The Lincoln Squirrel – News, features and photos from Lincoln, Mass.

My Turn

My Turn: FinCom has seen “breakdown in process”

The Finance Committee (FinCom) plays a critical role in our town: advising on budgets, reviewing expenditures, and helping guide decisions that affect every taxpayer. The integrity of its appointment process matters. And yet, recent public records obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request reveal a troubling breakdown in how this process was handled.

What the bylaw requires

Lincoln’s town bylaws are clear. They state:

“The Moderator of the Town shall, within thirty days after the final adjournment of every Annual Town Meeting, appoint for a term of three years either two persons or three persons, as may be necessary, to provide a committee of seven members (…) The term of office of each member shall commence immediately upon qualification and shall expire upon the final adjournment of the Annual Town Meeting of the last year of such person’s term of office.”

This language affirms that the responsibility to appoint FinCom members belongs solely to the moderator — not to the Finance Committee itself or any other individual. The process is meant to be transparent, timely, and grounded in public accountability.

What actually happened

Emails made public via FOIA show a very different process unfolding behind the scenes. Anyone can request these emails from the Town Clerk; they are public record. In one outreach message, the chair of FinCom wrote: “(…) me taking on the Chair Role and him taking on the Vice Chair Role and so recruiting falls in my purview.”

This directly misstates the bylaw. While the chair can assist with identifying strong candidates, the power to select and appoint belongs only to the moderator. The chair’s role should be limited to offering suggestions as one of several inputs, not acting as the main decision-maker in the selection process. But in this case, the chair handled nearly all outreach, correspondence, interviews and vetting.

The FOIA documents show that for each open slot, the moderator was presented by the chair with only one final candidate after the chair had already conducted the majority of outreach and narrowed the field. In one case, the moderator was informed of a candidate who later declined, but no broader pool of candidates was considered or interviewed. At least one resident (not affiliated with any current town committees) reached out to the moderator to express interest, yet was not offered even a preliminary conversation. This suggests the moderator had limited interest in evaluating any options outside those presented by the chair of FinCom.

The moderator confirms the delegation of duties in another email to the chair of Fincom: “Thank you so much for pursuing the search to fill Andy’s seat.” Essentially this suggests a self-appointed committee.

A pattern of exclusion

In another email, the chair remarked: “[Resident] continues to push and is asking when/if we’ll hold public interviews which I am not inclined to do.” That statement reflects a deliberate choice to avoid an open process. In fact, no general call for volunteers was made. Outreach was limited to those with close personal ties (recommendations from spouses and close friends), or individuals already serving on other committees. Qualified residents outside that inner circle were neither welcomed nor considered.

Even more concerning is this comment: “We really have till May/June as it’s been precedent to have folks serve out till June then roll off, vs. TM [Town Meeting], even though TM is the official line of demarcation… I do worry about our favorite resident sticking to the rules if folks serve a few months longer than the rules suggest.”

Precedent does not override bylaws. Suggesting that rules are flexible and describing a resident who expects compliance as a nuisance shows a troubling attitude toward public oversight and accountability. Residents who ask questions or seek transparency are not “favorites” or problems; they’re fulfilling the civic role we should all support.

Why this matters

Some may argue that because the appointments were ultimately made by the moderator, there’s no issue. But that misses the point. The process was not transparent. It was not inclusive. And it did not follow the spirit of the law. This has real consequences. Yes, Lincoln has a AAA credit rating. But that rating doesn’t reflect the full picture:

  • Our tax bills are among the highest in the state.
  • Our reserves greatly exceed credit agencies’ guidelines.
  • We misallocated $500,000 per year for several years — money we’ll never fully recover.
  • The budget presented at Town Meeting misrepresents our actual revenues and expenditures in order to raise reserves without explicit town approval.

The Finance Committee does not offer hybrid meetings. Roughly half of its meetings are held virtually, yet these are not recorded or made publicly available, despite repeated requests from both residents and town officials.

Notably, FinCom meetings were previously recorded, but the practice ceased after a resident raised a question about the Hanscom misallocation. During that exchange, the current chair provided a response that was proven to be inaccurate, and the resident’s public comment was abruptly shut down. Since then, recording has not resumed and FinCom developed a more restrictive public comment policy.

