To the Editor,
Where are all those MBTS folks who put up pink STOP SLV! signs?... the folks who raised millions of dollars to hire attorneys and purchase the Powder House Lane apartment complex to try and block the SLV development from going up?
Many of us are concerned this development will be ugly; will be seen from Rt 128; and will also endanger wild life, a municipal water supply, etc.
Where are all those We-Love-Manchester folks now? … now that the state legislature has been hoodwinked by an association of high-end developers, itching to get their fingers into prime real estate land in MBTS, Rockport, Marblehead, Milton and other high-end suburban towns?
Under these developers’ 3A “MBTA” mandate… our hand-appointed seven- person subcommittee (all of whom plan on continuing to live peacefully on Bennett Street, Tucks Point Rd, Masconomo, Old Neck, Washington, etc.) have been quick to earmark a few of MBTS’ less-fancy streets for high rise apartment houses and parking garages. Why?
According to our current town administrator … It’s all about more state grants! Here is his latest plan!
Our “administrator” has actually drafted a plan to commercialize/develop Reed Park (that grassy area on Beach Street with benches overlooking our quiet harbor… next to the railroad tracks)
Our administrator’s waterfront expansion goal includes moving the town’s few working lobstermen’s boats away from their current moorings on Morss Pier to build more docks for out- of- town boaters, plus a harbor master office?! In fact, he (aka The Town?) has already applied for two Special Permits from the Planning Board for this expansion; without our selectboard bothering to survey the town re: our interest in commercializing OUR town harbor!
But wait! The state says we can only receive this grant to commercialize/expand our town harbor if we allow the MBTA big- box housing mandate to pass on November 18th!
Always remember - the more grants Manchester receives; the more fiscal responsibility and often additional compensation a town administrator or manager receives. Is this why our town administrator keeps trying to grab every grant that comes down the pike? I do not think the majority of Manchester wants to see our town turned into a new and improved Manchesterport by the Sea, where parking lots are plentiful, and tourists outnumber residents many days of the week!
Meanwhile… do not be fooled by talk about the MBTA mandate encouraging low- income housing. In fact, this new housing mandate specifically says that senior housing; studio and one bedroom apartments “cannot be counted” in the additional 171 units and parking garages that the MBTS subcommittee has said will be allowed to be built in, around, and on top of the 164 housing units that currently exist on a portion of Pine St, Morse Ct, Elm Street and in the current Powder House Apartment area… including, at some point, the town pond behind the fire station. Yes!! These mandated two+ bedroom luxury units, with their handy parking garages, will be perfect for those wanting to retire here or enjoy Manchester during the summer season.
If this mandate passes on November 18th, property owners in and around Pine, Elm and Morse Court will watch neighbors sell their properties for VERY high prices to these happy developers, Am I being too dramatic? Listen up!
Last week the Massachusetts Ethics Commission forbade two Gloucester Ward Councilors from participating, let alone voting, in the city’s recent vote on their MBTA housing mandate. Councilor-at-Large Jeff Worthley and Ward 3 Councilor Marjorie Grace both own property in one or more of Gloucester’s MBTA targeted neighborhoods. The Commission therefore forced them to RECUSE themselves from voting with the rest of Gloucester’s ward councilors. They were prohibited from representing their constituents when it came to a vote on the MBTA mandate. Why?
The Ethics Commission told the two councilors they would have a conflict of interest if they voted, as they could substantially benefit financially if the mandate passed!
On the flip side… under this mandate, what happens to your home’s current value when the two houses across the street at, say, 30 and 34 Pine Street, with a combined lot size of 1.3152 acres, are sold to a developer who will by right be able to build a minimum of 15 units, perhaps 20, along with the mandated 1.5 parking spaces per unit? Clearly this developers’ dream housing mandate is going to create nasty divisions among and between MBTS neighbors and neighborhoods.
It is critical that town residents look at the big picture. It is important to understand this kind of mandate can only be happening in 2024, when it appears we no longer have national, state, nor local government by and for the people.
If we, as a small town, cannot muster a simple majority to say “NO” to this most recent government mandate… and ride out this storm … as we have chosen to do with the SLV development, how will we respond when faced with additional mandates when they come sliding down the pike?
Breaking News!!! Norton Selectmen just voted “NO” to this mandate; North Reading, Middleboro, Milton, Holden and East Bridgewater town meetings also voted NO to the MBTA mandate. Meanwhile…earlier this month the Massachusetts Superior Court heard testimony re: Milton’s refusal to accept the MBTA mandate. The court will now issue its opinion within 120 days, upholding or rejecting Milton’s town meeting vote to block this MBTA state housing mandate.
Manchester should therefore NOT HAVE A TOWN VOTE until the court’s opinion is issued. WHY? If the majority of our town meeting votes on November 18th to accept this mandate…we will be stuck with the mandate. Hence; it makes sense to postpone the November 18th town vote until AFTER the court renders their decision on whether towns, such as Milton and Manchester must follow the MBTA mandate or not.
To request Yellow SaveMBTS yard sign: www.savembts.org; or join MBTA Multifamily Zoning Communities on Facebook.
Susan Wadia-Ells
Manchester
