So the deal has already been signed it appears. Contamination of the old gas station lot doesn't seem to have any effect on the deal to buy and move the church. And now, the council is asking the Mayor to answer per-submited questions. Call me out of touch, but what good is this now.. after the deal is signed? According to the Charter, the Mayor was to make this decision, not the council. The City is so ready to open the Water Street and Edgell Road intersection, the church deal couldn't happen fast enough. There is irony in all of this late hour Mayor bashing... 3 members of the current council were on the BOS and have had multiple years to make a deal that residents could live with and now that the Mayor has made the decision, a few members of the council are covering their butts, knowing full well, when this project is complete, very few in the area will be happy. The 20 questions are below:
1) Please discuss the history of the
chapel and its historic significance to the
neighborhood and why it is important to preserve the building for the neighborhood.
(District 2 City Councilor Pam Richardson)
2) Please describe the improvements
to the Edgell/Edmunds /Water St. Intersection and the land that the chapel
currently is on and how the intersection improvement plan is affected by
the current location of the Chapel. (Richardson)
3) How long ago did the Star Market
vacate the Nobscot Plaza and the first time (if this information is
available) that Mr. Rose reached out to the town expressing
an interest in working with the town to develop the property?
(Richardson)
4) Please provide a brief summary
(if this information is available) of the amount of work the Town/Economic
Development Dept. has done with members of the Nobscot neighborhood
to try and reach consensus regarding the future of Nobscot Plaza. (Richardson)
5) If this information is available,
please share what we know about the lease with CVS currently and the prospect
of what potentially could happen with the property if CVS vacates
the Plaza (as the last tenant of the property) and to follow that, what
Shaw’s Supermarkets (current lessee) could do with the property if there are no
longer tenants. (Richardson)
6) The special act from 2013 that
was referenced in your letter to the Council provides the final approval
authority to the Board of Selectmen. As you are aware, after
the change in the charter some duties of the Board of Selectmen have vested in
the Council and other in the Mayor. This special act is not among a
long list of acts specifically documented in the Charter as an act that
continues. Has there been an advisory opinion sought from the
Inspector General that concurs with the apparent local interpretation that the
special act is still valid in a city and the Mayor specifically assumes the
power of the Board of Selectmen in this instance? (City Councilor George King)
7) What is your vision, role, plan,
and efforts on the matters relative to Nobscot? (District 4 City Councilor Mike
Cannon)
8) What is your
long-term vision for a successful Nobscot Plaza? Is Mr. Rose’s latest
plan, which calls for, among other things, a 4 story apartment building,
consistent with that vision? (District 3 City Councilor Adam Steiner)
9) Would you explain your strategy
of the Nobscot Chapel decision as it fits into your overall redevelopment
strategy for Nobscot Plaza and the Nobscot area? (District 5 City Councilor
Denis Giombetti)
10) Why after Mr. Robert, Mr. Halpin
and other officials agreed that the only negotiating lever that the people of
Framingham had regarding the Nobscot plaza was the Chapel and that it was
decided not to do an additional RFP until a satisfactory solution for the
blighted shopping center was approved was our only piece of negotiating
leverage
given away? ( City Councilor Cheryl Tully Stoll)
a. What was the process surrounding the decision?
b. What was the justification for the decision?
c. Who made this decision?
d. And how is this decision in the best interest of the people of Nobscot and
the rest of Framingham?
11) What were the criteria and
rationale by which the decision to either award or reject Nobscot bids?