In-person meetings are not streamed and often overlap with other key town meetings, making it difficult for residents to attend. As a result, residents are effectively shut out of the process unless they can be physically present. (The only exception is the budget hearing leading into Town Meeting, which is recorded, but by then the budget has already been set).

The Finance Committee should be a check on our financials, not a closed circle where only familiar names are welcomed. We need a committee built on independence, rigor, and diverse perspectives.

What needs to change

The current process undermines trust. It discourages civic engagement. And it signals that governance happens behind the scenes, not in the open. We often hear that it’s difficult to find volunteers, but that raises the question: why aren’t we opening up the process to the many capable and willing residents who call Lincoln home?

We can, and must, do better. We owe it to every taxpayer to ensure that town governance is fair, transparent, and consistent with the rules we’ve collectively agreed to follow. The Finance Committee is too important to be treated any other way.

Sincerely,

Karla Gravis (145 Weston Rd.)
Sarah Postlethwait (7 Lewis St.)

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

My Turn: Friends of COA urge support for community center

At the 2024 Town Meeting, as the culmination of decades of discussion and planning, the citizens of Lincoln resoundingly approved a project to build a new community center designed specifically to meet the needs of the Council on Aging & Human Services (COA&HS), Lincoln Extended-day Activities Program (LEAP), and the Parks and Recreation Department.

Since then, architects, site planners, designers, along with the Community Center Building Committee (CCBC), the Conservation Commission, and other town boards and committees have worked diligently to turn the vision of a community center into reality. Throughout the process, they made a number of cuts to the original design to reduce costs. Even so, when bids for construction came in, the lowest bid exceeded the original budget by $2.3 million due to tariffs, supply chain issues, and overall economic conditions.

The CCBC has requested the additional $2.3 million from the town in order to proceed with the construction of the community center on the current schedule.

The Friends of the Lincoln Council on Aging has been a strong proponent of the community center project from the beginning. We contributed $1 million to the community center project in order to reduce the amount the town needed to borrow to fund it. In addition, we helped raise $345,000 through private contributions to reduce the cost of the project to the taxpayers.

We strongly support the CCBC’s request that the town contribute $2.3 million from the stabilization fund to the community venter project. The town has managed its affairs prudently so that the requested funds are available without requiring additional borrowing. This project, at this time, still represents a generationally unique opportunity for the residents of Lincoln to build an asset that will continue to serve the town’s residents, of all ages, for years to come.

Please join us at the Special Town Meeting on June 25 at 6:30pm. We hope you’ll vote in favor of Article 1 to provide the community center project with the funding it needs.

Sincerely,

Rhonda Swain (143 South Great Rd.)
President, Friends of the Lincoln Council on Aging

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

My Turn: An offer to buy and “rewild” Panetta property

The Tesla Investment Holdings LLC Board of Directors is fully committed to supporting a “no” vote on Articles 3 and 4 at the June 25, 2025 Lincoln Special Town Meeting to block the Rural Land Foundation of Lincoln’s (RLF) Nature Link project, which proposes adding a 20-home single-family condo development to the six-acre Panetta property. We stand with you to protect Lincoln’s rural character and ecological integrity.

To counter RLF and Civico’s claims that our rewilding offer is a distraction, we provide this unified, formal statement of our plan to purchase the Panetta land and rewild it, in line with Lincoln’s vision statement: “Lincoln is a town that cherishes its rural, agricultural character, its small-town heritage, its open space, and its historical legacy.”

Concerns with the Nature Link plan
  • Wildlife disruption — Developing Panetta land disrupts natural wildlife corridors revitalized by TendingYourYard.org‘s rewilding site at 100 Page Rd. in Lincoln, which has attracted bald eagles, pollinators, and other species.
  • Oversized luxury development — The 20 homes, with 17 estimated to cost ~$1 million and up, contributes only the minimum required three affordable units to the town’s housing stock. All homes carry HOA fees, making even “affordable” options out of reach for most.
  • Watershed risk — A large septic system on Farrington Trust conservation land undermining environmental integrity.
  • Taxpayer burden — Lincoln’s $950,000 taxpayer-funded Community Preservation Committee (CPC) money indirectly subsidizes developer profits, allowing Civico to build more substantially more units than they would have been able to do otherwise.
  • Lack of transparency — This deal was negotiated behind closed doors, without public input or any advance notice to abutters. Keeping the community in the dark not only excluded valuable alternatives like our rewilding proposal, it also significantly limited what was possible for the site and the town.

