This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
07/24/2018 12:00 AMWhen the Board of Selectmen (BOS) meeting agenda for July 23 was released, one item on the agenda quickly drew a firestorm of attention on social media. The item looked to narrow the scope—both in substance and time—for the recently formed Ad-Hoc Academy Building Guidance Committee. However, after public backlash online and at the meeting, First Selectman Tom Banisch withdrew the motion to change the scope.
Following several public hearings at which the board heard numerous residents express displeasure with the potential development options on the table for Academy, the BOS decided to take a step back, refocus, and gather more information, then settled on a charge for the Ad-Hoc Academy School Guidance Committee at its meeting on May 14.
According to its original charge, the committee was formed to gather information on various options, present that information to the public, and then ensure “that a comprehensive and unbiased survey of Madison taxpayers and residents is conducted with regards to the future use of the Academy School building and fields using a polling firm specified by the Board of Selectmen.”
The BOS appointed the members at its regular meeting on June 26. The board opened the agenda to appoint Kathryn Hunter, Robert Card, Jerry Davis, Henry Griggs, Tom Scarpati, Bob Hale, and Sarah Barrett.
Though the committee had only met twice by time of the July 23 BOS meeting, the BOS agenda stated the board would “discuss and take action to approve modifying the charge of the Ad-Hoc Academy Guidance Committee to reduce the scope of work to review building-only proposal and make a recommendation to the Board of Selectmen at the Aug. 27, 2018 BOS meeting.”
The potential change in scope drew more than 100 residents to the meeting. Banisch said his intention in the possible change was to take the Academy land completely out of the question and try to get a question on the upcoming November ballot. Banisch said his hope was that by putting a question up in November, the governor’s race would help ensure high voter turnout. However after listening to numerous public comments, Banisch said he realized his desire to change the scope was a step too far.
“Let me say that this was probably a mistake on my part,” he said. “I am really anxious to come to a conclusion with this Academy School and by taking the land out, I thought that would solve the problem, but we are going to do what the people of the town want. If we are not going to get it done by the November elections, we are not going to get it done. This was just me trying to move things along.”
The selectmen agreed with Banisch and the motion to change the scope of the committee was unanimously withdrawn.
Swift Public Backlash
Academy has been at the forefront of debate and public fascination over the past several months, so a potential change to the committee quickly spread like wildfire through the town. At the BOS meeting, many residents stood to voice their opinions, all in opposition to the change.
Resident Joan Walker said she didn’t understand the need to try to change the scope, especially when the committee had been given little time to work thus far.
“The voters of the town took the BOS at their word that they had heard their voices from the public hearing and wanted more options reviewed,’ she said. “This does not mean only one other option. There are several viable options that could be put forth by this committee and I feel it is the duty for the BOS to keep its word and allow the committee to do its work and then let the voters decide. Let this be a fair and transparent process.”
Numerous residents said they understood why Banisch wanted to see an Academy question on the upcoming November ballot, but resident (and former first selectman) Fillmore McPherson said a goal date can’t guide the process.
“I appreciate your concern for having a good turnout at the vote,” he said. “I think that is a worthy thing to do because we traditionally have some very poor turnouts…This school has been empty for 14 years and has been turned over to the town for at least a decade and if we waited another year to the municipal elections or even two years to the presidential, we would probably have a pretty good turnout with the presidential. We don’t want to get the decision-making ahead of the facts that might come out. I suggest you take a deep breath before you make these changes.”
Griggs, who currently chairs the Academy Committee, said cutting the committee charge now would defeat a significant potion of the committees goals and objectives.
“If the work takes us past September, it will be in the service of finding one, a viable solution, and two, doing so in a way that will be regarded as having real integrity,” he said. “This takes time…To cut off the discussion before it even gets going—that is the opposite of what I signed up for and I would urge the board to let us continue our work. We hope to make you proud.”
Considering how severely the idea of changing the committee scope was opposed by the public and even members of his own board, Banisch acknowledged the error of his move with a bit of humor.
“Can anybody tell that I didn’t talk to anybody else before I did this?” he asked the audience.