Blog Feed

Public Comments by Select Board member Charlie Russo at the Select Board meeting of July 30, 2024:

I’d like to share a Sudbury history lesson. Back in 2015, the relations among Select Board members were so antagonistic and so toxic that almost nothing got accomplished. The members at that time were Pat Brown, Susan Iuliano, Chuck Woodard, Bob Haarde, and Len Simon. Back then, OML violations were often alleged and several times upheld, accusations flew back and forth, and Select Board unfortunately  devolved into partisan teams. The Fairbank Center was delayed, the Bruce Freeman Rail Trail was delayed, we had trouble attracting experienced candidates to be Town Manager here. It got so bad that in 2015 the Sudbury Clergy Association hired mediators from Harvard University to try to help work things out.

Relationships were so bad that the Harvard University mediators quit.

Elections happened, Select Board members turned over, and we got past that. I ran in part to try to stop the shenanigans we saw then.

Susan and Chuck have long since moved out of town. Pat Brown served with distinction on the Commission on Disability after her term on the Select Board ended. Bob Haarde I’ve seen at Town Meeting, but my understanding is that he is happy to be done with Sudbury politics. That accounts for four of the five members from that time.

And starting about three years ago, when Jen first took over as chair, we started really getting things done, because we gained consensus through compromise. We broke ground on the Fairbanks and BFRT, we approved new Financial Policies, we hired a new Town Manager, we settled a new Sewataro contract, we allocated our ARPA funds. A lot of good work was accomplished to benefit residents.

This history lesson is important, (and I first prepared these remarks in January but have tried to hold off so as not to escalate things) because lately it’s feeling like the bad old days again, what with all the FOIAs, unfounded OML complaints, and the Select Board having little to show for the past year except for our bickering over firearms and rubber-stamping minutes.

And with all the memos we’ve been receiving lately, from that fifth member of the Select Board from back then, who has submitted not 1, not 2, not 3, but approximately 12 angry memos attacking the Select Board over the past 12 months, we can see the link from today back to the bad old days of 2015.

Today I think Select Board members, as elected leaders, we each need to decide: do we want to go back to the bad old way of doing things, where differing views results in personal attacks, when evidence and facts didn’t matter, and we saw political posturing instead of work toward solutions – or do want to return to the course of compromise and consensus that we had that worked so well just a few years ago, when so many good things were accomplished.

All that said, I will not tolerate disrespect toward this board, toward members of other committees or staff, or town counsel, which we’ve had to deal with a lot lately. I hope others join me in looking for compromise and solutions, rather than joining in attacks and reverting back to the bad old days.

Charlie Russo

Sudbury Select Board Member

Comments on the application for reappointment by two ZBA members, July 16, 2024

We must always respect and honor those who give their time as volunteers in this community and I am grateful to all volunteers. But we must also respect the rule of law, and honor our residents who may appear as applicants or be fellow committee members. For these reasons I cannot support the reappointment of John Riordan or Jon Gossels. These men have shown a history of poor judgement, an increasing trend toward advocacy instead of objectively applying regulations – which is the function of the ZBA – , and frankly not playing by the rules.

The ZBA is not an elected body, its members are appointed by the Select Board. The Select Board is elected to set policy. If we’re screwing up, there’s an election around the corner that residents can use to make a change. If the ZBA is makes mistakes, the only vehicle for change is through us. And reappointing them while it may seem a kindness now, only defers these problems that are trending worse. The ZBA has increasingly acted in a unilateral and bullying way that increasingly diverges from the Select Board’s policies. We’re the only fix available to those problems.

Let me be specific:

  • A new Town Meeting attendee asked me after this year’s TM: why does the ZBA not get along with anyone – they opposed the firearm bylaw – we’ll get to that in a minute – they opposed the Planning Director’s proposed Article 32 to streamline zoning appeals process and they second’d a frivolous motion.
  • Remember these men submitted their reappointment applications on June 6, well past the deadline. We’re seeing a definite pattern of disrespect and a scofflaw attitude from ZBA members. The rules should apply to everyone.  
  • There is a history here of poor decisions, such as denying a local business group back in September 2022 that wanted to put a Dogtopia in when Olympia Sports closed; instead the denial led to the opening of the dollar tree
  • We see poor judgement in the proposed Bonnie Brook development, which was approved after extensive review by the Planning Board. However, the ZBA heard an appeal from a developer seeking an exemption from the Town Meeting-approved inclusionary zoning bylaw, a major strategic effort for the Town to maintain its 10% subsidized hosing inventory. This set up the potential for a lawsuit between the Planning Board and ZBA.
  • Town Planning Director Adam Burney tried to address and prevent this potential lawsuit, prevent it from happening, by introducing Article 32: Section 6300 Site Plan Review, to bring Sudbury closer in line with State standards and eliminate the ZBA’s hearing of Planning Board appeals. Guess who objected? John Riordan, who seems to relish the potential for a lawsuit.
  • Remember the Stone Tavern Farm District – a whole Special Town Meeting was held in January 2020 because the ZBA let a project be approved simply because it let the deadline pass
  • Lately we’ve heard from the ZBA accusations against the Select Board of politicization: but let’s remember they commented on the firearm bylaw, but not on the MBTA zoning or the Site Plan review jurisdiction for Planning Board appeals, both of which are more directly applicable to zoning. Funny that the Zoning Board was silent on the two non-firearm articles. Who’s doing the politicization?
  • Let’s remember that all 5 members of the ZBA signed the original citizens petition from 2022 seeking to illegally ban firearms. If you include their spouses the ZBA accounted for 8 of 19 signatures for that original petition to illegally ban firearm shops in town.
  • Per Page 77 here:
  • https://cdn.sudbury.ma.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/260/2023/03/SelectBoard_2023_Mar_21_supporting_materials.pdf?version=5ca748916cd0c0742411778452c11cfa
  • Chair John Riordan even encouraged a lawsuit at ATM 2022 and said: “I take strong issue with the ‘well, maybe we might face a lawsuit.’ Yeah, maybe we will. But somebody has to put a stake in the ground, stand up, and end this torrent of gun violence in America.” 2:57:00 https://cloud.castus.tv/vod/sudbury/video/6453a8222561db0008aae927?page=HOME
  • For them to claim to understand the law, and to claim to be able to be objective in ruling on this matter is laughable. If they were to deny an application, their petition would the opposing attorney Exhibit A.
  • In recent weeks the ZBA gleefully submitted another illegal firearm bylaw, based on the input of some secret “Ad Hoc” committee of anonymous origin. While they objected to our proposal last year based on the public process that was followed and proximity to rail trail, child care facilities, and a potential housing development in Wayland, their proposal follows zero public process and is closer to those sensitive locations. What hypocrisy!
  • To wrap up, the ZBA has 4 named associates who can step in. The ZBA is appointed by the Select Board, and to reappoint these men after their secretive and bullying behavior in opposition to residents’ express wish as voted at two Town Meetings to avoid an unnecessary lawsuit over an imaginary firearm shop – is bad governance, goes against the rule of law and frankly common decency. We must open these positions up. Again, technically we never received their applications in time.

Department of Public Works receives prestigious accreditation – June 25, 2024

I’m very proud – but not surprised – by Sudbury’s Department of Public Works (DPW) receiving the prestigious recognition of full accreditation by the American Public Works Association (APWA). Sudbury’s DPW is just the third agency in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to achieve this recognition. The accreditation is an extensive process, including a self-assessment and demonstrated record of continuous improvement. Congratulations and kudos to all members of the Sudbury DPW for this well-deserved recognition. Thank you for all you do!

Town Manager Contract Extended – June 11, 2024

Kudos to Select Board Chair Jennifer Roberts for finalizing negotiations with Town Manager Andy Sheehan around a new contract. Andy’s now had a three-year contract, from July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2027. It’s wonderful to have certainty and continuity for the Town Manager position, and the new contract is a recognition of Andy’s great service to the Town. Andy scored an average of 3.8/5 on his last annual review by the Select Board, with many glowing comments from board members and Town staff.

Colby Caravaggio Day – June 7, 2024

Today is Colby Caravaggio Day. While he never taught my children and I can’t claim I knew him, I do know how excellent all our SPS teachers are, and from the wonderful stories I’ve heard about him and his 25-year tenure at Noyes, it’s clear he’s had an indelible effect on our community. While we grieve his loss, we can also admire his legacy, which our kids will carry forward. Count me among those grateful to Colby Caravaggio for the positive impact he has had on Sudbury.