Longtime Lincoln residents and founders of the nonprofit Tending Your Yard, Tending the Earth will expand their nonprofit with a vision to rewild the Panetta land.

A sustainable alternative: rewilding the Panetta property
  • Farrington conservation land can still be conserved — Our plan supports all aspects of RLF’s proposal — Farrington’s conservation, Lincoln’s CPC contribution toward conservation, and Cambridge’s watershed protection. The only major difference is that Civico’s luxury condo development will be replaced with land preservation and their large septic system located in the middle of new conservation land will no longer be required. Our rewilding secures Panetta’s legacy and conserves Farrington’s future.
  • Farrington easement — We will grant Farrington Trust a vehicle easement for environmental training, aligned with TendingYourYard.org’s mission, after they transfer 2–3 acres (~$1 million value) to the Panetta property deed, as agreed in the Nature Link project, expanding conservation to 8-9 acres. As with the Nature Link proposal, the access ceases if Farrington sells their land or repurposes it against their conservation charter.
  • Rewilding vision — TendingYourYard.org will rewild the land (native plantings, trails, educational center) without disturbing existing buildings (two houses, one barn), which may need repairs. Detailed plans (e.g., budget, scope) will require weeks of on-site assessment and community input post-“no” vote.
Tesla Investment Holdings LLC’s commitment
  • On June 10, 2025, the Tesla Investment Holdings LLC board approved a $3.3 million distribution from our Schwab brokerage account, payable immediately, to replace Civico’s $3.3 million in the Nature Link plan and secure the Panetta land deed from the RLF.
  • TendingYourYard.org, a nonprofit created by Arline Sutherland’s Irrevocable Trust (a major Tesla Investment Holdings LLC shareholder), requested that Tesla allocate $3.3 million to hold the Panetta property for rewilding, similar to our successful site at 100 Page Road. Jeff and Arline Sutherland are Lincoln residents and abutters to the Panetta land.
Financial assurance
  • Tesla Investment Holdings LLC manages an $80 million fund with over $12 million in loans to partner organizations. The $3.3 million check, authorized by our board, is immediately available from our Schwab brokerage account.
  • Yesim Taskor, our CFO and a Farrington Trust abutter, can verify the offer’s legitimacy and provide financials to RLF or the Town of Lincoln upon request.
  • Dennis Murphy of Hill Law is our land trust lawyer and has reviewed this document.
Why our offer wins
  • Immediate funding — Our $3.3 million check is ready today, unlike other unfunded proposals. RLF provides the Panetta deed, and we close swiftly, no rezoning required.
  • Community benefits — Rewilding avoids oversized condo development and septic risks, supports Farrington’s conservation, and aligns with Lincoln’s vision statement and intended use of CPC funds.
  • Open discussion — A “no” vote enables community input on all proposals, unlike Nature Link’s rushed, opaque process.

Our “rewilding Panetta” proposal is a true win-win for our town, our residents, and our natural environment—but it is only possible with a “no” vote on Articles 3 and 4 at the Special Town Meeting on June 25 at 6:30pm.

Sincerely,

The Board of Directors, Tesla Investment Holdings LLC (100 Page Rd., Lincoln):

    • Jeffrey Sutherland (CEO, JVS Management Inc.; managing partner, Tesla Investment Holdings LLC)
    • Reverend Arline Conan Sutherland (Arline Sutherland’s Irrevocable Massachusetts Trust; shareholder, Tesla Investment Holdings LLC; creator, TendingYourYard.org)

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

My Turn: Vote “no” on community center and “re-scope” the project

Dear friends and neighbors,

The June 25th Town Meeting will decide whether to fund an additional $2.33 million for the Community Center. We urge you to vote “no” — not because we oppose better facilities for our community programs, but because we believe that this project has fundamental issues that additional money won’t fix. We are speaking up now because we are at a decision point, and this is the time to raise our voices, noting that constructive disagreement is part of healthy discourse and vibrant government. Democracy works when we all participate.

