Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 7/24/2019
LONGMEADOW – In the wake of the Select Board’s four to one vote to not exercise chapter 61B rights in regard to the town’s Tennessee Gas Pipeline concerns at the July 10 meeting, residents implored the Select Board members to “exercise transparency” and to “make every effort and take every action possible to protect the residents of Longmeadow,” at the July 15 meeting.
July 10 Select Board Meeting
At the July 10 meeting, the Select Board discussed their thoughts on the 61B first right of refusal. Select Board Chair Marie Angelides explained that the town could spend $2.7 million and match what Tennessee was “using to buy easements with the Longmeadow Country Club,” bearing this in mind, she stated, the Select Board members had spent the last week to 10 days talking to several attorneys and researching.
Select Board Vice Chair Richard Foster proposed a motion to not exercise the Town’s 61B rights. In response during discussion, Select Board member Mark Gold disagreed, stating that he was going to vote against the motion. Gold commented that he understands the discussions they have had with attorneys and their options, however he “thinks it’s his obligation to support the voters in Longmeadow.”
Responding to Gold, Select Board member Thomas Lachiusa stated that he believes supporting the voters of Longmeadow “would be not to spend $2.7 million dollars on a piece of property that we’re probably going to have to return to the gas companies to do this metering station.” He then explained his way of thinking by explaining that his “understanding is that the gas companies are required to replace all the cast iron pipe that was used,” with steel. “It’s a federal mandate, and I don’t believe we’re going to have a chance of disrupting that…support for the town is to not go any further with this project.”
Foster chimed in stating, “We’ve listened to the lawyers, fortunately or unfortunately the general public wasn’t in on the conference calls and executive sessions, but we’ve asked a lot of questions, we’ve come at it from different angles, we understand what the voters said… It’s unfortunate that the voters and the groups that were supporting this action possibly didn’t have as much briefing on the outcome or the possibilities of success but it definitely looks like, even from the attorney general that you talked to today, it does not look like its an easy road or an obtainable road to intervene in such actions.” He continued to state that they’re “better off” to go into mitigating the best possible situations for the community.
“Mark talks about constituency wanting to buy this land, and we’ve been pretty clearly told that that may not do anything. They [Tennessee Pipeline] may have the right to come in and take it by imminent domain and just act like it wasn’t even there,” Foster added.
Select Board Clerk Marc Strange stated that while he agrees with Mark Gold and “appreciates the sentiment” that 68 percent of the town’s voters did vote in favor of the non-binding referendum, “I do think there’s kind of an unwritten understanding or assumption that if the town were to exercise its 61B rights that it would stop the meter station project. I’d be curious to see how the vote would come out if the voters knew that even if the town exercised its 61B rights, we may not be able to intercede in the project. Even though I agree with Mark’s opposition, without some sort of guarantee that this would stop the project, I can’t vote in favor of it.”
Angelides noted that she was “disappointed” that they didn’t have more of this information earlier in the process. “I think the residents felt they didn’t want this here and they felt this might be a way that we could stop this, and we understood clearly from speaking to not just one set of attorneys but several that this is not going to work,” she said. Angelides then added that any resources that the town would use on this project, they should be put to assure that if the facility is still going to be built there that it be a safe facility.
“We’re still looking into various options but the motion on the floor is whether we’re going to exercise 61B and unfortunately I don’t feel that’s in the best interest of the town at this point,” Angelides closed.
Foster stated that there was conversation about amending bylaws to address this concern, however he stated it would still be “totally unsuccessful and it just wouldn’t be approved.
“There doesn’t seem to be any reasonable way to stop this, other than if we had a piece of land that we could offer them some other place if it fit into the plans, that was out of the way, that we all liked that would be ideal – but we don’t have it and there’s no other location,” Foster said.
Outgoing Town Manager Steven Crane responded, stating that in the final environmental report they did have two other potential sites, but they “have challenges as well.” Angelides commented that the DEP and the endangered species act were involved with those sites. Crane then added that the other sites were “in the floodplain.”
The Select Board took a vote to not exercise 61B, with Angelides, Strange, Foster and Lachiusa voting to not exercise 61B, and Gold voting against the motion.
July 15 Select Board Meeting
Five days after the Select Board made the vote to not exercise 61B rights, at the July 15 meeting, several residents spoke out during the resident comment section of the meeting.
Resident Jamie Meadows explained that less than two years ago he and his wife moved into town where they built a house on the end of Prynnwood Road. Additionally, he stated that he has two young children, and their new home is right down the street from the proposed metering station.
“What does this metering station mean to our community? What will it do with long-term health risks to our kids? What’s going to do to our property values? There’s no way that this is the ideal location for a metering station,” Meadows said. He then explained that he knew of multiple people who sold their homes in the area and moved for two reasons, takes, and the potential metering station.
“My wife and I are concerned. What’s this going to do to our community, to our neighborhood, to our kid’s health? I’d love to see some action here,” Meadows closed.
Another Longmeadow resident, Lori Robinson, explained that she was “deeply disappointed” by the Select Boards approach to the project. “I assume that the Select Board’s key responsibilities include the health and welfare of Longmeadow residents…you have not stepped up to do the job. Will you make every effort and take every action possible to protect the residents of Longmeadow? If not you, who will?” Robinson questioned.
Michelle Marantz, a resident and chair of the Longmeadow Pipeline Awareness Group, highlighted that this issue is of “widespread concern” in town. “It should come as no surprise that our members were shocked, disappointed and angered by the vote against perusing 61B,” she stated.
“Despite this failure to communicate I believe the Select Board can do better with informing the Longmeadow community, after all, you work for us,” Marantz said in regard to the Select Board not alerting the group that they took this vote. She then asked that each Select Board member speak openly at a meeting on what their exact, individual positions are on the pipeline issue.
Moving on to Select Board comments, Foster responded to residents. “For the record, I’d like to make one comment. Our meetings are posted, they’re on the website, they’re televised and results are put out. There is complete transparency. To any assumption that’s being represented in comments that this board is doing something behind the scenes is totally false.” Foster added, “Everything is in the open, open for public consumption unless it’s executive material.”
To close the discussion of the pipeline project, Lachiusa said that he “got the message” but he would prepare a statement personally. He then stated that he believes he has been open with the people in the pipeline awareness groups with where he stands on the issue.