Local Voters To Decide Future of Recreation & Open Space
Photos
Local Voters To Decide Future of Recreation & Open Space
When you look around Stoneham, do you see the public amenities that a modern town demands? On Tuesday April 2nd, Stoneham voters decide the future of highly visible, intensely used but seriously under-funded cultural and recreational resources including, but not limited to, our baseball fields, playgrounds, library, Whip Hill Manor, one of the world’s last remaining public Wurlitzer organs, and senior housing.
On that day, residents choose whether to adopt the Community Preservation Act (CPA). CPA generates funds for historic, open space, and community housing by pairing a 1% surcharge on property taxes with matching state funds. If passed, the average property owner in Stoneham would pay an additional $4 to $6 per month.
A New Opportunity
The state’s match will now be based on a new blended calculation. The blended CPA allows Town Meeting to accept donations or allocate monies to the Stoneham CPA fund that the state will match. As a result, the property owner’s surcharge can be leveraged to a greater effect. Not just the property owner surcharge, but gifts, mitigation fees, land sale revenues, stabilization account transfers, and any other municipal appropriation for community preservation can now be included in calculating the state match.
The blended calculation has spurred a wave of new interest in the program. With November’s election, 44% of the cities and towns in the state have now adopted CPA. Beverly, Fall River, Salem and Somerville became the first cities to adopt CPA since 2008, while the towns of Canton, Somerset and Great Barrington also voted to join the program.
“Promptly adopting the CPA to tap these new funds for Stoneham will allow us to maximize this new opportunity. It will do so at low cost to taxpayers,” according to John Warren, candidate for Selectman, who spearheads Support Our Stoneham (SOS), the group pushing forward the current effort.
Community Fabric Falling Apart
Public amenities here are decaying. Recent local budget cycles stripped away funds dedicated to the culture and recreation needs of residents. For example, in recent years the Recreation Department was shut down. Staffing for Whip Hill Manor was eliminated. The Stoneham Library had to close its program room which serves scores of children in the summer due to moisture issues, the tip of the iceberg of rehabilitations needed for the vintage 1903 Carnegie building to serve the next generation. Playgrounds in town are suffering from equipment deterioration and site issues which render them almost unusable.
Tough Budget Years
The Town’s budget has been marked by increasing scarcity since the passage of state Proposition 2 ½ in 1980. Prop 2 ½, dramatically constrains the ability of cities and towns to raise revenue through local property taxes. Further, In FY 2012, Stoneham received $3.3 million in general local aid from the state. That is a decline of 48% over the last thirty years (adjusted for economic growth).
Tax payers too, faced financial struggle with a higher unemployment rate in recent years, averaging 5.7% for Middlesex County since 2008 during the Great Recession.
A Fortunate Community
However, Stoneham remains a fortunate community. The above mentioned unemployment rate was significantly lower than the rest of the state and the nation as a whole. Our median family income approaches $100,000 per year and about 70% of us own the homes in which we live rather than renting.
Supporters of the CPA feel that it is important to live in a community that provides for the recreational and cultural needs of residents. “CPA supporters wish to live in a community that thrives rather than simply survives,” says CPA supporter and local historian Marcia Wengen. She continues, “For the cost of a cup of coffee each month, we could have tremendous positive impact on the look and livability of our town.” To revitalize needed recreational and cultural amenities, CPA supporters want to approve this new funding stream.
Risks
The future of the state match component of the program cannot be predicted with absolute certainty. Over the twelve year life of the CPA so far, the state match has always been funded, though the amount has varied. However, the legislature just recently appropriated an extra $25 million and its leaders have indicated their full intention to provide $25 million from the budget surplus in future years. The governor has long supported the CPA.
Over its 12 years of existence, the state match has averaged 40% of the funds generated by CPA towns. At a 40% average match rate, the town would expect $1.60 in state match for every $4 paid by property owners. Any other funds set aside for CPA by town meeting would generate the same 40% match from the state.
Property owners’ component of the program would be restricted to a 1% increase in their tax payment to the Town.
Opposition
Opponents of the CPA feel that it is a new unneeded tax that will burden local families. As described by former Selectman Paul Rotondi in a recent letter to the editor, Stoneham would benefit most from “tax relief not tax increases.” They are also concerned about how funds will be allocated to projects. If CPA is adopted and a committee is formed to award funding to various projects, they want to know that decisions are made on the basis of project merits only, and no cronyism is allowed.
Additionally, Selectman John DePinto, at a recent meeting stated the concern that if the Selectmen as leaders of the community, choose to support CPA, they renege on a 2011 promise made to voters to not raise taxes.
CPA Spending
If adopted, the Town would form a Community Preservation Committee, which would create a preservation plan. The committee would recommend applications for projects to be funded and submit these recommendations to Town Meeting and the state for approval.
At least 10% of the annual CPA funds must be spent on open space or recreation, 10% on historic restoration and 10% on community housing. The remaining 70% may be spent on projects from any of these specific categories. The project must provide a public benefit. Nothing is allowed to be spent for maintenance.
VOTING OPTIONS
a) If you are NOT a registered voter, call the Town Clerk’s Office at 781-279-2650 and request an application. It must be returned/postmarked no later than Wednesday March 13.
b) Absentee ballots may be obtained by calling the Town Clerk’s Office at 781-278-2650. They must be returned on or before Monday April 1.
c) Go to Town Hall on Tuesday April 2 between the hours of 7 am and 8 pm and vote. If you need transportation call the Senior Center no later than Friday March 29 to arrange for a ride. The number is 781-438-1157 between 8:30 am and 4pm M-F.
