Yesterday, Walpole voters resoundingly defeated, again, a flawed plan to place a stand-alone police station on Robbins Road by a vote of 4,296 (80.15%) no to 1,057 (19.85%) yes.

Although the proposal was purportedly scaled back 25% in square feet and $2.5 million from a similar 2006 request, Walpole voters defeated this plan by a significantly larger margin of victory. The Robbins Road location is not an appropriate site for such a facility for many reasons, mostly related to its proximity to the middle school, aquifer zone, and a residential neighborhood.

With these election results, the Walpole electorate has spoken loud and clear about their intentions for our public safety facilities.

This is a 100-decibel message from the voters. We don’t believe we’ll see half-baked override proposals from the town any time soon, and that’s a good thing for the taxpayers.

While we are happy that this proposal was soundly rejected, we sympathize with the police and fire departments. Unfortunately, the Board of Selectmen pursued a plan full of holes, and when citizens raised questions, those elected officials refused to respond. This loss falls squarely on the Board’s shoulders.

The citizens had too many concerns that remained unanswered on Election Day, and they were equally turned off by the Board’s failure to listen and adapt.

We extend our sincerest congratulations to 2010 Board of Selectmen winners Eric Kraus and Mike Berry, along with all others who were victorious tonight. We wish you all the best of luck. We are encouraged by the commitment to listen from the new Board of Selectmen members and hope it’s a new day at Town Hall.

Walpole 2020 was founded to encourage a comprehensive approach to addressing all of our municipal building needs, and tonight’s results validate our mission. Over the course of this campaign, we discovered that Walpole has many talented individuals who are willing to volunteer to help the town chart its course in a smart, efficient manner.

In the future, we hope we can play a role in bringing all interested parties to the table to do what’s best for our great community and get on a clear path to meeting our needs. 

Thank you to all of the volunteers, donors, and most importantly, the voters of Walpole for your role in defeating this proposal. This is your victory.

- Walpole 2020

FULL RESULTS

Tomorrow is Election Day in Walpole. No matter how you feel about our issue, we ask that you engage in your civic duty and vote.

We hope you will review this website and consider a “no” vote on Question 1 for the many reasons we’ve laid out. Our town deserves better.

If you do not know your polling location, you can find it out on the link to the right, under “Election information.”

“I want the town center to reflect Walpole’s history without being stuck in it; to admire its present without ignoring the past; and to always be looking toward the future.”

Stephanie Alves
Boston Architectural College student

If you have seen any of the proponents’ presentations on Question 1, you’ll recognize the above quote from a Boston Architectural student as a major rationale for choosing the Robbins Road location for a stand-alone police station.  To paraphrase them, this young woman so captures the vision of Walpole’s planning for downtown and beyond!

But a deeper look at the Stephanie Alves report shows that the proponents use of this quote is extremely misleading and out of context. 

Here is the title of the report which Ms. Alves presented to the Board of Selectmen in Spring 2009.

Walpole Town Center: Site Planning, New Commercial Building, and New Police and Fire Station

As you can see, there is no reference to building a stand-alone police station on Robbins Road.  On the contrary, Ms. Alves vision for downtown includes a combo police-fire station, which is very different than the plan pushed by Question 1 supporters.

Here are several quotes from throughout Ms. Alves report:

“A new combined police and fire station will be located at the corner of Stone and School Streets and away from the traffic of Main Street.” (page 3)

“I’ve also added a new combined police and fire station at the opposite corner (of Rt 1A and 27).” (page 6)

“The police and fire stations will be combined into one new, modern building.  It is located on the corner of Stone and School streets for easy accessibility between the streets and is out of major intersections to avoid traffic … Each use gets its own wing of the building that is approximately 20,000 square feet each, connected by a common entry point.” (page 10)

We know today that the location in her plan is the same site of the approved library, which was a pending ballot question in May 2009 when the report was submitted.  And to be very clear, we do not advocate revisiting that location or the library because it is a settled matter in town.  But Ms. Alves advocates for a combo police-fire station downtown, not a stand-alone police station on Robbins Rd! 

The combo facility is part of her vision for downtown Walpole.  But if you listen to Question 1 supporters, you’d think differently because they blatantly take her one quote out of context and use it to justify their push for a stand-alone police station on Robbins Road. 

There are many reasons Question 1 will fail.  Misstating facts and others’ opinions will be one of the main reasons for defeat.

