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

Letter to the editor: Domnitz “comes down on the neighborhood’s side”

letter

To the editor:

I’m writing to offer my full and total support for Bob Domnitz’s reelection to the Planning Board. I hope that all Lincolnites will rally behind someone who cares about Lincoln’s neighborhoods and who has the track record to prove it.

Those of us who remember a Planning Board that was routinely dragged into court to defend itself against cell tower companies, nonprofits and aggrieved property owners—and then frequently lost—acknowledge that Bob’s attention to detail and his unique legal and engineering background are two of the main reasons this board has been lawsuit-free in recent years.

Bob is both an engineer and a lawyer. Bob’s technical background and knowledge of the inner workings of the cell tower industry and how it goes about siting its towers have kept cell towers from popping up all over town. Cell tower developers have been stymied by Bob’s unique approach (he should patent it) to flummoxing their requests. In addition, his warrant article advocating for an extension of the zoning setbacks to 75 feet for nonresidential uses in residential neighborhoods is protecting every Lincoln neighborhood.

Bob serves as the Planning Board’s representative to the Rt. 2 Oversight Committee. Believe me when I tell you that he’s the only independent voice really working to protect the town’s interests on that hideous construction project. The contractor would like to use cheaper materials and MassDOT would like to cut costs on the project, but Bob continues to be a thorn in their sides, holding them to the terms of the contract. Without his continued work, the Lincoln section of that highway could end up looking a lot uglier. Now is not the time to change horses midstream, while this project is still going strong.

In fact, Bob is the voice of skepticism whenever Massport, Minute Man National Park, or any other state agencies, private developers or nonprofit organizations try to sell the town a bill of development goods. Bob can see through the smoke and mirrors and can be counted on to come down on the neighborhood’s side.

But perhaps most important to me, unlike most other (by that I mean all) town officials, Bob has a sense of humor. His large-minded perspective, his camaraderie with other board members and his sense of irony have lightened the mood at many a Planning Board meeting, and given a choice, I’ll always vote for the candidate with a good sense of humor.

Reelect Bob Domnitz so the he may continue to protect Lincoln.

Neil Feinberg
Concord Road

Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to news@lincolnsquirrel.com. Letters must be about a Lincoln-specific topic, will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Letter to the editor: Marshall is “the whole package”

To the editor:

I am writing in strong support of Nancy Marshall’s reelection to the Lincoln Sudbury School Committee (LSSC) during the upcoming March 30 Lincoln town election. Lincoln is fortunate to have a candidate of Nancy’s caliber currently serving on the L-S School Committee who is seeking a further term.

Nancy embodies the essence of strong volunteer leadership in Lincoln and I’m proud to be part of the community she has represented through the years. As a mother of four, Nancy’s volunteering has paralleled her children’s educations while serving and enhancing her wider community. Nancy served as Lincoln PTA president for three years and worked on a number of K-8 initiatives for the Lincoln School. When her children became students at Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School, she ran for a seat on the L-S School Committee and has served for six years, two of them as chair. In short, Nancy brings a long succession of experience in our schools and understands relevant issues in a systemic way. She’s the whole package: smart, caring, committed and veteran.

Finally and significantly, all six seats on the L-S School Committee are “at large” roles. This means that each LSSC member serves and represents all Lincoln and Sudbury residents. This also means that none of the LSSC seats are meant for or saved for Lincoln or Sudbury exclusively.  So the LSSC could be comprised of any combination of Lincoln and/or Sudbury residency—there’s no guarantee of (a) Lincoln resident(s) on that board.

Two of the current six LSSC members are Lincoln residents—Patty Mostue (having been re-elected in March 2013) and Nancy Marshall. And how do we continue to enjoy the benefit of Lincoln voices among the LSSC members? Quite simply, Lincoln voters need to show up and vote.

Voters on Monday, March 30 will find three names on the ballot running for an LSSC seat, with the opportunity to vote for two of them—I urge you to cast one of your two votes for Lincoln’s own Nancy Marshall. And, for those interested, I’ll be casting my other vote for Gerald Quirk—another smart and caring LSSC incumbent who lives in Sudbury and has made many bonds in Lincoln during his first term via personal outreach, committed service, and ongoing effective representation of our community.

Lincoln, please vote on Monday, March 30 (7:30 a.m. to 8 p.m., Smith Gym)!