TO LEARN MORE
Visit SOS on the web at www.cpaStoneham.typepad.com
Susan
1:37 pm on Thursday, March 7, 2013
I would appreciate seeing a link to the median income information you have stated. I assume you obtained the information from a reputable source if you are presenting it as fact. I would also be interested in knowing what percentage of the 70% of us who are homeowners happen to be senior citizens on fixed incomes. The causes that would be funded by this override are all very worthy causes, and I don't think that has been disputed, but our tax dollars are most wisely spent in order of priority. This override, if passed, would circumvent that and funnel it directly to the areas you mentioned above. I would prefer to see my tax dollars spent on a priority basis through our town budget.
Rachel Meredith-Warren
2:45 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
Hi Susan,
Thanks for your comment. Ny response was too long to fit here, so I posted it at: http://cpastoneham.typepad.com/my-blog/2013/03/whats-in-it-for-me.html
Thanks,
Rachel
Susan
9:48 am on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Rachel,
Thank you for responding to my comment. I would like to clarify that your figure for median income was, as you stated above, for families, and that the median income in this town from the same census data is actually $77,476, which includes 4.6% below poverty level. Also, the $4-$6 monthly additional tax would continue to increase, since it would become a part of the tax levy. The timing of this override couldn't be much worse, given the economic factors, the recently voted debt exclusion that will be increasing our taxes, and the possibility that we may be asked for more with the cost overruns at the new middle school project combined with the needed funding of high school repairs. Those who are wealthy enough to want to provide the extra funding to CPA projects can certainly do so without having an override mandate it.
Rachel Meredith-Warren
1:46 pm on Sunday, March 10, 2013
Hi Susan,
I’d like to offer additional context because I feel strongly about my point that this is a fortunate community. We are so lucky to live here. Using the same aggregate numbers you prefer from the census, you’ll see that in Massachusetts, the median income is $65,981 and 10.7% have dealt with in poverty in the last year. In the US as a whole, the median income is $52,762 and 14.3%. The numbers you found for Stoneham are the envy of many other communities.
All these numbers don’t feel like they matter much when one’s individual budget is tight though, right? My personal budget challenges me too. I spend countless hours trying to make sure ends meet at our house. In January I finally started saving $25/month for my 2 kids to go to college. Laughably little, right? But, every dollar counts and every dollar gets us closer to the goal. $4-6/month for CPA is not inconsequential to my own budget, but it seems a wise investment.
Overall, it comes down to a difference of opinion. My feeling is that providing recreation and open space are within the govt’s responsibility to look after our health, safety, and welfare. It sounds like you support a more volunteer oriented model of providing these things.
I totally respect your right to vote accordingly and I’m betting from your cordial tone that you respect mine too.
Very sincerely,
Rachel
Mark
9:39 am on Friday, March 8, 2013
How appropriate John Warren's group is called SOS! The Middle Class has been sending out an SOS for 4 years now.
Is anyone paying attention to the price of gas and heating oil? Property taxes? Health, Dental or Auto insurance? Not to mention the prices at the grocery store! Our disposable income is in the toilet!
Public Employee Salaries, Pensions and Health Care is unsustainable! What are we paying the last school superintendent? $10K, $12K a month? Or the last Police/Fire Chief? Another $10K a month? How long do you think the people of this town can carry that nut going forward? Town Managers are making promises knowing the revenue base is shrinking.
Now they are trying another scheme to pry your tax dollars out of your pockets. What's next? Threatening our children with larger class sizes? No sports? No music or art? Meanwhile we are giving Billions to Illegals, Corporations and Countries that want to kill us. Enough is enough! No More Taxes!
Rachel Meredith-Warren
2:49 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
I hear you saying that you don't feel that CPA is a measure you would support.
Patricia Walsh
9:35 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Mark: Are you a homeowner in the Town of Stoneham? I have been paying real estate taxes, excise taxes, high school sports user fees, trash fees, water & sewer bills and donating to numerous causes in this town for almost 30 years, but would be more than happy to pay approximately $50 per year more (with a 40% match from the state) to improve some of the amenities of this town that have been deteriorating year after year since I purchased my home. As you state below, I will be the first to commend you for the comment that "our leaders have to market" what we have to offer and to support this all you have to do is look at the empty storefronts at Redstone and the deterioration of our downtown, library and parks so now it is time for the voters of Stoneham to take the bull by the horns and vote yes for CPA.
Patricia Walsh
9:45 am on Friday, March 8, 2013
I am certainly in favor of the CPA and at 60 could be considered a senior citizen but an additional $50 per year added onto my tax bill to improve this community would be welcomed and money well spent in my opinion! The Town of Stoneham tax rate is $.03 per thousand higher than the Melrose tax rate per thousand and the City of Melrose has certainly done a terrific job in the beautification of their community. Melrose has a lot more to offer their residents than Stoneham so I would like to know where my tax dollars are going. What priorities are we paying for but getting less than the cities and towns abutting Stoneham? I would like to be able to take my grandchildren to a well kept park and a library children's room in this Town, but due to the limited hours of the children's room at the library and the deplorable condition of the parks (due to lack of funding for both), I take them to Wakefield or Melrose. The park behind town hall is a disgrace and the Rounds playground (now being controlled by the Town of Stoneham) has made no progress in the two years that the grassroots effort to improve that park has been established. I applaud Tom Boussy, Rachel, Tania and Angelika for their efforts to try to improve this community - we need more people like them to get involved!
Rachel Meredith-Warren
2:52 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
Hi Patty,
Thanks for your positive feedback! It makes me feel like I'm not alone. I am interested in doing some comparison research on Stoneham's budget against similar towns after the election. I too use the parks, playgrounds and libraries in Melrose and Wakefield more than here because the equipment is in better condition and I wonder why, why, why?