For those of you in a rush, here’s the TL;DR:

1. Please come to the upcoming Special Town Meeting on Wednesday, June 25 from 6:30-9:30pm. However you vote, please vote! There will be childcare available from 6:00-9:00pm in pod C (the LEAP pod). The community center will be the  first warrant up for voting, and:

    • A “yes” vote would see it move forward (with additional $2.33 million funding required from the town), but we feel that this increased funding still won’t solve the fundamental issues that we outline below.
    • A “no” vote will pause construction and allow for a new process to revisit the entire concept.

2. We are in favor of a “no” vote to pause and re-scope the project because:

  • This isn’t the community center that the town voted to fund. The original vision that we voted on described a “gathering place and activity center” that would “attract residents of all ages to gather for coffee and meetings and informal activities.” The reality: budget constraints have forced cuts that moved us far from this vision. The building design is now essentially an office building for three separate groups sharing utilities. The only unscheduled public space available to all residents is a lobby, labeled the “community gathering” space. All other spaces will be used “if scheduling allows” and by appointment only. In addition, there’s no gym or lecture hall or other typical community center functionality in the design.
  • It’s designed for yesterday’s needs, not tomorrow’s growth.
    • LEAP already has waitlists of 10+ families and can serve only 104 kids at capacity — no room for the growing families moving to Lincoln.
    • Council on Aging currently serves ~200-300 people but wants to reach our 1,875+ seniors — impossible in this constrained space.
    • Recreation will similarly hit capacity limits with no expansion possible.
  • Timing, functionality, location, and operations present fundamental challenges:
    • The timing of this construction brings more deep disruption to kids who have already been disrupted twice in their elementary school years (school renovation + COVID)
    • With the current design, LEAP will lose substantial functionality and autonomy, and the current budget (even with the proposed increase in funding) does not replace existing resources (e.g., play spaces, furniture)
    • The location has not been reconsidered in over a decade, and may not reflect the priorities of current town residents
    • There is no existing plan for operations, conflict resolution, and mixed use from co-location.
  • The “sunk cost” trap. Yes, we’ve invested ~$2 million in planning. But spending another $26 million+ to build the wrong solution compounds that mistake rather than fixing it. Good money after bad isn’t fiscal responsibility — it’s how small mistakes become massive ones.
  • Bottom line: We’re being asked to spend $26million + on a building that won’t serve our community’s real needs, and creates new problems we don’t currently have. Each program deserves proper, dedicated facilities — not a compromise that serves none of them well.

3. There is a new Town Meeting Survey to figure out how to make our meetings function better. Please take it!

We have taken the time to write out our thoughts and thought process in detail in this document starting on page 3, with a lot of homework behind each point. We invite and encourage correction on any misunderstandings or misinformation, and we invite and encourage dialogue from those of you who disagree with us.

According to a recent (June 10) memo from the Community Center Building Committee: The “alternative [to the Community Center] would likely require reconsidering a significant investment in Bemis Hall and Hartwell Pods — a comparable cost to the community center but a loss of shared function spaces and addition of 2+ years to the schedule.” To us, this is a vastly preferred alternative and actually addresses most of the problems we have identified above and below. We would love to hear your point of view, and are open to changing our opinions if there are compelling arguments to do so.

However you vote, please vote. Democracy works when we all participate. The vote: June 25th, 6:30-9:30pm (childcare available 6:00-9:00pm, pod C).

Sincerely,

Randi Rotjan and Jeff Chabot, 267 Concord Rd.
Kristin and Carlos Ramirez, 9 Giles Rd.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

My Turn: Green Energy Committee supports Nature Link

By Paul Shorb

The Lincoln Green Energy Committee (GEC) has reviewed the proposed Nature Link project that will be subject to Special Town Meeting votes on June 25, 2025  from the perspective of the GEC’s charge from the Select Board, which is “to proffer advice and make recommendations to the Select Board, other town committees and boards, town staff, and town residents and businesses on issues and potential actions related to climate change.”

In short, the GEC concludes that the project would be net positive from a climate change perspective. We reach that conclusion based mainly on (1) the design of the housing to be built, and (2) the protection of a large natural area from development. You can read our full statement here.

