Expediency vs. accountability

This is an apology.

At last night's selectmen's meeting, I caved, voting for expediency over accountability. It was wrong, and I apologize.

The issue was the Coonamessett River [Restoration] Working Group's (CRWG) request to apply for Community Preservation Act (CPA) funds. They have a $60,000 design study that requires another $40,000 to be completed, and they believe that this project would qualify.

However, there are a few issues that need to be resolved first:

1) The CRWG is applying for funds under historic preservation. The problem is that this is a restoration project, not a preservation project. Indeed, a memo from the Community Preservation Committee (CPC) clearly stated that the Historical Commission would have to determine the river's historical significance before the CRWG could apply.

2) According to the Coonamessett River [Park] Coalition and the CRWG, restoration was supposed to be free. Town meeting and the people of Falmouth were repeatedly told that no town funds would be used for this project. Indeed, in 2005, town meeting was told that state and federal agencies, "have grant programs for various aspects of design..."

3) Section 8 of the CPA application asks if there are other funding sources. The CRWG claims there are none, yet the Coonamessett River Trust (CRT) is, according to it's website, "ready to assist...in securing resources to carry out the Town’s planned Coonamessett River restoration projects." Moreover, they claim to have "raised almost $3,000 to support river restoration."

4) The CRWG admitted in its documentation that they allowed the scope of the project to grow BEFORE getting the additional funds needed to pay for that.

Yet in spite of raising these issues, I got no clear answers.

The historical designation doesn't exist, and according to the chair of the Historical Commission, it could take a considerable amount of time if the town wanted to pursue that. As for the promise of a free restoration, the only explanation the CRWG could offer was that they made a mistake. Other funding sources? Nope, the CRT was never contacted.

Indeed, a better question with regard to the CRT is: What happened to them? This group was originally the Coonamessett River [Park] Coalition, retooled and incorporated as a non-profit so that their efforts at restoring the river could be seen through to fruition. And yet now they are conspicuously absent. If they're no longer interested in restoring the river, why should the town be?

Instead of answers, accusations of obstructionism started flying. At one point, a member of the CRWG put words in my mouth, suggesting that I was saying we were going to have to raise taxes to pay for this.

Another said it was the selectmen's responsibility to help them find the funding. This was, frankly, an outrageous statement. The CRWG was appointed to do this; if they can't find the funding, they're not doing their job.

Yet in spite of all this, I found myself voting to let the CRWG pursue "parallel tracks" and apply to the CPC before resolving the aforementioned issues.

We have a high school where expediency trumped accountability. Just a few months ago I was accused of obstructionism for suggesting that we vote against the $19 million override. Now look at what we've got. A little less expediency and a little more accountability go a long way.

As I write this, my ears feel like they've got cotton stuffed in them. The logical explanation is an ear infection, but there's a part of me that wants to believe it's a sign. Something - call it karma if you want - is reminding me that I was listening to the special interests last night and not the common interest.

If asking for accountability is obstructionism, I want to be guilty. After all, if we can't hold people accountable for $40,000, how do we expect to hold anyone accountable over $85 million?