Frank Pignone
11:00 pm on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Recreation Programs
National Park Service
Department of the Interior
1849 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20240
202-354-6900
Read more: Federal Grants for Municipalities and Recreational Facilities | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/list_6827184_federal-grants-municipalities-recreational-facilities.html#ixzz2NNwINQbu
Paul Rotondi
11:19 am on Friday, March 8, 2013
The point is that all the things mentioned here can be approved at an annual town meeting out normal revenues without the CPA. The Town meetings sets the priority on how we spend normal revenues, not the State and some non elected board. This is simply a way around 2 1/2, and a method of getting more of the taxpayers money it follows the SOS philosphy: I want what I want, I want it now and I want you to pay for it.
Rachel Meredith-Warren
3:00 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013
Hi Mr. Rotondi,
Thank you for all your service over the years.
One thing I bring to the table is the perspective of a newcomer, having bought our house here just 4 years ago.
If the normal process of budgeting has produced the conditions I see around me, something is not right. CPA would also go to town meeting (i.e. is transparent). The state set up CPA to encourage investment in specific areas that the normal budgets tend to overlook. If we don't have CPA we can't access matching funds from the state. Every dollar of CPA is matched by 40 cents from the Commonwealth.
Also, I don't want it now, I want it 4 years ago when my youngest was beginning to toddle around town.
Marcia M. Wengen
6:25 am on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Paul
My understanding is that warrant articles for projects, goods or services presented from the floor of Town Meeting must include a source of revenue. Is there a 'slush fund' somewhere in the $63m budget voted on in 5 minutes at 11 pm, that we should know about? That way any project without scrutiny or prioritization could be presented 10:55 pm. Hmmmmm, that’s an interesting way to do business.
Marcia
AnnMarie
9:28 am on Saturday, March 9, 2013
"I want what I want, I want it now and I want you to pay for it." Can you see how truly insulting that comment is? I have lived in this town for 20 years, I have paid all of my taxes on time, I have attended the meetings I could, I have exercised my right to vote in every town election, and I have waited at the expense of my children. 20 years is not an "I want it now" response. Perhaps someone hasn’t been listening.
Patricia Walsh
5:40 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Paul,
Aren't you a member of a ten person non-elected board that you appointed responsible for building the new middle school with a $40MM budget? Which I might add is now over budget. And wasn't it you that created the Tri-Board consisting of the Board of Selectman, School Committee and the non-elected Finance and Advisory Board and isn't this Tri-Board charged with controlling town budgets? And you do not want a non-elected board to spend CPA funds? Is it a non-elected board that you don't like or is it that you don't like the fact that you cannot control the board?
Wasn't the budget agreement designed to circumvent town meeting so that people who disagree with you don't "stack town meeting"? Reality is that people go to town meeting and vote for which direction they would like the town to move in and place priority on how the money is spent which is the most basic form of a democracy.
Frank Pignone
10:54 pm on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
I so remember the old Superintendent Joe Connelly saying...'The more 'WE' can get from 'outside' "OUR' budget at Town Meeting , the 'Better off We'll be'.......
We were renting out old North School with all revenue going to the schools. Then one day the underground Oil Tank blew a hold and needed replacement to some Several Hundred Thousand Dollars'...Do you want to know 'who' paid for that 'OUTSIDE' the School Committees Budget ?.......And then......There was the 'Track' at the high school that needed repair ...several hundred thousand I believe and the'Article came to Town Meeting...'WE' approved and time went by. NO TRACK REPAIRS ! ..Then the School Committee came to us and 'truthfully' told us.. " Uh..sorry . So sorry.WE took your money and used it for 'something else'...And then they 'submitted 'another' article for the Track ! And 'they' came.. and 'approved it ' again. !!
Down at the base of Maple Street before you drive 'up' to the Red light.. There are over a thousand cars parked there every day and then take a 'Shuttle' to the Hospital in 'Winchester'...And there is a 'building' on the property !... Does anyone know if we the people receive 'any' of that money for those cars ?...If Winchester buys the building...Will it be ( or is it now.) TAX FREE ?...And the only one who benefits is the 'owner' of the property.. That land was APPROVED for Over 55 'quiet' Townhouses !...Site plans in our town turn out'different' after the community leaves the meetings. !
Paul Rotondi
7:58 am on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Marcia: you are mistaken, any citizen can be present a warrant, long before town meeting, asking for anything, Wasn't putting the CPA on the Ballot approved on a citizen's warrant at Town Meeting? During the budget process Citizens can come to the numerous public hearings and state what they want included. The point is simple, these items should be paid out of normal revenues and not by going around 2 and 1/2. Chasing State reimbursements is not sound fiscal policy, especialy with the states record on education reimbursements. Should we buy something just because it is on sale.
AnnMarie
8:08 am on Saturday, March 9, 2013
I truly respect everyone's point of view on this. My kids are too old to appreciate the playgrounds, they never had access to any quality ones while growing up.They have already been ripped off by not having access to a real music and art program in the schools, consequences unknown as we will never know what doors were not opened to them as a result. Two of my children have sprained their ankles running into divots in the field while playing. We have gone to the library to get books for school only to find the Youth Room closed. While it may be too late for my family, let’s get Stoneham back on track. We pay the same as our surrounding neighbors, yet they have so much more. Why is that? Although it has been stated these projects could be funded outside of the CPA at Town Meeting, every Town Meeting I attended had a theme that there is not enough money to even fund the normal course of business. The CPA is being brought to the table because the citizens of Stoneham are sick and tired of watching out town crumble. Therefore, we are looking for a separate fund that will pay for the things all of our citizens should have without going to visit our neighbors. We are tired of hearing all the reasons why we CAN’T have something. Thank goodness for the new blood on the Board and for the private citizens trying to make something happen! I am tired of hearing all the reasons for “No” and “Not Now” without any creative thought on how we can make something happen.