(Note: Since we do not have Ms. Alves express consent to post her full report, we cannot link to it at this time. We do not know if she is aware that her Spring ‘09 semester homework project is the basis for promoting a radical change of downtown Walpole by moving the police department to a stand-alone building on Robbins Road.)

Here’s one for those of you who like to keep score.

This week in the Walpole Times, there were four letters-to-the-editor (LTE) opposed to the override, and two in favor.  Due to their policy, the Walpole Times will not run any additional pre-election advocacy letters.

Prior to this week, the LTE scorecard read 15 letter opposed, zero in favor since the beginning of the year. 

The final score: 19 opposed, 2 in favor.

That’s right.  The two pro-override letters written this week, one by chief proponent Selectman Cliff Snuffer and one by the police union chief, were the first and only two letters submitted this year to the Walpole Times.  No one else has bothered to publicly state their reasons to support this flawed plan. 

We can’t say we blame them.

Unfortunately, in his final pitch, Mr. Snuffer again refused to answer legitimate concerns that linger just one week before the election. Sadly, he instead chose to lash out with baseless personal attacks, which is conduct very unbecoming of an elected official.

Below are links to all opposition letters-to-the-editor in the Walpole Times since January 1 , 2010. Some authors are involved with Walpole 2020, some are people we’ve never met.  All have one thing in common: they raise legitimate issues about the proposal that remain unanswered.

Please read and see for yourself the many reasons why Question 1 must be defeated.

(Editor’s Note – This week’s LTEs are not yet on the Walpole Times’ website.  When they are up, we will link to them.)

May 20, 2010
Letter: Selectmen have not done their homework regarding Robbins Road site
Letter: Vote ‘no’ on Question 1 June 5
Letter: Come out and vote on June 5

May 13, 2010
Letter: Are you in for a $7.9 million burnt pizza?

May 6, 2010
Letter: Warning to parents: sex offenders must register annually, in person at police station

April 30, 2010
Letter: Town officials need to look at the big picture
Letter: Finance Committee’s missed opportunity for public safety facilities

April 16, 2010
Letter to the editor: Pay attention before you vote in June
Letter to the editor: Residents need to protect Walpole’s master plan

April 2, 2010
Letter to the editor: Open space needs to be preserved
Letter to the editor: Not all roads lead to Robbins Road
Letter to the editor: Robbins Road not the right site for new police station

February 8, 2010
Opinion: Finding alternate sites for police station
Letter to the editor: The numbers don’t add up

January 7, 2010
Letter to the editor: Robbins Road not right location for new police station

We are looking for volunteers to help Walpole 2020 spread the word.  Please visit our “Support Walpole 2020” page and fill out our volunteer form.

Also, the new lawn signs are in!  If you’d like one on your lawn, please check the appropriate box in the form on the link above.

We know that Walpole Times reporter Keith Ferguson has been working tirelessly over the past week to interview the six candidates running for the two open seats on the Board of Selectmen and write individual candidate profiles.  We expected that he would ask each their opinion on the Robbins Road police station.  But we didn’t expect the results.  Here’s Keith in his own words, from a Tweet this morning:

Keith_WalTimes Just reviewed my candidate profile interviews. It appears all Selectmen candidates are opposed to a Robbins Road police station.

All?  Can it really be?!

We previously posted a recap here about the Candidates’ Night, where Mike Berry, Eric Kraus, and Bill Hamilton all publicly declared their opposition to Question 1.

However, Keith’s revelation would mean incumbent Selectmen David Sullivan, who voted to advance the override to Town Meeting, has publicly flipped his position and is now opposed to the proposal.  Patrick Shield had thus far declined to take a stance on the question. And James Taylor has yet to publicly declare a position, and is an RTM member who missed the roll call vote at Town Meeting, although he had assured us privately that he would have voted no.

We’ll be looking forward to tomorrow’s paper for confirmation of this news and, of course, our Vote No on #1 ad!

Several members of Walpole 2020 attended the League of Women’s Voters candidates’ night last night at the Old Post Road School.  The main event of the night was a discussion between four of the six candidates running for two seats on the Board of Selectmen: Mike Berry, William Hamilton, Eric Kraus, and Patrick Shield.  Incumbent David Sullivan and challenger Jimmy Taylor did not attend (no explanation was given).

