Town Meeting rebuffs Mass. Ave. foes again

Town Meeting last night rejected two resolutions to stop the Mass. Ave. Project that would not actually have stopped the Mass. Ave. Project.

Mass. Ave. opponents rise to vote against sidewalk construction at Town Meeting in 2011.

The first resolution (Article 69) sought to repeal last year’s authorization of easements to rebuild sidewalks in East Arlington.

The second (Article 70) would have asked the Selectmen to put a nonbinding question about the project on the ballot in April of 2013, after construction was already in progress.

Both failed by wide margins.

Muddled attempt to stop Mass. Ave. fails at Town Meeting

Vowing to stop the Mass. Ave. redesign, opponents failed to block a motion at Town Meeting upon which the fate of the project did not actually depend.

At the Arlington Diner

The motion, which passed by a lopsided vote of 135-32, authorizes the Town to take easements to facilitate the reconstruction of the sidewalks by allowing access to abutters’ land during construction.

Although these easements entail no transfers of land from private owners to the Town, any use of the Town’s eminent-domain powers requires an affirmative 2/3 vote of Town Meeting. Opponents mustered roughly half of the votes they would have needed to defeat the measure.

Mass DOT takes comments

Advocates for and against the rebuilding of Mass. Ave. in East Arlington went into overdrive, and comments from the public went into overtime, at a sometimes-raucous project hearing at Town Hall on April 12.

Some 400 people came to the Department of Transportation hearing on the Town’s proposed design. 79 gave comments, and many more were turned away when the hearing adjourned at 10:40.

Arlington Town Hall on Tuesday night. Not quite to capacity, but very full.

Petitions in boxes

Photo via Creative Commons license

April 12′s hearing on the Mass. Ave. project is the final public step before the state’s Highway Commissioner decides whether to fund the plan. But the Town has already hosted 7 public meetings to design it.

At one of these last July 22, Joe Connors announced the anti-rebuild East Arlington Concerned Citizens Committee had collected “over two thousand” signatures on a petition against the project.

In contrast to the group’s recent antics, this petition may be the most substantive thing the CCC has done.

Criminal complaint alleges no crimes

As detailed in a previous post, the anti–Mass. Ave group last week filed a criminal complaint againt the Town that alleges no crimes, unless disagreeing with the opponent’s opinions is a crime.

With this stunt, rephrasing their old arguments as a criminal complaint, the opponents have fallen irrevocably into self parody. Fittingly, the Arlington Advocate broke the story on April 1.

I usually follow the convention on this blog of showing my personal opinions in red. I do so below, but really every other word should probably be red. If you only want my cub-reporter voice, stick to the news post; however, I am not making any of this up. Heck, I couldn’t.

You can read the complaint for yourself courtesy of the Arlington Advocate. But here are the highlights.

Plan opponents slam town with criminal complaint

Foes of rebuilding Mass. Ave. filed a criminal complaint against the Town of Arlington last week for failing to accept anti-rebuild arguments.

Eric Berger’s lawyer, Michael Rossi, filed the complaint with the Public Integrity Division of the Attorney General’s office.

According to that office, the Division was established earlier this year to investigate and prosecute “cases of public corruption and fraud.” However, the 10-page complaint does not describe any crimes, just differences of opinion.

Rebuild foes withdraw protest request

The East Arlington Concerned Citizens Committee, founded two years ago to stop the reconstruction of Mass. Ave., last night withdrew its request for a permit for a march along that street on April 9.

Speaking for the group before Arlington’s Board of Selectmen, Eric Berger cited multiple requirements the group was unable to meet because he had only learned of them that day.

Town Manager Brian Sullivan said that other parade events of the scope requested entail many months of planning. “Never was there any mention” of the April 9 date in any of the letters from the group, Sullivan said.

Anti-rebuild web site has telling design

The East Arlington Concerned Citizens Committee, formed in early 2009 to oppose the reconstruction of Mass. Ave., has hung its first shingle in cyberspace.

The group’s new web site sports an attractive orange-and black design crafted by Creative Infusion.

At the bottom of every page of the site is the following vision for Mass. Ave.:

CCC logo

Notice anything missing?

Rebuild foes seek permit for protest march

Aux Armes, Citoyens!

Vowing to close down Mass. Ave., opponents of the plan to rebuild that road in East Arlington have asked the Board of Selectmen for a permit to hold a protest march.

Such a permit is only needed for large crowds.

The agenda for the March 28 Selectmen’s meeting includes the following item:

5.    Request:  Permit to March
Eric Berger, East Arlington Concerned Citizens Committee

Berger last month described a plan for an “opposition march down a closed-down Mass. Ave. corridor.” He has also promised “civil disobedience” should Mass Highway approve the Town’s plan over his objections.

Redesign foes OK with lane widths after all

Since the summer of 2009, opponents of the plan to rebuild Mass. Ave. have criticized the 11-foot travel lanes proposed by the Town as too narrow.

Eleven feet, they say in their leaflet, would be so narrow as to “increase the likelihood of accidents:” a serious charge.

Last week, however, the group’s principal spokesperson, Eric Berger, endorsed 11-foot lanes.

Criticism kindly meant

Last year opponents of the Mass. Ave. redesign published their own plan for the street. This proposal was later made available online by the Arlington Advocate.

Last week the Advocate ran my short criticism of three aspects of that plan, “Reconsidering Mass. Ave. Criticism.“

To cut to the chase:

Some of the critics’ concerns have merit. Some have been incorporated into the Town’s plan. However, I urge opponents to reconsider demands that would, perhaps unwittingly, widen Mass. Ave., snarl traffic, and forgo state and federal funding.

The whole thing is here and the opponents’ 2009 plan is here.

Thanks to the Advocate for making both of these viewpoints available online.