Paul Rotondi
11:15 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Patricia: Thank you for validating the existance of the non informed voter. The School was voted on by the people of Stoneham, The building commitee is only acting on what was voted by the Town first, not making the decision on what we are going to spend our money on. Contrary to what you think the school is proceeding within the budget the people agreed to not a cent more. Secondly, the budget agreement did not circumvent town meeting, it just provided for a uniform recommendation to town meeting. Town meeting could m ake any changes they wished. Like the CPA I suggest you get the facts before you speak.
Patricia Walsh
8:31 am on Sunday, March 10, 2013
Well Mr. Rotondi let's see who else you can attack on this blog. You insulted AnnMarie, called Marcia mistaken and now I am an non-informed voter. Are you trying to rule me out of order like you once threatened when you were Chairman of the Board of Selectman or do you just think that no one else in town is as smart as you? It frightens me to think that you and some others in this town seem to have so much control or at least think you do.
Paul Rotondi
9:24 am on Sunday, March 10, 2013
Patricia, why attack me, and just stick to facts, each of your blogs were an attack on me and provided no facts, I am just trying to present the facts. I tried to rule you out of order, because then and now you were not speaking to the issue. It friengtens me when people can not debate the facts, or twist the facts to get the tax payers money.
Frank Pignone
11:35 pm on Sunday, March 10, 2013
I read , I believe somewhere above that 'if you need a ride to the polls' ; call the Senior Center. I wish to be 'crystalline' in this. Are the 'resources' of the Senior Center and/or any of its staff being used to promote this particular vote. ? How was this correlated. When I receive that answer, I shall write you once again. I would also be interested in just 'how much' money is needed to fund these 'concerns' of the 'Playgrounds' ? The Trash Fee did not help. The Apartments; The Condos; The Enlargements and new buildings did not seem to help; The Rink Revenue, The 3 hole Golf Course, the new revenue from the new ownership of Boston Regional did not help; The Water and Sewer personnel of the town going off the Property Tax to the tune of 2 or 3 million did not help when they 'had' that money as 'hole' to fill and 'did' !...And now.. we see this 'coming at us'. Make no mistake. This 'is' an override, and once again it comes to the 'people'. The Mass.Sales Tax way back began at around 3 % and now it is 6.25%. It all seems to grow and 'new ways' always seem to come. We just got a break charging local Meals Tax. That did not help either. You should make these playgrounds a 'project'. We will all pitch in with labor and/or money as the talk is 'Playgrounds' here. The Class of '82' is a wonderful example of 'how ' to get things done as a Team. Coming after the people as this to 'fund' a 'Town Wide' 'list' is against all the principals of Prop. 2 1/2. I'm not for this 'method'.
Dennis O'Hara
3:16 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Mr. Pignone: I am the communications coordinator for the Stoneham Senior Center, and I would like to address your question regarding the Center. As promoted on Patch and other local media for each election held in Stoneham, the Stoneham Senior Center offers van rides to and from the polls to any Stoneham senior citizen who is a registered voter. The Senior Center and its staff do not endorse any candidate nor do they promote one side or another of any particular issue. To clarify, the service is only available to Stoneham registered voters ages 60 and above. The Senior Center is pleased to provide this service to encourage civic participation by those who otherwise might not be able to cast their votes.
Please email me at dennis.ohara (at) yahoo.com if you have any further questions or concerns about the Stoneham Senior Center. The Senior Center Director and I will be grateful for the opportunity to address your concerns directly.
Frank Pignone
11:51 pm on Sunday, March 10, 2013
Revenue: ? Something to 'Think' about Ladies and Gentlemen: The town currently receives from 'all of us' about $ 3 Million per year from the Automobile Excise Taxes. Your Excise taxes are based on a Valuation of $ 25.00 per 'Thousand Valuation.' The long ago vote on Prop. 2 1/2 had several Questions. One of them was a 'Yes ' or 'No' on bringing the rate 'Down' from $ 66.00 per thousand to the Present $ 25.00. If we were still paying $ 66.00 per thousand, we'd be depositing over $ 7 Million rather than $ 3 Million presently.
'IF'..we somehow ( with exemptions for poor and /or elderly) go up by a 'Third' as a 'Local Option' by about $ 8.00 per thousand.. we would have a Million Dollars 'more' revenue to Fund what you all are arguing about here.
Example ?.. If your auto is valued at $ 10,000 your present Excise Bill would go up by $ 80.00 per year or about $ 7.00 per month. ( $ 8.00 X 10 )....This 'extra' amount should be'set aside'... for your programs as you so well write about here ladies and gentlemen. God Bless...I want you to enjoy your town. I did and I want your children to have the joy I did living my life here. 'Frank'..
Frank Pignone
12:01 am on Monday, March 11, 2013
Regarding the 'money' needed to raise the higher Excise Taxes. You may 'easily' be able to raise this 'sample' $ 80.00 by going to your own 'Automobile Insurance ' Policy. Notice there are 12 'parts to it'....There are 'optional' parts on your policy as in 'Bodily Injury, Collision , Comprehensive, Rental, and even your 'deductibles'... "If' you are on a long vacation of 3 or 4 weeks or you aren't going to use the vehicle for a while.. ** You could eliminate 'Collision' for this period as your vehicle is 'not' going to run into anything in the driveway. You may also 'either eliminate your deductibles, Rental, and even 'lower' the Bodily Injury Portions.. once again as your risks for these coverages is almost 'nil'.....You also may even review your Homeowners and Auto to see if 'further' savings are in order... $ 80.00 or even a little more with a little pencil sharpening can be achieved. Check with your agent always for your own insurance needs. Many of you may not have known about these available 'managements' of your Auto Policy....Those parts, or several of them are 'Variable'....Summer or Winter Driving risks must be 'examined' as to your needs...
