What a difference a year makes, right? One night instead of three. Three-plus hours, not 10 or more, of mostly civil discourse. Virtually all articles and amendments passed handily, including Article 29, leading to June’s Prop 2 1/2 override vote (more on that later).
All that plus another impressive turnout, along with an end — perhaps — to Marblehead’s noncompliance with the MBTA Communities Act. Voters have approved new zoning districts that allow for, but do not guarantee, construction of multifamily housing along Broughton Road and Tedesco Country Club.
Matter settled? All parties satisfied? Not exactly.
But let’s begin with props to everyone who showed up. And even more to town officials who worked long and hard to craft and present a long list of numbers-heavy budget items.
Shout outs, too, to Select Board chair Dan Fox, School Committee member Melissa Clucas and DPW Director Amy McHugh, among others, for guiding voters through the number crunching, and to Charter Commission chair Amy Drinker for honoring her late colleague Sean Casey as “our Thomas Jefferson.”
And now, some lingering thoughts, concerns and questions:
Will voters weighing Prop 2 1/2 override options come to the polls committed, confused — or both?
Marblehead is in uncharted waters here, having never faced a general override vote offering multiple options. It’s therefore incumbent on town officials — and yes, news outlets like the Current — to provide clear explanations about what each tier entails and how marked ballots can and should reflect a voter’s true intent.
That may not be so easy. However, town officials and groups like 4MHD have promised a rigorous information campaign between now and June 9. We trust them — and us — to meet the moment. We’ll have more to say about what choice or choices we endorse in a later editorial.
OK, which side ultimately prevailed on the 3A issue?
Good question, and one most pointedly asked by attendee David Modica, whose “are we kinda being pricks?” remark quickly went viral on social media, garnering millions of views. His larger point — that the redrawn map may satisfy the letter of the law but not its spirit, and that it seems unlikely to result in any actual housing being built — has fueled criticism that Marblehead, as a recent Boston Globe editorial put it, has become an archetype of “a wealthy community trying to keep out people under the guise of ‘preserving the character’ of the town.”
A couple of points worth making among the widespread media coverage of what might be called Modica’s Moment:
Our earlier endorsement of a “yes” vote on Article 4 doesn’t mean we are unsupportive of Marblehead creating more housing options. In fact, we urge the town’s housing coalition to explore any and all viable options.
Last year, Marblehead passed a perfectly reasonable zoning plan that was shot down, in our opinion, by a combination of misinformation and fearmongering (i.e., Marblehead becoming “the next Wonderland”). Would it have triggered the same backlash we’re seeing now? Doubtful. Meanwhile, 3A opponents seem conspicuously silent. Yet they own this, too.
The state’s final seal of approval on Marblehead’s now-infamous plan — if and when it comes — should not be the end of a healthy and long-overdue discussion about how to boost the tax base and thoughtfully create additional housing opportunities in town.
A show of hands: Who prefers clickers?
Opinion remains divided in this shop over whether “peer pressure” discouraged “no” voting on key budget items, or whether the time saved by show-of-hands voting (after debate) on, for instance, 11 separate budget items was worth it.
We’ll note there are valid arguments on both sides. In general, however, we favor using clicker technology as a routine matter, even if it’s more time consuming. Voters should feel confident that issues are being settled by the book, so to speak, and not according to some hidden agenda or forced expediency.
Town Meeting ended on a positive note — albeit with its only negative vote
Article 40, the last voted on, was an affirmation of Marblehead’s adherence to principles set down in the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution. A proposed amendment went further, calling out President Trump by name while listing many of his administration’s most egregious transgressions.
We happen to agree with much of what the amendment writer spelled out. However, as one editorial board member noted, “I still think there’s something to celebrate in the idea that Town Meeting wanted to live somewhere other than the extremely polarized realm of national politics.”
He added, “Not to make too much of it, but that’s in part why the Current exists, to remind people that we’re neighbors with common interests and challenges first, even if we are aligned with different camps in the national political wars.”
A good note to end on, that.