The question 1 override issue came up on two main questions.  Below is a recap of each attendees position, in alphabetical order. 

(Please note we are not endorsing any candidates, but trying to represent a fair and accurate representation of where each candidate stands on this issue.  If you feel someone’s stance is mischaracterized, please e-mail us at Walpole2020@verizon.net, or enter comments at the end of this post.)

For simplification, the two main questions were:

A.  Please name your top three infrastructure priorities for Walpole.

B.  Will you support another ballot question on the public safety override in the Fall election? (Admin’s note: Of course, this assumes a defeat on June 5th, which we believe will happen but don’t take for granted. Make sure to vote NO on question 1!)

Mike Berry:

Question A:  Mr. Berry listed the reuse of the current library, Rt. 27 by the commuter rail station, and a third project near Norfolk.  He did not discuss the police station.

Question B:  Mr. Berry said it was his desire several months ago that the Board of Selectmen delay the current question until the fall election to allow for more analysis and input from residents, which perhaps would have changed the overall proposal. He does not support the current proposal, and philosophically, he does not believe in overrides returning to the ballot within a year so he would oppose an immediate revote.

William Hamilton:

Question A: Mr. Hamilton only discussed one priority, and it was the police station.  He called it a “mistake” to site a stand-alone police station up on Robbins Road, and called for a combo police/fire station downtown.

Question B:  Mr. Hamilton does not think we should move that quickly.  The Board of Selectmen need to listen more to the people they represent.  The current override will not pass, lots of people oppose it. The question is a second mistake for the police department location, following the failed attempt in 2006.  Too bad the Selectmen have dug in their heels in opposing a Stone Field option.

Eric Kraus:

Question A:  Mr. Kraus listed (1) a new police station, but not on Robbins Road.  It does not belong there; (2) general infrastructure; (3) green space and fields.

Question B:  Mr. Kraus did not want to take a position on a hypothetical fall election ballot question without knowing the details, but said he’s unlikely to support a question in the same year.  The police station does not belong on Robbins Road.  There should be a stand-alone or combo facility downtown.

Patrick Shield:

Question A:  Mr Shield listed his priorities as (1) municipal building, by figuring out what we need to do and how to replace old building; (2) roads and sidewalks; and (3) bridges.

Question B:  Mr. Shield did not want to comment on a hypothetical fall ballot question without knowing the details such as location, etc.

In addition to the Boston Globe coverage this week, the Walpole Times has also printed a story about the efforts of Walpole 2020. Below is an excerpt.  Please click on the link to get the full story from the Walpole Times website.

Walpole residents form Walpole 2020 committee in stand against police station ballot question

By Keith Ferguson

The Walpole Times

Posted May 20, 2010 @ 02:56 PM

WALPOLE —

The Robbins Road area residents who oppose a police station on the West Walpole street have formed an official political committee to stand against the override on June’s town election ballot.

Walpole residents will have the opportunity to vote on a debt exclusion override on June 5 that seeks to borrow $8.5 million to finance that construction of a police station on Robbins Road and the design phase of a new downtown fire station.

Neighbors to the proposed police station site next to the VFW have been vocal in their dismay, claiming selectmen have done little or no research on other potential sites in town for the new headquarters.

Called Walpole 2020, Robbins Road area opponents filed to become a formal political committee with the town clerk last week.

Robbins Road resident Dominick Ianno said the purpose of the group is to spread awareness about the public safety override.

As a political committee, members can now accept contributions that can be spent on political advertisements, lawn signs, mailers and other campaign materials.

The group is named Walpole 2020 because it’s calling for town leaders to develop a municipal building plan through the year 2020. It is also a reference to “clear vision,” said Ianno.

(Continued …) 

The Boston Globe has written a story about our efforts!

Below is an excerpt.  The full story can be found here

Critics seek to derail police station plan

Michele Morgan Bolton, Globe Correspondent / May 20, 2010

WALPOLE — Opponents who helped defeat an $8.5 million proposal to Town Meeting for a new police station are now working to get the beleaguered initiative — which also includes design funds for a stand-alone downtown fire station — off the June 5 ballot.

The opponents say the town should instead ask voters to approve the $500,000 to $700,000 needed to fund the design of a combined downtown public safety facility that a majority of residents — and a 2004 master plan for the town’s future — say is preferable.