Yes...The 'Excise'Taxes 'may be' one 'idea' to get the playgrounds and the children's needs where you wish them. Good luck to you....
Rachel Meredith-Warren
3:26 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Hi Frank,
I want to make sure I understand exactly. Could you tell me the mechanics of changing the excise tax rate? I think you are suggesting it as a way of increasing local revenues that would be allocated in the municipal budget? And that this is a method that you support? Was the decrease of the excise tax connected to Prop 2 1/2 in a meaningful way, or were both issues coincidentally on the same ballot?
Thanks,
Rachel
Mark
10:37 am on Monday, March 11, 2013
Sending out an S.O.S. to John Warren’s Group! The Middle Class is Getting Hammered! On April 2 Vote No On Question 1.
Stoneham Student Population/Expenditure Per Pupil the last 11 years!
2013 - 2401 N/A
2012 - 2467 N/A
2011 - 2550 $12,499
2010 - 2650 $11,577
2009 - 2706 $11,400
2008 - 2730 $10,827
2007 - 2894 $9,961
2006 - 2952 $9,276
2005 - 2991 $8,747
2004 - 2990 N/A
2003 - 2969 N/A
Stoneham Student Population has decreased by 568 students over the past 11 years. At $10,612 average cost to educate those students the good folks of Stoneham should’ve realized a savings of $6M dollars. Instead the cost have gone up by $6.5M dollars.
In 2005, Total Expenditure Per Child was $27,000,000. In 2011 it was $33,477,000.00 an increase of $6.5M
http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/profiles/finance.aspx?orgcode=02840000&orgtypecode=5&&fycode=2011
John Warren has served on the Finance Committee. Why isn’t he or his group telling the good folks of Stoneham the truth.
Rachel claims Stoneham has received $3.3M less in State Aid. Why isn’t she asking her Representatives, Katherine Clark or Jason Lewis why Stoneham is getting the short end of the stick with regards to Chap 70 funding. Cities and Towns are getting money to hire interpreters for Illegals but our kids and seniors are threatened with reduced services.
Paul Rotondi
11:15 am on Monday, March 11, 2013
Mark: They want ask why Stoneham is getting the short end of Chapter 40 funding, because SOS is in the bag of Beacon Hill, McNiel works for a State Senator, and Warren was Lewis' finance chairman. You can't do anything about higher fuel prices, higher food prices No on question 1
Rachel Meredith-Warren
3:45 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Hi Mark,
I admit I'm not an expert on education. It looks like the cost per student has increased, but are these numbers adjusted for inflation? Are there different regulatory requirements for schools that might raise the cost per student? I don't understand what info I should focus on in the link you provided. Could you clarify?
Also, I understand that in the grand scheme of things, all items in a budget are connected, but school funding feels tangential to the question of whether voters should be for or against a ballot question concerning Stoneham's participation in a state program to fund open space and recreation.
I'd like to know more about Chapter 70, how our portion of that state education aid is calculated and whether we are maximizing our eligibility. But again, I don't understand the direct bearing it has on the CPA vote on April 2nd? The reason I haven't asked Lewis or Clark (tangent: we have a local Lewis and Clark, that is funny, isn't it!) about it is that I don't understand why I would do that right now.
I know that we disagree on the issue of CPA. Please don't assume that it means I or anyone participating in SOS is stupid, disingenuous or has a bad character. I assume you are a good intelligent guy, doing the best you can for what you believe is right.
Very sincerely,
Rachel
Frank Pignone
11:11 am on Monday, March 11, 2013
Any of you ..'Truly' should strive to obtain a copy of a publication that is somehow never 'advertised' in this town . It is entitled the 'End of Year Report' which shows 'more than any' publication I have seen the 'complete' and 'disclosed' expenditures breakdown of 'every one' and 'every source' of expenditures and revenue of the Stoneham Public School System. It is available 'on line' if you contact the Mass. Dept. of Education...and they may post it for you and your friends or group. You may 'find' in these figures areas you may wish to 'make recommendations' on and also compare our 'Grant' aggressiveness vs. other communities, If you are having a problem obtaining it , I am sure people as Mr. Rotondi who knows the area well shall aid you. We all want you to have the resources for you and your children as well as guests and family who visit your home, as we all had from Elementary through Stoneham High Graduation. The school fields we see so beautifully kept should be no better than 'any' playground in our community.....If we can maintain a school playground or field... then a small area as A.P.Rounds should be done in about.......................5 hours..!
Rachel Meredith-Warren
3:59 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Hi Frank,
I defer to my comment to Mark re: school funding discussion being important but not the focus of this ballot question. Thank you for suggesting the End of Year Report as a resource though. I didn't know about it until now.
Regarding AP Rounds, I believe they are still looking for volunteers. You can get in touch through www.RebuildingRounds.org. I bet they would love for you to organize a team of helpers for build day and to maintain the playground on an ongoing basis. They are still looking for donations too.