Shorb (99 South Great Rd.) is the chair of the Green Energy Committee.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

My Turn: former Farrington trustees urge “yes” vote

As Lincoln residents who have served over the years as trustees of Farrington Nature Linc, we five fully support the proposed Nature Link project, and we ask you to join us in voting “yes” on both Articles 3 and 4 at Special Town Meeting this Wednesday evening. 

The access road included in the overlay zoning in Article 3 provides Farrington a unique and long-sought-after safety alternative to Route 2 for on-site nature programs for children.

The conservation plan in Article 4 will ensure that Farrington Nature Linc can afford to stay in Lincoln for decades to come and continue to serve children from low-income communities.

This public and private collaboration that each of us has seen develop over the years gives Farrington value for the property it has stewarded here since 1909, enhances safety of its extraordinary programs in service of children and community, and maintains a surrounding of the natural world so important for all children to experience.

Many of you know at least one of us personally, and you know we ask for your support responsibly and respectfully. Please join us at Special Town Meeting (beginning 6:30pm June 25) and, with us, vote “yes” on both Nature Link Articles 3 and 4.

Sincerely,

Sandra Bradlee, Hemlock Circle
Sue Klem, Trapelo Road
Brooks Mostue, Lexington Road
Susan Taylor, Beaver Pond Road
Susan Winship, Meadowdam Road

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

My Turn: Change how FinCom members are named

By Bob Domnitz (on behalf of petitioners)

Several weeks ago, 130 residents signed a citizens’ petition asking that our Special Town Meeting consider an amendment to the General Bylaws of the town. If adopted, the amendment would grant authority to the Select Board to appoint the members of the town’s Finance Committee. That authority is currently held by the Town Moderator.

The Finance Committee (FinCom) is one of Lincoln’s most important volunteer committees. Its work is complex and its analysis and recommendations have a decisive impact on town operations and residents’ taxes. Despite its importance, FinCom receives limited direct engagement from residents.

As signatures were gathered for the petition, the vast majority of residents said they did not know how the members of FinCom were chosen. They thought that the moderator’s role was limited to presiding over Town Meeting. No one could recall a contested election for the position of Moderator, and no one could recall that a moderator had ever expressed a viewpoint on town finances or FinCom appointments.

The disconnect between FinCom and residents has been compounded by the current practice of relying on FinCom to screen potential candidates for membership. Vacant positions have not been advertised, and public interviews have not been held.

If endorsed by Town Meeting, the citizens’ petition will make the Select Board the appointing authority for FinCom. Residents look to the Select Board for overall management of the town. It seems natural that they ought to be the authority that appoints FinCom. The town usually has a contested race for Select Board, and candidates differentiate themselves based on their views and policy preferences. That process helps align our Select Board with residents.

Adoption of this amendment will empower the Select Board to solicit and publicly interview volunteers for FinCom, following the same public process they use for other committees that they appoint. Appointment by the Select Board will therefore create a clear link between residents and FinCom.

Although many Massachusetts towns continue the tradition of a moderator-appointed Finance Committee, the trend is toward other methods of appointment. A substantial minority of towns now rely on appointment by Select Boards, direct election by residents, or appointment by a committee composed of various town officials.

By considering this amendment, the town has an opportunity to strengthen transparency, accountability, and resident engagement in a vital part of our local government. Embracing best practices that encourage diverse perspectives and open public participation will not only enhance the Finance Committee’s effectiveness but also foster greater trust and collaboration within our community. Together, we can ensure that Lincoln’s financial decisions reflect the voices and values of all its residents, building a stronger, more inclusive future for our town.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

My Turn: Almost 200 residents urge passage of Nature Link proposal

Dear friends,

We, the undersigned, are writing to express our strong support for the Nature Link (Farrington/Panetta land) proposal that will be on the June 25 Town Meeting warrant. We urge you to join us and vote in favor. We support the Nature Link proposal because we believe it is more than a win-win for the town.