Sincerely,

Carole Kasper
Concord Road

Letter to the editor: “focus like a laser” on getting state funding for school

letter

To the editor:

I write this commentary as a former chair and member of the School Building Advisory Committee (SBAC), now disbanded. At the outset, I think it is important to emphasize what the Town Meeting warrant articles (number 30, 32 and 32) relating to the Lincoln School are not about. They are not about picking a particular design option or sum to spend on a school building project. If Town Meeting desires to move forward with a school building project, those decisions will be made at future Town Meetings or Special Town Meetings.

The warrant articles relating to the schools before Town Meeting on March 28 are limited to: (1) whether the town desires to apply for MSBA state funding for a future school building project (warrant article 31), which could cover approximately 30-40 percent of any such project; and (2) whether the town will authorize the funding necessary to undertake the feasibility study necessary for any MSBA project (warrant article 30). If the town does not want to pursue the type of major renovation project which qualifies for MSBA funding, it has the option of voting for a repair-only project and related feasibility study (warrant article 32).

I support Town Meeting passing warrant articles 30 and 31 (and thereby rejecting warrant article 32). I have come to this conclusion based on:

  • the year and a half I served on SBAC and the 50+ SBAC  public meetings I attended over this time
  • listening closely to both the wisdom of the 11 other members of SBAC (a diverse group that did not always agree) and the many thoughtful  members of the public who attended the SBAC public forums
  • observing the dynamic of  SBAC members and a significant number of those members of our community who attended the public forums in expressing their belief that the best option for the school and the town is a major renovation project that qualifies for state funding and preserves the L-shape configuration of the school, the center field, and the trees and bucolic character of our unique school campus—a campus which resonates with the special character of this special town.

I recognize that a major renovation project, for which Lincoln’s contribution is expected to be at least $30 million, will and should raise questions about the fiscal responsibility of such a project. Some might question whether the School Committee, by being candid about the minimum cost but unable at this time to identify a maximum cost, is seeking a blank check. I am convinced it is not.

At this time, the School Committee cannot responsibly place before Town Meeting a maximum number because no schematic drawings have been done of the conceptual options developed by Dore & Whittier during the SBAC process. (These will be developed during the feasibility study process.) Moreover, since the School Committee will have to come back to future Town Meetings for the approval of a particular design option and its bonding, it knows that it will have to present an option that is fiscally responsible. Finally, since the School Committee will be seeking community input into every phase of the MSBA/feasibility study process, residents will have ample opportunity to make sure the option which ultimately emerges from that process is fiscally responsible and provides value for the money spent.

I do not see a “repair-only” option as responsible from either an educational or fiscal perspective because, in my view, such an approach could be more costly in the long run and, as the November 2013 SBAC report states, leave unresolved “the mid/long term facility needs, as well as educational objectives and priorities of the schools.” In my opinion, this seems neither responsible nor wise. The January 2015 SBAC report did not take a position on this option or any option because SBAC appropriately believed the town should decide the direction it wants to take.

In sum, I think the Town Meeting should be focused like a laser on what it can do to have the town accepted into the MSBA’s 2016 process, since so much more can be done for the school with approximately 30-40 percent in additional funding. In my view, this means passing warrant articles 30 and 31. It also means passing them by large majorities, if that is possible. After the defeat of the old “preferred option” in November 2012, the MSBA suggested to the town that it should seek to develop a consensus on the direction it wants to take for its school. In my opinion, large majority votes in favor of warrant articles 30 and 31 are necessary to send the MSBA the message that after a “ton” of work over the last year and a half through the SBAC process a consensus has emerged in favor of an L-shaped configuration that preserves the special character of this special town.

Although such a vote will not guarantee that Lincoln will be invited into the MSBA’s 2016 process, the town runs a significant risk that it will not be invited into this process if it does not show substantial support for warrant articles 30 and 31. In my view, this is a risk the town should not take.

Sincerely,

Steven P. Perlmutter
Todd Pond Road

Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to news@lincolnsquirrel.com. Letters must be about a Lincoln-specific topic, will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Letter to the editor: school has earned support

letter

To the editor:

When it comes to the Lincoln schools, I have many beliefs.

I had three very different learners go through the schools all within the past decade, which provided me with the opportunity for a broad perspective. However, I regret that I had been let down in several key areas, and this bothered me immensely. Consequently, one of the reasons that I voted against the [Lincoln School] building “preferred option” was that I believed that the school system hadn’t earned my support.

However, dwelling on the past is seldom fruitful, and changed circumstances can often bring changed beliefs. For instance:

I believe that Becky McFall, our current superintendent is an educator, and a credible one at that. I believe that she is focused on “raising the bar” for every aspect of the school system, and to me, this is an issue of paramount importance to Lincoln. In my opinion, the school system is heading in the right direction, and doing so under a thoughtful and community-centric leader.  She holds open office hours regularly to encourage parental input, and I encourage you to stop by and share your thoughts accordingly.

