Two Committees Reveal Two Falmouths

There are those in town who believe that Woods Hole gets special treatment and the recent decision by the Falmouth Board of Selectmen to delay — if not set aside — the plan to build affordable housing in Webster Woods has only reinforced that impression.

One of the basic tenets of our government is equality and while Teaticket, East Falmouth and even North Falmouth have seen one affordable housing development after another proposed and built, Woods Hole has remained untouched. As a result, there is no affordable housing in Woods Hole and a simmering resentment in other parts of town.

However, Chairman Kevin Murphy's suggestion to transfer development rights from Webster Woods to a different parcel in Woods Hole was brilliant. Very simply, there are better places for housing – whether affordable or market rate – and this idea should be pursued.

The problem is that the Webster Woods decision was handled in an entirely different way from the Coonamessett River cranberry bog decision and the contrast will only serve to deepen the divisions between Falmouth's villages.

In both cases, a committee was formed and charged with creating a plan.
In both cases, the committee worked hard for months and years to come up with a compromise.

In both cases, the compromise would permanently alter a parcel of land that local residents cherish just the way it is.

In both cases, the compromise was generally accepted by the town at large but rejected by residents nearer to the parcel.

In both cases, the decision was to be ratified by Town Meeting.

Yet Webster Woods was spared ratification — if not the axe — by the introduction of an 11th hour alternative plan. In contrast, the opponents of the Coonamessett River cranberry bog decision offered one alternative after another — from the beginning of the process all the way to Town Meeting — only to be shot down over and over again.

It's a revealing contrast between the way our town government works and the way it should work. Life may not be fair but government should be. The selectmen are giving Woods Hole a second chance to develop an alternative; East Falmouth should be given the same opportunity with the Coonamessett River cranberry bogs. Anything less will only serve to exacerbate the perception that Woods Hole enjoys certain privileges in Town Hall.

(This post was also published as an op-ed in the Thursday, January 17, 2008 edition of the Falmouth Bulletin under the title, "Guest Commentary: Webster Woods decision reveals a double standard.")