Share This Article
The May 5 meeting of the Sudbury Select Board occurred just prior to the second night of Sudbury’s Annual Town Meeting. With a packed calendar in May, the Board opted to take positions on articles slated for the May 20 Special Town Meeting.
Article 1 — Citizen’s Petition: Vote to Support House Bill 3464
The board supported this article 4-1. The warrant describes it as follows: “To see if the town will vote to support House Bill 3464, An Act to Update the Bottle Bill, on file with the Town Clerk and on the General Court’s website at https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H3464, the bill, among other things, increases the deposit for bottles from 5 cents to 10 cents, adds additional types of containers subject to the law, and requires retailers to accept more returns; and further, request that the Town Clerk send to the Town’s legislative delegation a certified copy of the vote taken hereunder, or act on anything relative thereto.”
Article 2 — Citizen’s Petition: Resolution Regarding the Audit of the Massachusetts Legislature
The Board punted this to their May 19 meeting to provide time for Member Russo to review materials submitted by the petitioner.
Article 3 — Citizen’s Petition: An Act Providing for Recall Elections in the Town of Sudbury
The Board opposed this article 1-4.
Member Radha Gargeya offered thoughts on representative government. He later added that it’s important to receive the message driving the petition, but emphasized this should be reviewed in a calm, unemotional process.
Member Dan Carty offered a brief comment that a recall provision was long overdue.
Member Russo offered comments on the “consent of the governed.” He noted that he could support a recall provision, but added “I just don’t think this cake is fully baked.”
Chair Kouchakdjian stated that she’s not opposed to a recall provision, but described this one as “not very well written.” She added that a charter review should be discussed during Select Board goal setting. She voiced concerns about dishonoring the electorate if this wasn’t done carefully or thoughtfully.
Vice Chair Janie Dretler called for a “more thoughtful review,” and argued that it was a weak recall provision relative to others in the state. She added “Just because you don’t like that you lost an election you can call for a recall. I don’t think that’s democratic.”
Article 4 — Citizen’s Petition: Vote of No Confidence In the Sudbury School Committee
The Board opposed this article 1-4.
Member Russo quickly stated “I vote no.”
Vice Chair Dretler questioned the factual basis for the article and added “I’m incredibly disappointed that this was brought forward and absolutely do not support this.”
Member Radha Gargeya cited his earlier comments about Article 3, and voiced opposition.
Member Dan Carty offered a brief comment: “I have absolutely no confidence in this School Committee, so I’m a yes.”
Chair Lisa Kouchakdjian talked about her experience on the Sudbury School Committee, and described the article as “baseless allegations.” She argued that the chair of the Sudbury School Committee has been “attacked nonstop for quite some time.” She continued “I know sometimes we’ve agreed, sometimes we’ve disagreed amongst each other, but I would never wish upon any one of you the horror that has been bestowed upon one of our elected officials in this community, one of our School Committee members. If there was any weight or credence to any of the allegations, I would have cause to consider them. But there’s zero here.”