(Giombetti)
12) Given the high value the
property offers to the owner of the Nobscot Shopping Center it was likely he
would be a bidder. Why did the administration choose to bid this
parcel at this time before the issue of the shopping center’s future was
determined? (King)
13) Considering the cost of moving
the chapel and the $50,000 purchase price, the city is selling the property
substantially under its appraised value which is the mid $300 thousand
range. Why is the City willing to accept such a low price? (King)
14) What are next steps in the
Nobscot Chapel award and what assurances does the neighbors have that
redevelopment of the plaza will be put forward by the owner? (Giombetti)
15) What guarantees do we now have
that Mr. Rose will come forward with anything remotely suitable for the Plaza
since he finally has what he has wanted all along? (Tully Stoll)
16) What is to stop Mr. Rose from
building a CVS on the corner and leaving the rest of the plaza as is? (Steiner)
17) Why after Mr. Rose changed a
plan that was close to approval by the neighbors and then pulled out from under
them by Mr. Rose with a plan for four story buildings closely abutting a
residential neighborhood did the City not cancel the RFP? (Tully Stoll)
18) Is there a provision
ensuring that the historic chapel will be sited on the former gas station
property as was described in the RFP? What assurances do we have that there is
no environmental contamination on this property? (Steiner)
19) Why has the City Council and the
public been kept in the dark regarding the Nobscot Task Force? (Tully
Stoll)
20) Why when this decision was in
the process of being made, did you not once hold office hours in Nobscot?
(Tully Stoll)¿
8 Comments:
Does the city council even have the right to ask the mayor these questions? Good for the Mayor for agreeing to come and answer them but you are right about it being a bit late to the party here. But then as you said some on the council had many opportunities to come to some agreement on this but chose to not do that and kick the can down the road to the Mayor but now that they have done that they seem to want to take back the decision making authority. Seems pretty childish of them to me.
have a look at the council meeting with the Mayor answering the 20 questions. And now, the council is questioning, after nearly 2 years, who has the authority to sell the chapel. This whole issue has shown how dysfunctional our new form of government can be.
What I walked away with is: the expansion of the intersection wont happen until next year as it was not funded. DPW has some money to throw at it, but would need that grant money from the state to do the job.
The fun starts at 27:55 and ends with the Mayor walking out saying, "she's not answering any more questions" at 1:19:00
http://207.172.210.8:5002/CablecastPublicSite/show/1677?channel=1
Mayor walking out on them was freakin hysterical! The whole thing had the look of one of those government hearings you see on CSPAN where the people asking the questions are doing it for show. They gave her 20 questions and she answered them in writing and from a legal point of view. Staying there would have just turned into a political side show for all those running for office this year. It might have not been the most respectful way to leave the meeting but man watching Giombeti's reaction to the 'piss on you I did what you asked' at 1:19:00 is priceless! That's entertainment we should be charging for, forget the weed shops.
Your thoughts on the mayor's actions last night Jim?
I was surprised... and then I wasn't. She answered the questions... with the help of Petrini and Associates... and wasn't going to take any shots from the council afterwards. I think she can stand in with anyone but I also think I see the animosity they all have for each other. I never got the feeling she (The Mayor) had much to do with this entire issue. She appointed a Nobscot Task Force, knowing full well what the outcome would be if the church was sold to Rose.
I don't see anything changing... the church will be moved and CVS will be built before the widening of Water Street and the grant from the State kicks in.
you can read all the answers here:
https://www.framinghamma.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=1895
So dad. It seem we are modeling the behavior of our legislative and executive branches in DC here in Framingham. Can you really not just remember that everyone deserves respect, even those who you don't agree with? Shame on both sides. You should all be put in timeouts until you can act like the adults you claim to be. Shameful
It is going to be a long 3 years. From the get go it was clear that certain council members did not understand their role in the new government. The ways that the mayor and some city hall workers were treated were absolutely shameful and the Chairman did very little to stop it. And we should all wonder how that will impact the City's ability to hire new higher level talent in the future if they know they will have to publicly have put up with that bullshit.
It was inevitable that the mayor would start treating the council back the same way. That's not to say that gives her an excuse to be rude, more just basic human nature. I don't expect the relations will improve between the Council and the mayor. We will now have to watch the spectacle over the next 6 months as those Councilors that are running again put on a political show for us.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home