I know that the landscape consultant who volunteered for Rounds was concerned about the major erosion issues there. The stair cases and entry/exit points need masonry or some kind of hardscaping repairs. Also, I don't know if this remains true, but there was a ground wasp infestation in the soil there that prevented kids from playing in the summer. The wasps were territorial and dangerous, based on reports from parents who try to use the site. I'm not sure if the wasps have been eradicated. Another thing I need to find out. It wasn't just a matter of cleaning up the site, but remedying the site issues I mentioned, as well as replacing broken and outdated equipment and updating the T-ball field.
Very sincerely,
Rachel
Larry Means
2:19 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Mr. Rotondi your response to Patricia Walsh was just another one of your condescending comments to another citizen of Stoneham ("Patricia: Thank you for validating the existence of a non informed voter" Paul Rotondi 3/9/2013) Your statement about we don't need another nine (9) member non elected bureaucracy setting town priorities...in response to setting up a 9 member Community Preservation Committee will at the very least be voted on by the voters of Stoneham. The voters will decide on election day not bad mouthing people. Talk about hypocrisy you've been involved with appointing many such committees to advance your agenda.... the last of which has been a complete failure ( the Tri-Board Committee it didn't meet for a whole year and broke all its own rules)
Rachel Meredith-Warren
4:01 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
I've posted the text of the April 2nd ballot question #1, as well as the Warrant Article that will follow if CPA is adopted on April 2nd, at: http://cpastoneham.typepad.com/my-blog/
AnnMarie
4:36 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
I really don’t think it is appropriate to call people out by name who haven’t even added their two cents to this forum. Whether you agree w/ the CPA or not, I think respectful listening & responding is always good form. To all who have followed that line of input, thank you. Some of the comments above seem to focus on money being spent on education only. Investing in amenities that would benefit young families & children are only some of the examples of things the CPA would help. The money could also be used for new window for the library thus saving energy costs. It could be used on the Fire Station, Sr Center, etc. It would be a fund the citizens could use to improve our town however we choose. The point is we are paying roughly the same as our neighbors in taxes, but somehow our money is not going as far. You can’t deny portions of our town are fairly shabby after being neglected for many years. I find the consistent decline in our school population (posted above) to be extremely alarming. It means that investors (tax-paying homeowners) are not selecting our town to educate their children. Although any investment to the school will not benefit me directly any longer, having a high performing school is important to me because I would like to use the proceeds of my home in my retirement which is not all that far away. I will be unable to do that if my home value falls because I can’t find a young family willing to send their children to our public schools.
Mark
8:23 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Rachel, I'm sure you are a very nice person with good intentions but lets be real. Any request for an increase in taxes from the good folks of Stoneham is indeed tied to other taxes and fees we pay.
Why are you asking the folks to pay more through a CPA when I showed you an example of how we are paying $6M more in taxes to educate 568 less students? Doesn't that concern you?
Why are we building more schools with our tax dollars when we could be, with the reduction of student population, closing a school(s)?
I'm just using the schools as an example of how we are paying enough already. There are many more examples I could be using.
There is plenty of money for our children, it is just being mismanaged at all levels of Government.
Some on here are whining about Wakefield has this or Melrose has that. Why can't we have this or why can't we have that? Please Stop!
Stoneham has more to offer than both of them combined. Our leaders have failed to market it as such!
Geographically you couldn't ask for a better spot to attract business or commuters. We have great parks, fields and acres of green space. We have an exceptional Theatre and Zoo. We have some pretty good restaurants. We have our own skating rink. A municipal and private golf course. The fells to bike, walk and run in. We have Spot Pond to fish or sail on and a pool to swim in.
There is more than one way to raise revenue. Time for some problem solving and critical thinking
Patricia Walsh
9:58 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Mark: I would like to remind you that the zoo, fields and acres of green space along the Fells, Spot Pond and the pool are owned by the Commonwealth of MA and not the Town of Stoneham. The privately owned Theatre is amazing, but the downtown has become so unattractive that the Theatre is probably the only thing that attracts visitors from abutting communities - the Theatre is underpromoted. As I stated above, I have paid taxes & fees in this town for 30 years and would like to know why I am paying more per thousand than Melrose and getting less - improvements are in desperate need in Stoneham. Please ask the Town Administrator, School Building Committee and School Committee where the tax money to educate our students is going - that is not the purpose of this blog.
Mark
9:44 am on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
@Patricia Walsh. If you look at a map, the Zoo et al is indeed located in Stoneham and its beauty and recreational use are available to the good folks of Stoneham. This is and has been a double edged sword. We enjoy the beauty but it doesn't result in additional tax revenue.
As for the downtown, with the exception of the hole in the ground and poor lighting, it isn't as bad as you state. If I'm not mistaken all store fronts are occupied and I hope, contributing to the tax base.
You keep bringing up Melrose and some fictitious notion that they are getting something Stoneham is not. With the exception of Pine Banks, Melrose is a dump.
And finally unless your paying taxes out of two different pockets, a blog that brings up increasing ones taxes puts all taxes on the table.
Patricia Walsh
11:24 am on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
@Mark (anonymous) - I did not say that the zoo is not located in Stoneham, I said that it is not owned by the Town of Stoneham. The downtown streets are not condusive to foot traffic and although the stores are occupied, other than the butcher, the theatre and Melissa's restaurant, there is nothing in downtown Stoneham to attract me to do business there. I think the Stoneham Chamber should initiate an effort to encourage the Stoneham business owners to improve their storefronts to be more appealing to the consumer eye. I have lived in Stoneham for 29 years and eat at the restaurants & bakeries in Melrose as well as other services that their city has to offer that our town does not (boutiques, coffee shops, etc.) - you have not spoken to the empty storefronts in Redstone or the lack of a competitive grocery store to compete with Stop & Shop. Melrose will be welcoming a Whole Foods soon - who is spearheading an effort in this town to fill the vacancy of Shaw's and other stores at Redstone that have been empty for several years now? We need new blood on the Board of Selectman - maybe then something will be done to promote change and improvement in this declining community.