I also believe that the entire process for the building project has improved. The School Building Advisory Committee made sincere efforts to engage the community in meaningful ways, they tried their best to give a range of options with credible pricing scenarios, and they acknowledged that a school building was secondary to a school system—even though certain building features can have a positive impact on the educational experience. They completed their assignment under budget as well.

I also believe that our school buildings have needs that should not be ignored. They also have shortcomings and lack certain features common in many other schools.

Lastly, I believe that this issue is very important to our community and that the upcoming vote will be key in setting a strategic direction to follow. As such, I urge you to plan on attending Town Meeting. Please take some time to review the latest report available online. Similarly, the warrant articles and ballot questions should be read in advance.

Please attend Town Meeting on March 28. Simply put, your participation is crucial.

Sincerely,

Vincent Cannistraro
15 Deer Run Road

Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to news@lincolnsquirrel.com. Letters must be about a Lincoln-specific topic, will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Letter to the editor: Marshall deserves reelection

letter

To the editor:

Nancy is an experienced contributor and incumbent for reelection to the L-S School Committee. Her focus is always on what is best for the entire Lincoln-Sudbury school community. She excels at developing productive relationships, building consensus and connection between constituents and town boards, and taking the time to thoroughly understand a problem and seek out objective, practical solutions. She draws on considerable support in both Lincoln and Sudbury.

Nancy is dedicated to and passionate about public education. She believes in delivering high-quality education to every student; with a background in economics, Nancy also fully understands the pressures that budgetary constraints and unfunded mandates place on this goal. Solutions require practical and innovative problem solving in the context of an ongoing dialogue with everyone involved: students, teachers, community, administration, parents and her School Committee colleagues. Nancy’s communication and interpersonal skills transform this dialogue into a productive process. Specifically during her tenure on the L-S school committee, she has been actively involved in the hiring of a strong administrative team and also worked closely with the administration in securing the construction of the solar parking canopy that is now underway. Most recently she was a participant in a successful collective bargaining negotiation that allowed for modest growth in compensation and gains in employee contributions for active and retiree healthcare.  This negotiation positions the high school to begin addressing long-term benefit liabilities in earnest.

Elections take place in both Lincoln and Sudbury on Monday, March 30. Please vote, and please consider giving your vote to Nancy Marshall for Lincoln-Sudbury School Committee.

Sincerely,

Cathy Rogers
Weston Road

Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to news@lincolnsquirrel.com. Letters must be about a Lincoln-specific topic, will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Letter to the editor: vote for Domnitz

letter

To the editor:

I worked with Bob on the Planning Board for five years and am writing in support of his reelection. He brings to the board a background that includes both engineering and law. He puts countless hours into the job and has a thorough understanding of Lincoln’s bylaws. His contributions to board discussions are analytical, thoughtful and always grounded in fairness to the applicant and the neighborhood, and most importantly, what is best for Lincoln.

Bob understands that we are in a time of change and that Lincoln must respond to these changes, but must do so without forgetting Lincoln’s core values and the work of the generations that came before us that make Lincoln the unique place it is today.

Hard work, analytical thinking, fairness, honesty, transparency and an understanding of Lincoln’s uniqueness and values – this is Bob Domnitz. The entire Flint family could not be more enthusiastic about his candidacy for the Planning Board or recommend him more highly. I urge you to support him in the election Monday, March 30.

Sincerely,

Ephraim Flint
27 Lexington Rd.

Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to news@lincolnsquirrel.com. Letters must be about a Lincoln-specific topic, will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Letter to the editor: vote for Quirk, Marshall

letter

To the editor:

I am writing in support of Gerald Quirk of Sudbury and Nancy Marshall of Lincoln in their bids for reelection to the Lincoln-Sudbury School Committee. Both have given their time selflessly over the past three years and six years respectively, building a strong, healthy relationship between the towns of Sudbury and Lincoln in matters related to LSRHS. Their two spots are up for re-election and a third candidate has put his hat into the ring. Please help ensure that they can continue the hugely productive work they are doing. Most importantly, don’t forget to go to the polls on Monday, March 30 and cast your vote.