“You don’t serve voters by making recommendations without trying to do what the master plan calls for,’’ said Stetson Circle resident Russell DeMartino, chairman and treasurer of an activist group called Walpole 2020. “If you do, that’s just arrogance.’’

The May 5 Town Meeting vote rejecting the police station proposal was the first time in the town’s history that a request for a Proposition 2 ½ tax-limit override was shot down by representative Town Meeting members before it could be decided by the general population, officials said.

It’s also the second time in four years that a request to build a new police station on Robbins Road has been rejected, opponents said. This time, a smaller-scale design based on a plan borrowed from Abington was put before Town Meeting, as well as $600,000 for a study to build a new downtown fire station.

(Continued … )

If you saw the propoganda packet provided to RTMs by the Board of Selectmen for Town Meeting discussion, you noticed it was full of overly-optimistic materials. 

One item included was a 2006 press release from the Master Plan Implementation Committee (MPIC), supporting the 2006 proposal.  However, conveniently left out of the packet was the 2010 MPIC letter sent to the BoS just weeks prior to the meeting questioning the merits of this year’s plan.  The inclusion of the 2006 letter was so blatantly misleading that the first speaker at Town Meeting after the Snuffer presentation was the current chair of the MPIC, who rebuked the use of that 2006 press release as an implication of this year’s committee’s position.

It was a bad start to a bad night for the proponents.

As this year’s police station override has progressed through various stages of the ballot process, we’ve heard the supporters argue that it’s only respectful to let the voters decide the issue.

Excuse us while we point out the obvious.  The voters have already decided this issue, several times over.  They have made it clear where they want to see a new public safety facility, and it does not involve a stand-alone police station on Robbins Road. 

This year’s return to a failed proposal does not respect the will of the voters, it disrepects the will of the voters.

How does this year’s proposal respect the will of the 1,800 voters who participated in the 2004 Master Plan process?  That plan specifically called to ”Revitalize Walpole Center,” in part with ”a new civic center for municipal facilities” including ”public safety offices.”

How does this year’s proposal respect the will of the 2,908 voters who showed up on June 3, 2006 for our town’s municipal election and voted on virtually this same proposal?  Of those voters, 1,658 voted no, and 1,250 voted yes, clearly rejecting a stand-alone police facility on Robbins Road.

How does this year’s proposal respect the will of voters appointed by the Board of Selectmen in 2006-07 to a commission to recommend a public safety facility location?  That commission unanimously recommended a combo public safety facility downtown, and after several months of delay tactics, the Board of Selectmen, without any public reasoning, abruptly refused to accept the commission’s findings and unceremoniously disbanded the entire commission, throwing away months of hard work.

How does this year’s proposal respect the will of the 2010 Town Meeting members who heard hours of debate and chose not to appropriate the necessary funding for the present plan?  The law, for very good reasons, requires Town Meeting to provide a 2/3 majority to appropriate money for debt exclusions.  On May 5, 2010, both a standing vote and a roll call vote to appropriate for the debt exclusion failed to reach a 2/3 majority. 

If the proponents of the Robbins Road plan truly “respect the will of the voters,” then they’d put their time and energy into finding a way to do what the voters have expressed as their true will. 

Unfortunately, we’ll have to send them the message, again, at the ballot box on June 5th.

The police station override proposal put forth to the voters is, in our opinion, incomplete, full of discrepancies and vagaries, not financially sound, and at times, contradictory.  But other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

Exacerbating the problem is the amazingly stubborn attitude of a few members of the Board of Selectmen who refuse to address the valid concerns raised to them. 

Should we tolerate a non-responsive Board of Selectmen?  No.  You may not like what you read or hear, but if you are an elected official, it is never acceptable to stick your head in the sand.   

Members of Walpole 2020 have written two letters in the past few months raising serious questions about the police station proposal.  Despite promises of an imminent response from two BoS members, they have not produced one. 

In early March, directly responding to the BoS’s January request to put concerns in writing, this letter was submitted: Letter to BOS – 3.6.10.  Despite a promise from Mr. Snuffer at a March FinComm meeting and from Mr Timson at a March BoS meeting about a “response” letter, they have not produced one.

Prior to Town Meeting’s start in early May, this letter RTM letter 4.29.2010 was circulated to reiterate earlier concerns and address some new ones.

Please read the letters and see for yourself what issues have been raised.  Future posts will delve into the details. As you’ll see, there is plenty to write about between now and Election Day.