divisions that scheduling a revote might cause for the town.
"I don't want the town to be divided over a library. It's a library," Puleo said. And then she appeared to lean toward casting her vote against the library.
"I want this library more than you might think, but I can't do it," Puleo said. She said residents who had initially voted for the library would feel strong-armed if it were to pass in a second vote. "It's not fair," she said.
But after an appeal from fellow Select Board member and library supporter April Stein, Puleo decided to take a walk by herself. When she returned her mind appeared changed.
"I cannot be the person that decides the up or down for the library," she said. "I can't be the one who says no and kills the library and I can't be the one to say yes. I am going to have to let the town vote again, but I can't do it."
When the vote finally came after 10:30 p.m., with board member Al Springer alone in opposition, it was met with silence.
The question of whether to build a new library in Shutesbury has sharply divided the town. The existing M.N. Spear Memorial Library is 900 square feet, which supporters contend is too small to meet the demands of the town.
A first vote at a special Town Meeting on Oct. 25 passed by the exact two-thirds margin needed to proceed to a ballot question. But in that ballot vote two weeks later, residents reversed the decision, voting 423-382 against the library. Following that vote, supporters of the plan requested that the Select Board put the question to a second vote.
Those divisions remained evident Wednesday, as the Select Board heard more than 2½ hours of public comment from residents both for and against a second vote. Supporters of a revote presented a petition with 283 signatures in favor of another ballot. Opponents submitted a petition with more than 130 signatures, gathered since Sunday, asking the board to reject the request for a revote. Speakers were more or less evenly divided on the subject. Each speaker's comments concluded to thunderous applause.
Supporters' argument for a revote centered on two points: that the opponents' campaign prevailed by presenting misinformation to voters and that a $2.1 million grant from the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners presented a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. The grant, which expires Jan, 31, 2012, would set the town's share of the project at $1.4 million, of which supporters have pledged to raise $400,000. And they also appealed for the Select Board to give voters more time to consider a complex proposal.
Katherine Hilton noted that many of those who ultimately voted against the override did not turn out to the special Town Meeting.
"The point is that as many as 289 people, more than a third of those who voted, rejected the override without having heard both sides of the argument," she said. "That is no way to make an important decision. We owe it ourselves to be well informed."
Meryl Mandell noted there was precedent for a revote in Shutesbury. In 2003, the Select Board agreed to hold a second vote on Shutesbury's $166,000 portion of a $1.5 million project to reconstruct Leverett Road after the first vote failed to garner a two-thirds majority at a special Town Meeting. The second vote ultimately passed.
"It is legal and there is much precedent in Shutesbury and in surrounding towns to revote on issues of great importance," she said.
But opponents vigorously rejected that notion, saying a second vote would render their initial ballots meaningless and subvert the democratic process.
"We felt like we made a fairly educated decision in our household," said Robert Price, a library opponent. "Then we found out people were saying people made their decision on misinformation. We said, wait a minute, saying this many people in the town of Shutesbury voted on misinformation really discredits the people of Shutesbury to understand the information.
"Was there a bunch of people who were misinformed or a bunch of people who were concerned about the direction their town was going?" Price said.
Others said taxes have become too high and they could no longer afford to live in town.
"You may think that a couple of hundred dollars a year doesn't make a difference, but it does," said Ben Drabeck, a 50-year resident of town. "I am making plans to sell my house and get out of Shutesbury. I'd like a new car, but I can't afford it. I'd like a vacation, but I can't afford it. I think the same is true of the Taj Mahal of a library these people are proposing."
The Select Board spent over an hour and a half debating the merits of a revote. The board considered whether the project might be scaled down to reduce its cost, but struggled with the fact that the state has already signed off on the proposed 5,800-square-foot library.
Stein said she supported a revote because such a recourse was allowed under the Proposition 2½ law.
"It's not disregarding people, it's a safeguard," Stein said. "It's so we can make an informed decision."
Springer pointed to the turnout Nov. 8, which was 60 percent of the registered voters in town, and said Shutesbury voters had decided the question.
"Why did we get that record turnout if an extra $2.50 each week didn't matter," Springer said, referring to the project's weekly cost for the average Shutesbury homeowner broken out over 20 years. "I think things are pretty tight right now and they don't want to spend anything extra."
No comments:
Post a Comment