Share This Article
I am a member of the Lincoln-Sudbury school committee, but the views expressed herein are my personal views and not those of the Lincoln-Sudbury school committee.
I am writing in opposition to Articles 3 and 4 at the Special Town Meeting on May 20th in the gymnasium at Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School. I am writing with a unique perspective. I am a former trial lawyer, I am one of very few elected officials residing in Sudbury who is not covered by the proposed recall provision, and I am a current member of a school committee.
With respect to Article 3, I would agree with the position taken by the Sudbury League of Women Voters some three days ago in their opinion below opposing Article 3. The issue is not whether there should be a discussion about changing the Sudbury charter to include a recall provision, the issue is how that discussion should proceed. Transparency is critical. Openness is critical. Inclusiveness is critical.
The state recommends a charter commission or committee or a local study committee, which can hear, work through, consider, and accommodate all sides of any issue addressed by the recall provision. These committee hearings should take place on multiple days and nights, so as to include as many residents as possible in the discussion. It should certainly not be limited to one night in a gymnasium with a 5 minute speaking limit.
The issues with respect to Article 3 include, but are not limited to, the number of voter signatures required to call a recall election, the amount of time to collect those signatures, the specific grounds required with respect to the reasons for any recall, how to elect the successor if a recall is successful, and whether the proposed charter change should be voted on at a town-wide election.
As to Article 4, and this is where the lawyer in me comes out, a vote of “no confidence”? What basis? What evidence? The Select Board asked the petitioners to appear at a public meeting to present their petition, and they refused. This is inconsistent with the concepts of “openness” and “transparency”.
With respect to the work of the school committee itself, much of that work is dependent on information provided by staff, including the Superintendent and the Director of Finance and Human Resources. I am serving and have served on a school committee. I know personally, how difficult the job can be to educate and respect every student and to balance that against competing demands and never enough money. But the SPS School Committee has done a great job of trying to balance all the interests it must accommodate and educating all students in the district.
Please vote No on Articles 3 and 4 on May 20th.