  • 77 acres of land — long identified as being critical — will be permanently protected. Not only is it important for habitat; it also connects to other parcels of open space to provide a significant wildlife corridor.
  • Wetlands and their buffer zones will be protected permanently. Laws and bylaws can be changed. Conservation restrictions are permanent.
  • The Cambridge water board has confirmed, by their large financial contribution, that the Farrington/Panetta proposal offers significant protection for their water supply.
  • Townspeople can enjoy the proposed trail that provides access to this land and to adjacent trails.
  • Protection of significant forestland, such as found on this site, mitigates against climate change by providing carbon sinks, absorbing and storing greenhouse gases.
  • The housing would provide an appealing addition to our housing stock by creating a close-knit condominium neighborhood. Seventeen of the new single-family houses will be in the under-2,000-square-foot range; three of these will be income-restricted. The remaining three houses will be in the 3,500-square-foot range.
  • The funding proposal for conservation will not add to our tax base. The funding proposal includes $500,000 from the Rural Land Foundation, $800,000 from the Cambridge Water Department, $950,000 from the Community Preservation Act (designed for both land protection and housing); and the remainder, approximately $850,000, from contributions (more than half of that amount has already been raised, dependent upon the Town Meeting Vote.)
  • Farrington’s Nature Linc will be able to continue in Lincoln. Farrington, created in 1906, provides an important nature-based education program for students from low-income communities. The agreement with Farrington is dependent upon their gaining a safe access road that is not dependent upon Route 2.
  • This proposal benefits the long-time Lincoln Panetta family; it also further benefits Lincoln and Massachusetts by creating mixed-income housing. It also preserves Gerard’s Farm Stand.

There will be two warrant articles* on this proposal: one that requires a two-thirds vote and one that requires a simple majority. Article 3, requiring a two-thirds vote, will extend the land area in the North Lincoln Overlay District to provide for housing and the farm stand. Article 4, requiring a majority vote, allocates existing funds from the Community Preservation Act fund to conserve the land designated as being of conservation interest.

We believe this proposal is a strong one. It follows the long range, careful planning that has made Lincoln the town that we love. The town has a long tradition of partnering with the Rural Land Foundation to protect open space, and open space linked with housing and public trails.

We hope you will join us and vote yes on Article 3 and Article 4 at Town Meeting.

Sincerely,

Abigail Adams
Gail Alden
Robert Anderson
Sarah Andrysiak
Dogan Arthur
Loretta Arthur
Steve Atlas
Ken Bassett
Cynthia Bencal
Alex Benik
Rebecca Bermont
Sarah Bishop
Pam Boardman
John Bordiuk
Janet Boynton
Stephen Brand
Kim Buell
Larry Buell
Annemarie Calhoun
Jennifer Campbell
Karen Carlson
Tom Casey
Ted Chan
Alex Chatfield
Deborah Choate
Andrew Clark
Lindsay Clemens
Marshall Clemens
William Constable
Rosamund Delori
Alice DeNormandie
Penny DeNormandie
Tom DeNormandie
Jona Donaldson
Nancy Donaldson
Anne Doyle
Jonathan Drew
Leah Drew
Rachel Drew
Nataly Dvash
Lucy Edgington
Dave Elliott
Elizabeth Elliott
Andy Falender
Shirin Farrahi
Becca Fasciano
Jon Ferris
Kristen Ferris
Caroline Fiore
Jim Fleming
Nancy Fleming
Sara Foster
Martha Frost
Rainer Frost
Keli Gail
Jerry Gechter
Gina Halsted
Jean Hardcastle
Chris Hamilton
Sue Harmon
Emily Haslett
Tom Haslett
Jim Henderson
Nancy Henderson
Ruth Ann Hendrickson
Lis Herbert
Zach Herbert
Amanda Hill
Ruth Hodges
Jennifer Holleran
Susanah Howland
Tony Howland
Ken Hurd
Pam Hurd
Peter Hussey
Caroline Jacobs
Brian Jalet
Kim Jalet
Paula Johnson
Steve Johnson
Diana Jong
Herman Karl
Suzanne Karl
Judy Kearney
Bryan Kelly
Elizabeth Kelly
Jonathan Kelman
Joan Kimball
John Kimball
Chris Klem
Sue Klem
John Koenig
John LeClaire
Barbara Leggat
Virginia Lemire
Jackie Lenth
Dave Levington
James Light
Jonathan Light
Paula Light
Lew Lloyd
Rosemary Lloyd
Mary Helen Lorenz
Gwyn Loud
Sara Lupkas
Rick Mandelkorn
Fred Mansfield
Joan Mansfield
Caroline Marotta
Rachel Mason
Lucy Maulsby
Sally Maulsby
Libby Maynard
Nick Maynard
Chris McCarthy
Janice McQuaid
Richard McQuaid
John Mendelson
DJ Mitchell
Matt Mitchell
Richard Mollica
Staci Montori
Edward Morgan
Terry Morgan
Henry Moss
Anne Mostue
Brooks Mostue
Patty Mostue
Richard Nichols
Trish O’Hagan
Barbara O’Neil
David O’Neil
David Onigman
Jane O’Rourke
Margaret Olson
Stacy Parks
Andrea Patton
Joan Perera
Terry Perlmutter
Chris Plonski
Laura Protzman
Ginger Reiner
Kurt Reiner
Dana Robbat
Joe Robbat
Travis Roland
Rick Rundell
Aldis Russell
Lucy Sachs
Reynold Sachs
Barbara Sampson
Don Seckler
Jim Sheehan
Kathy Shepard
Ray Shepard
Ellen Meyer Shorb
Paul Shorb
Molly Slavet
Barbara Slayter
Vickie Slingerland
RL Smith
Tucker Smith
Jonathan Soo
Kara Soo
Nancy Soulette
Charles Staples
Bill Stason
Andy Stevenson
Hannah Stevenson
James Stock
Henry Stone
Jim Storer
Sandy Storer
Kathleen Sullivan
Laura Sullivan
Tricia Thornton-Wells
Dilla Tingley
Peter Van Winkle
Prudy Van Winkle
Mary Jo Veling
Peter Von Mertens
Katy Walker
Tom Walker
Irene Weigel
Lynn Weigel
Deborah Weisgall
Ben Wells
Bryce Wells
Susan Welsh
Throop Wilder
Robin Wilkerson
Blandyna Williams
Susan Winship
Krystal Wood
Louis Zipes
Tanya Zipes
 

