Share This Article
Asked by the Sudbury Select Board whether Sudbury’s legislators should push to broaden CPA funding qualifications for recreational walkways, the Community Preservation Committee (CPC) deferred to the Community Preservation Coalition.
The October 7 meeting of the CPC featured robust discussion about the matter. Select Board member Dan Carty presented map views of various parcels in Sudbury where walkway connections to recreational assets seemed reasonable. The ensuing discussion had less to do with what he proposed than which legislative strategy would be most effective. The Community Preservation Act limits spending to open space, historic preservation, affordable housing and outdoor recreation, and sidewalks are generally treated as transportation infrastructure rather than recreational land, which leaves them outside what the law allows. That said; the law has ample fuzzy areas.
Member Sherri Cline explained that the Community Preservation Coalition was working on potential updates to the CPA statute, and would be advocating for those changes once that process ran its course. Chair Sam Markuse added that the committee need not take a vote, because the Select Board only asked for input on the matter.
The result of the conversation appeared to be quite simple: the committee will let the coalition do their work, and consider supporting the proposed updates to the statute if and when they have finished.
Member Andrew Bettinelli noted that a home rule petition could be leveraged to ensure sidewalks are fundable under the CPA in Sudbury, without impacting other member towns. That remains a possible approach outside of the work of the Community Preservation Coalition, but an article would have to be filed for a Town Meeting vote to enact that strategy.
The Sudbury Park and Recreation Commission (PRC) recently voted against supporting a letter to Sudbury’s legislators prior to this CPC discussion. Walkways remain a well-supported issue in Sudbury, as all parties responding to the Select Board request for input have, so far, indicated conceptual support. A town-wide consensus on how to execute on that support remains undecided.