Memorial Day 2024

As we observe Memorial Day, I hope we all take a moment to remember and honor the brave men and women who gave the ultimate sacrifice while serving in the U.S. military. Memorial Day originated after the American Civil War; today, it honors the sacrifices of military personnel from all wars and conflicts. It’s a day to recognize and reflect on those who gave their lives in service to our country and freedom.

Town of Sudbury has a strong history of military service sacrifice, from before the Revolutionary War to today’s Gold Star families. I am grateful for their service.

New Board Leadership – May 14, 2024

Congratulations to Jen Roberts for becoming the new Select Board Chair, and Dan Carty for being named Vice Chair. In the past year, Jen and Dan have both shown a willingness to dig into the data, hear from multiple perspectives, change their mind when the evidence justifies it, and compromise to benefit all residents. Kudos to both of them.

Town Meeting 2024 Recap – May 8, 2024

Now that the dust has settled, let’s acknowledge that Town of Sudbury Annual Town Meeting 2024 was tough. Every rational adult who attended or watched could find a reason to feel frustrated. Like Winston Churchill said, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except all the others that have been tried.” True. Democracy, wonderful as it can be, is a messy process, as we experienced.

The good news is that Sudbury Town Meeting voters had the wisdom, for the second year in a row, to deny attempts at an illegal – and potentially massively expensive – ban on firearm shops, which arrived at the last minute via an amendment to increase setbacks to 500 feet. The 500-foot amendment was just a ban by another name, and the proponents knew that. (If they didn’t, that’s an even bigger problem). This was clearly an attempt to overrule the decision of Town Meeting from last year and I’m grateful Town Meeting voters didn’t fall for this trick.

The bad news is that supporters of last year’s proposal for an illegal ban on firearm shops undermined this year’s proposal for a legally defensible firearm safety business use zoning bylaw. We fell short of the ⅔ majority needed by about 4 votes for a bylaw that would have added far more oversight, safeguards, and public input for residents in the event that a firearm business wanted to open in Town. Today, thanks to the pro-ban supporters, our Town lacks those safeguards and oversight.

Nearly every person who spoke at Town Meeting against the Select Board’s proposal was among the 19 people who signed the petition last year sponsoring a total ban – including all 5 ZBA members. Their claims of an objective review of the new bylaw are hard to believe.

The unwillingness of hardline ban supporters to compromise, their insistence on pushing a national ideological platform rather than focusing on local and practical solutions, and their rejection of staff and expert advice now leaves the Town vulnerable to a firearm shop coming to Town.

This year’s proposal sought to do what has been successfully done in 9 other communities to protect residents – no firearm shops opened and no lawsuits occurred in those towns.

Sudbury is likely not a desirable location for a firearm shop, given relatively high rental rates, lack of highway access, and the availability of firearm shops in other communities. A reasonable zoning bylaw with additional oversight would likely make Sudbury an even less desirable location. A total ban, however, would attract national special interest groups to test the law, forcing the Town into an unnecessary and expensive legal battle.

What is the goal? Enacting additional protections, or picking a courtroom fight? There is no need to pursue a total ban.

The refusal of pro-ban Select Board members to compromise or contribute in any meaningful way to the zoning bylaw has led to discord, distrust, and dysfunction in our board, despite the opportunity to provide feedback at 16 meetings and the many, many iterations of the bylaw developed by Town staff and a majority of the Select Board. All this has distracted us away from important topics like sidewalk expansion, future budget planning, capital planning, and Fairbank Community Center programming.

This is all a shame. I urge the two pro-ban Select Board members to finally consider some compromise so we can get protections and oversight in place for residents. We can compromise on practical policy matters without compromising our ideals.

Please, the ban has been defeated now twice. Please compromise.

That the proponent of the 500-foot amendment had a personal conflict that she declined to disclose to Town Meeting voters makes this entire episode even more problematic.

Process-wise, I want to be crystal clear that, while I don’t love how everything happened or agree with every decision that was made, I recognize it’s impossible for anyone to be perfect all the time or everyone to agree all the time. Especially on a topic like firearms. I remain a fan of Town Moderator Cate Blake. I can attest that presenting Article 16 was tough for me, but I’m sure moderating 16 was even tougher for her. When good people like Cate are trying to advance Town goals – and not some national ideological platform or their own personal interests – they deserve a little grace and support, and Cate deserves her share.

Go Team Sudbury!