During Gerald’s and Nancy’s tenures, Bella Wong has been hired as Superintendent-Principal and the high school’s administrative leadership team has been revitalized. The school now has four houses again, with the reinstatement of North House two years ago. Impressive new leaders have been hired in Finance, Student Services, Curriculum and Athletics. Innovative programs to benefit students with learning challenges have been piloted. Reductions in the district’s health care costs have been achieved over the last two years. Finally, a fiscally conservative teacher contract was negotiated two years ago to allow L-S to begin to restore staff as enrollment has increased. Gerald and Nancy made substantial contributions to these successes.

In Gerald’s words, one of the significant challenges at this time involves adequate funding: “The high school’s enrollment remains at record high levels, and Sudbury must adopt a regular practice of funding our schools in a manner commensurate with shifting enrollment in order to serve our students appropriately.” Gerald and Nancy are the two candidates fully committed to keeping the LS educational experience at its current level of excellence. Please support them with your vote on Monday, March 30.

Sincerely,

Laura Regrut
101 Lincoln Road

Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to news@lincolnsquirrel.com. Letters must be about a Lincoln-specific topic, will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Letter to the editor: your vote is important

letter

To the editor:

This is a reminder to Lincoln residents from a candidate, Alvin Schmertzler, running for an uncontested seat on the School Committee.

It is very important that everyone vote on Monday, March 30. Those of us running in uncontested contests need to know that you support what we are doing and how we are doing. That’s why I am asking for your vote on the 30th.

Al Schmertzler
142 Chestnut Circle

Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to news@lincolnsquirrel.com. Letters must be about a Lincoln-specific topic, will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Letter to the editor: vote for Marshall

letter

To the editor:

I was thrilled to learn that Nancy Marshall would be running to serve another term on the Lincoln-Sudbury School Committee and am writing a letter of support for her candidacy. The families of Lincoln, Sudbury and Boston are all fortunate that Nancy is willing to continue to bring her thoughtful and collaborative presence to the committee.

Nancy brings two valuable levels of experience to the School Committee position—first as a parent. All four of Nancy’s children were or are students at Lincoln-Sudbury. With over 10 years of parental involvement, Nancy has witnessed how L-S provides a positive and supportive environment for children of varied learning and social styles. She understands, as a parent, the hopes and fears of the families in our high school community and that knowledge helps to inform her decisions.

Nancy also brings a deep level of experience as a member of the school committee. Nancy has already served two terms and has six years of involvement with the committee. With that experience brings valuable knowledge and perspectives of the unique challenges and opportunities at L-S.  She understands the balancing act that often occurs as competing interests and demands are weighed, and she understands the deeper and longer ranging implications of policy decisions.

Nancy brings a thoughtful, deliberate and congenial approach to the committee. She listens well, thinks deeply, does a lot of homework and makes considered decisions based on sound judgment. Her collaborative approach is evident within the discussions of the committee and is also evident in the nature of the conversation with the faculty and administration at the school.

I am grateful that Nancy is eager to continue her role on the L-S School committee and would urge you to vote for her at the election on Monday, March 30th.

Sincerely,

Gina Halsted
1 Oakdale Lane

Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to news@lincolnsquirrel.com. Letters must be about a Lincoln-specific topic, will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Letter to the editor: ACLU is wrong on We the People Act

letter

To the editor:

Mr. Coppock in his letter of March 12 suggests that the We The People Act currently in committee at the State House and a topic at the upcoming Town Meeting is an effort to “amend the first amendment.” It is not.

Mr. Coppock also says that the We The People Act is opposed by the ACLU. In fact, there is apparently a “deep rift” at the ACLU over its “official” position on the Citizens United decision, according to a Roll Call report this past fall: “’There is a very, very significant divide within the ACLU on this’, said New York University law professor Burt Neuborne, one of six prominent former ACLU officials who wrote to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Sept. 4 to publicly denounce the national ACLU’s campaign finance position.” See also “The ACLU Gets It Wrong,” an editorial in the Amendment Gazette.

The ACLU opposes any restrictions on free speech. So do I, when it comes to citizens. But the Supreme Court’s decisions in the cases of Citizens United and McCutcheon amplify the voices of corporations and billionaires, drowning out the voices of ordinary citizens, and the ACLU is wrong in supporting them.

What the ACLU, and the Supreme Court, do not seem to recognize is how far these two decisions have gone in replacing a democratic government of, by and for the people with an oligarchy corrupted by the influence of big money in politics. Money is not equal to free speech; it should be “one person, one vote,” not “one dollar. one vote.” Corporations are political constructs whose sole goal is to make money in any way they can; they should not have the rights in the U.S. Constitution reserved specifically for natural persons.

Sincerely,

Jean Palmer
Tower Road

Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to news@lincolnsquirrel.com. Letters must be about a Lincoln-specific topic, will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.