Rachel Meredith-Warren
10:22 pm on Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Hi Mark,
I'm totally being real.
I don't have enough info. to make any conclusions about the schools. I don't find the $6m or the decrease in students to be alarming because those numbers aren't set in any context. How does it compare to similar communities over the same period? Maybe we're providing better educational opportunities. Maybe we're wasting the money. Maybe it's related to compliance with fed or state regs. At the moment I don't know. It doesn't sound like you know with certainty either though.
Likewise, I don't know what criteria are used for deciding school closures.
It would be great to set these things in a fuller comparative context.
How do you know the gov't is mismanaging the town? Could you provide some specific examples? Simply stating that things cost more than ten years ago doesn't sway me.
I agree with you that Stoneham is an awesome location. There is a lot of green space. The theater is a great asset. The zoo too is an important resource. I haven't been to the rink yet (our baby doesn't walk yet). Golf too is great. The Fells - fantastic.
But there is visible decay of important public amenities. This should be addressed. And here is a way to do that. With matching funds from the state. The program is 12 years old, not exactly untested.
Very truly yours,
Rachel
Patricia Walsh
7:52 am on Thursday, March 14, 2013
Hi Rachel:
To your last comment to Mark: Eloquently spoken, Rachel! Thank you.
Richard Fortuna
7:20 am on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
I agree on No New taxes, my son is 20 and my daughter is 6 and I am comfortable with thebaseball fields, and playgrounds, I am sorry but I dont not see the need to fund Whip Hill Manor, one of the world’s last remaining public Wurlitzer organs. Seniors in our community as a majority are taken care of by their families. The libraries are part of a communty share program. The wakefield library is a great resource and it is not far away. You give govt more money and there is more waste.
Look at this state there has been new taxes imposed over the years for such things but they just keep taxing and wasting. The state wants to tax the miles we drive??
This on top of exise, higher sales tax, higher tolls and possibly new tolls on route 93.
Why?
NO MORE TAXES
Susan
8:07 am on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
I agree with Mark, and I believe the discussion about per pupil expenditures has everything to do with this issue. When the town revenues are divided up, a portion goes to the schools. The rest is divided up for the remaining town departments. People may be surprised to learn that our per pupil expenditures surpassed those of the well respected and much sought after districts of Reading and Winchester a few years back. We pay taxes that are going into those per pupil expenditures. Some have mentioned the unattractive downtown and deterioration of playgrounds. This is because Public Works is underfunded. The money we pay now to this town in taxes is not being spent responsibly. Giving even more is not the answer. The library window should be fixed from funding withing the current budget. I am not even sure how that would qualify under the CPA override. Is the entire library an historical building? Isn't that window in the more recent addition? I believe some of the people who are in favor of this override have the best intentions, but rather than focusing solely upon funding this one cause with more taxes, a broader view could provide a different perspective.
Patricia
9:10 am on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
I agree with Susan and Mark. Living in this town for over 20 years, i too have seen the center and parks degrade. I live near Rounds park and enjoyed it with my young family. But, I don't agree with the CPA because I too feel that our tax money is not being spent as wisely as it could. Yes, school funding is definitely part of this equation, especially during these tough economic times. Families are already trying to make due and our Governor is going to try his hardest to "hammer" us even more. I especially don't like the way the CPA goes around prop 2 1/2 - it opens up a whole other can of worms. Another time, maybe but I do feel we need better control of how the tax revenue is being spent.
Mark
9:48 am on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
The Pro CPA crowd keeps bringing up AP Rounds. Isn't this project being privately funded by donations? Hasn't this fund raising been going on for two, three, five years now. How much money have they raised to date and how much more do they need? Maybe someone from that group could bring us all up to date!
Patricia Walsh
10:07 am on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Mark: Rachel-Meredith Warren can speak to your question better than I since she was one of the founders of the grass-roots effort, but I do know that the Town of Stoneham is now in control of the funds that have been donated to date and they are also in control of when the clean-up and the reconstruction will begin in other words, again.... Town Hall holds the reigns.
Angelika
4:50 pm on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
The AP Rounds Playground rebuilding project is indeed a privately funded project for a public playground on public land. Since I first approached Mr Raggucci about the project in Dec 2010, he and the entire Town Hall staff have been very helpful, useful, and understanding. We became a Town committee, partly so that we could have their accounting department do the accounting, and to operate under their non-profit tax It has been great working with them.
I don't know much about politics and budgets, but what I do know is that there was no money in any account available to make AP Rounds a usable space. My thoughts were that if I wanted my children to have a neighborhood playground, I would have to stop whining and fix it myself. Preferably before my children left for college - they are currently 3 and 5, but it seemed easier at the time to raise money than to change the glacial movement of any political organisation.
I know a bit better now. As of right now, we have raised $13,872.82. It has been two years of almost non-stop fundraising: writing letters, grant applications, organizing several major events (Easter Egg Hunts, Stoneham Family Day, Halloween Parties and Christmas Parties with Stoneham TV, etc.).
People have sent in donations, but obviously at a very slow rate.
We were hoping to raise $50,000 to purchase a basic preschool and big kid structure. Instead, on May 18th we will put in a preschool structure,using all volunteers.
