News

Please click here to listen to our NPR interview


Guest Commentary, Concord Journal, May 3rd 2007

Serious Questions Remain Unanswered on Walden Woods Playing Fields Project

The citizens of Concord were subjected to a travesty of the democratic process on Town Meeting Warrant Article 30, which allocated $1,500,000 of debt from the Town Capital Budget for the Walden Woods playing fields proposal.

Of the1,264 votes cast on the article, 802 were in favor, 459 were opposed and three were disallowed. Article 30 required a 2/3 majority vote and thus failed.

Within 20 minutes of the announcement of the failed vote, a motion for reconsideration was made by Attorney Philip Swain of Pine Hill Lane. By this time, 327 voters had left Town Meeting. Only 937 voters remained. A reconsideration vote was taken, and this time 678 were in favor, 258 were opposed and one was disallowed. Article 30 prevailed on the reconsideration vote, passing with a 2/3 majority.

How could such a mockery of the democratic process take place in Concord? What about the 327 voters who came to Town Meeting to inform themselves and vote, only to have their votes cast aside by the special interest Youth Sports Organizations (YSO)? The action of the YSO was not merely unsportsmanlike but an attack on the democratic process. Their win-at-all-costs tactics have damaged the credibility of Town Meeting and democracy in Concord.

Many citizens are troubled that such tactics could subvert and manipulate the outcome of Town Meeting. As Kim Novick put it, "I think we've seen a hijacking of this Town Meeting by special interests."

Serious questions still remain unanswered by the YSO and the town manager on the Walden Woods fields proposal:

• Why are we destroying Deep Cut Woods, a portion of Walden Woods, with preservation money while the high school football stadium remains unturfed?
• Why are the Walden Woods fields approximately twice as costly as fields in other communities?
• Why are we going to obliterate, as we know it, the only Cross Country course in Concord, which is considered one of the best courses in the state, while 21 multi-sport fields already exist and remain unturfed or unimproved?
• Do the kids on the Cross Country team and their premier course matter less to our community than kids playing soccer and lacrosse?   One in ten kids at CCHS participates in Cross Country and it remains one of the few non-cut, all-inclusive sports at CCHS.
• Why are we taking on $1,500,000 of debt for this project when we have to decide on a new Willard School and new high school?
• Would field development be less costly to taxpayers if it were incorporated into the high school master plan?
• Given the secret negotiations with Concord Academy for four years to lease them all the fields at Emerson Playground for 100 years in the spring and fall for their sports teams, what strings are attached to the private, undisclosed funds being raised?   Concord citizens have a right to know whose money is involved on a public project.   Demand transparency!
• Is there a plan to have our children play sports beneath cell towers affixed to the 70-80 foot light poles, even though the potential health risks of cell towers raise additional questions?   Who stands to gain from this?
• Why are we in such a rush to tear down Walden Woods while K-8 enrollment is plummeting 21percent from 2000-2011 and birth rates between 2000-2005 plunged 39 percent in Concord and 51 percent in Carlisle?
• Why is Concord footing the entire public funding portion of $3,000,000 while Carlisle is funding $0?
• Does planting saplings around Concord, with no funding allocated for this portion of the project, make up for the extinction of an historic ecosystem that has been in existence for hundreds of years?
• How can we consider this a "teachable moment" for our children?
• Can we condone the meeting held by school officials for the Cross Country and track teams to try and sway them to get their parents to vote for the fields when no opposing viewpoints were allowed to be presented?
• Is it ethical for the town of Concord and the School Committee to use the resources at their disposal to tell voters how to vote?   Signs telling citizens to "Vote for the Home Team Advantage" were placed in the Town House, the Beede Center, the Hunt Rec Center, the Harvey Wheeler center and the high school.  
• Is it ethical for the town of Concord to use the official town website to tell voters to vote Yes on Articles 30 & 32, No on Article 31 and No on any amendments?
• Should Concordians be allowed to vet the choice of artificial turf?
• Why were the YSO and the Fields Development Group the only citizens in Concord who had a voice in the site selection process?

These and other questions remain unanswered despite the fact that we have asked them repeatedly. The process for this project was deeply flawed and unfortunately the flaws spilled over into Town Meeting, where the citizens of Concord were finally able to witness the win-at-all-costs mentality that has characterized this project from the beginning. It saddens me to think that these are the individuals who are supposed to be teaching our children the aspects of fair play. Is this win-at-all-cost attitude a reflection of what our children are being taught on the playing fields of Concord?

A concerned citizen has started a petition to revisit Article 30.   Friends of Thoreau Country supports this petition. If you are interested in signing it, please log onto www.friendsofthoreaucountry.org. Our website lists other things that you can do to help Save Walden Woods. Join us in insisting on fair play and reclaiming democracy in Concord.  

Kenneth W. Hecht

Friends of Thoreau Country
57 Bristers Hill Road
978-371-2797