Harbor Debate

By Ed Kelley

So the debate begins anew.

The last election cycle pitted the Reforming Crusader Democrats against the Old Guard Republicans. One of the Democratic Slogans was "No Harbor Expansion Without a Referendum" Now some of the Old Guard are crying foul! Is this justified? Well lets look at the chronology of what has happened so far and you can decide for yourself.

Last year there were several meetings of the Harbor Advisory Committee at which they discussed the Harbor and the results of a town wide survey. They came up with a laundry list of suggestions.

Earlier this year, on several occasions, the Mayor affirmed his commitment to a referendum.

On April 13th the State's DOT engineers, after consulting with the Town presented three "Concepts" for the town to consider for future Harbor development. As I understand it, these are "concepts" that will be used to initiate discussion and not final plans. These concepts will be shared with the public for comments at a public hearing to be held in May.

On April 15th some of "the Old Guard" published their critique of the Concepts. The sum and substance of their critique: "None of the concepts work. Just to add some parking and leave everything else unchanged." It is important to note that these were individuals acting as a private citizens though they claimed "color of authority" by including their Harbor related titles and stating they held a formal meeting. They are apparently not a formal committee of the Harbor Commission as they might have one believe. No such committee exists. I trust the town will accord this document no more importance than it would my own letter of protest based on my review of the concepts. These are merely the ramblings of concerned (self-interested) citizens, but nothing more. That they chose to act as individuals is a breach of proper procedure by these Commission Members. This letter should have been discussed at the next Commission Meeting and made a part of the Official Record of the Harbor Commission. The Harbor Commission as a whole could review and comment on the critique and forward it as agreed onto the Harbor Development Committee and the Town Council for formal consideration. If the Harbor Commission consensus was to table the letter, it it should not have never seen the light of day. This letter speaks volumes about the personal agenda of these four individuals. They do not take their roles as public servants seriously enough to follow the correct procedures. Choosing to follow the rules when it suits them and discard them when they do not like them. There is a multi-member, politically appointed, commission for a reason, it has something to do with the democratic (small "d") process.

Where do we go from here? Presumably after the May public meeting a concept will be selected (or not) and perhaps modified based on public comment, including, perhaps, the aforementioned letter. At this point there will be further review by the Harbor Advisory Committee and Town Council. The comments of the Entire Harbor Commission, the Planning Board and the Environmental Commission as well should be sought at this stage to ensure that nothing was overlooked. These final comments should be sent to DOT and a formal proposal should follow. Once the Proposal is formalized there should be a final Public Hearing and ultimately a Town-Wide Referendum.

So have the Democrats lived up to their pledge. Time will tell.