Hope you can come :-)
Frank Pignone
11:11 am on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
The Senior Center , as a 'Parks and Playgrounds' upkeep request discerned as 'necessary' : How much of the Property Taxes is being used for the upkeep of our proud building and services there vs. 'other' revenue ? I do not know how the 'Parks and Recreation 'got away' from our 'Obligation' as Taxpayers to our young parents, Grandparents, and especially our children. WE... at voters, taxpayers, and most of all, 'Citizens' 'must' make sure that 'in 'YOUR' budget , Recreation and upkeep of these areas and programs are 'deemed crucial' once again and let us now 'End' these 'games' of selling 'new revenue' . It is all becoming too crystalline to a lot of us....and it is 'regretful' we have to resort to these methods of 'sneaky revenue'. All of the Schools seem to do quite well in maintaining their properties and further obtaining the millions , perhaps nearing a Billion for 'Schools' with as the gentleman pointed out so truly well the declining populations.
It may be a good time in the lives of all of you now bringing up children to now question some items which I believe you 'must'. A couple of these are the expenses of building a school and what is aid to 'sell' it..What were the 'forecasts' of the Utilities vs. what it 'turned out' to be. Do 'sub contractors' get to 'bid' on their own work in our state vs. others who allow the General Contractor to do it to keep costs down ? What is the 'minimum' square feet vs. other states ? There are....'Areas' to discuss. It is 'time'..
Mark
4:20 pm on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Patricia it sounds like you missed by about 3 miles where you should've moved 29 years ago. Just kidding I'm sure you are one of our towns treasures.
I don't get the infatuation with Melrose though. Its overrated and I wouldn't spend your money over there! As for the Fells, you claim Stoneham doesn't "own it", but when someone is drowning in Spot Pond, Boston Fire doesn't respond it's my tax dollars and Stoneham's Finest to the rescue.
Of course an idealistic Stoneham Center would look like Woodstock VT but it doesn't. Don't dismiss the great businesses and their owners in the square. A lot of them contribute mightily to the youth programs in town and you should really frequent them.
As for Redstone, I think there are currently two vacancies. You want another Grocery store go for it.
Bottom line is the collective WE pay enough taxes and when you include fees.... "The middle class is getting hammered".
By the way whatever became of all the money budgeted for snow removal the last two years? 2011/2012 were pretty mild years. Seems to me we should've had a surplus or refund! So many questions. So few answers!
Rachel Meredith-Warren
10:42 pm on Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Hi Mark and Patty,
I'd characterize Stoneham Sq as underachieving and at risk. There is a consistent number of conspicuous vacancies. The little plaza on the left of Ace Hardware (maybe that filled up again?), the old Hank's Bakery storefront, the restaurant space beside curtain time, the tanning salon is gone.
Whatever the number of current vacancies, the amount of vacant square footage is shocking. I don't understand what is going on there.
I had to run errands today, with a baby in tow. I went to Melrose because it offers convenience and easy maneuvering. I could park the car easily and then push the stroller to get groceries, clothes, stamps, toys, and lunch. I spent about $150. Every penny of which I'd rather have spent here. As I walked I saw lot of other caregivers with kids and seniors. These two groups often have mobility limitations. A lot of the seniors had walkers or canes and the people with kids have to juggle all that kid paraphernalia.
Regarding the snow, I imagine they reallocated the money as permitted within the budget cycle. That seems like a reasonable thing to do, doesn't it?
Patricia Walsh
4:31 pm on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Mark, my husband and children were born in Melrose but we moved to Stoneham for the great schools and the close proximity to 93 and 128 and Melrose was not the city then that it is now, but neither is Stoneham - one has improved and the other has deteriorated. Both of my children went to elementary, junior high and high school here so I have spent more time than you at sporting and school events, but can you tell me where the youth programs are in this town because my grandchildren have been looking for them for years. And there are a minimum of four vacancies at Redstone maybe you should see what I see in my own backyard.
Mark
6:41 pm on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Patricia, here is contact information for Stoneham Youth Sports. Much better programs than Melrose. I hope this helps
Stoneham Little League:http://www.stonehambaseball.com/board-of-directors.html
Stoneham Youth Football and Cheer: http://www.stonehamyouthfootball.com/board.html
Stoneham Youth Hockey: http://www.syhockey.com/Contacts.asp?n=55768&snid=dLMEX2E6%5D&org=syhockey.com
Stoneham Youth Soccer: http://www.stonehamsoccerclub.com/Directors
Stoneham Youth Softball: http://stonehamsoftball.com/Contacts.asp?n=55769&snid=dLMEX1J0%5B&org=stonehamsoftball.com
Richard
6:56 am on Thursday, March 14, 2013
We do not need new taxes, the economy is on the brink of disaster. unemployment is at a allt ime high. people are strecthing their dollar from higher gas prices, higher health insurance premiums, pay freezes, and not to mention the federal sequestor.
I would like nothing better than a restored playground for my daughter but then again I would rather she i has a good high school to attend down the road. We are being taxed in too many directions and Gov Patrick wants to increase our taxes and find new ways of making working class pay for the non-working class.
Nancy Haley
12:41 pm on Saturday, March 16, 2013
Many people may be missing the numerous hints written in the replies to the Patch concerning Stoneham-CPA-Taxes- Schools and Business.
The decrease in student population, reduction in new business (at this time) and the ideal location of Stoneham(within 128 belt); would suggest that perhaps the community is leaning toward a residential(apartments, condos, & homes) primarily. Redstone could become a 'Lifestyle' type mall with residents and businesses--the center of town is already leaning in that direction with the two residential properties.
The state should not be counted on to support projects/programs that citizens of this town are responsible for with local taxes and good management. The state budget is responsible for MAJOR infrastructure of building and maintenance; that all residents/visitors to the state should enjoy safely.