* Note: There are five articles on the warrant so the Town Meeting may continue on the evening of June 26. The Nature Link article is third. Please plan on attending both the evenings of June 25 and 26 in case the Nature Link article is not reached until the second night.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

My Turn: Thanks from St. Vincent de Paul

By the Society of St. Vincent de Paul of Lincoln and Weston

We are so grateful to you, our dear neighbors, for giving so generously to make our annual appeal a great success and securing a $20,000 matching grant from the Ogden Codman Trust. Your donations help ensure that our neighbors in need have food on the table, basic needs met, and the opportunity for further training and education. Every gift shows you care and makes a significant impact on the lives of those we serve. 

To our wonderful communities of Lincoln and Weston and all who came to our spring concert on the Weston town green: it was a real celebration of the generosity of all our volunteers and donors, and a perfect evening of music and fun.

We are truly blessed to live and serve in such active and compassionate communities. Thank you and have a lovely summer! 

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

My Turn: Details on the North Lincoln Overlay District

By Margaret Olson

On the issue of zoning: this is not a zoning by-law change. This is a use of the North Lincoln Overlay District, and it easily meets the purpose of the North Lincoln Overlay district:

12.5.1 Purpose

The NL-North Lincoln Overlay District is intended:

(a) to permit greater flexibility in the development of tracts of land by requiring few predetermined standards,

(b) to permit a developer to propose, and for the Town to vote on, a site development and use plan unique to a particular location,

(c) to permit the use of development standards more detailed than the general standards elsewhere in this By-law,

(d) to provide information for the Town to evaluate the potential impacts of a proposed development, and

(e) to enable the Planning Board to require adherence to a site development and use plan in the granting of a special permit.

Other North Lincoln Overlay District projects include Oriole Landing, The Commons, and the North Lincoln office buildings. Both the North and South Lincoln overlay districts give the town flexibility (via a town meeting vote) to approve uses outside of the base zoning and control over how that is done.

The downside is that development under the overlays requires a significant investment by the developer prior to approval without any guarantee that the project will go forward. The answer to “why Civico” is that there are few developers willing to do this: it’s expensive in both absolute terms and opportunity cost. The RLF and other landowners would be in a better negotiating position with respect to developers if there was more flexibility in the by-right uses (base zoning).

Olson is former chair of the Planning Board.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.