In Search of WHS Class of 1984 Members
Dear Editor:
We are in search of the Winthrop High School Class of 1984. Our 40th Class Reunion is quickly approaching on August 17, 2024 at the Winthrop Elks. Please contact David Hubbard at [email protected] or join us on Facebook Winthrop High School Class of 1984 group page if you are a missing classmate or know contact information for any of our missing classmates. We hope we see you all there.
MISSING:
Anthony Sinnott
Brian Bouchard
Charles McCarthy
Christine Paci
Daniel Melia
David Melchionda
Ed Krovitz
Eddie Dalton
Eric Sirote
Erin Wells
Gary Pelletier
George Collins
James Martin
Jodi Seaman
Joe Disessa
John Altri
John McCollom
Katy Lockyer
Kenneth Mascis
Kevin Mascis
Kevin J Sheehan
Kim Muise
Kristen Barry
Linda Tedeschi
Lisa Altri
Lynn Ferullo
Matthew Troy
Michael Gillis
Nancy Reese
Nora Trussell
Patrick Fennell
Paul Hampton
Richard Beshere
Richard Delrossi
Richard Driver
Stephanie Mccann
Vikki Hoomis
Thank you,
WHS Class of 1984 Reunion Committee
Looking At The Debate
Dear Editor,
I can’t help but think of an old adage that my mother would say in Italian. Unfortunately, I never learned Italian, but the translation, she said, was something like: “Someone can do good all their life, but if they do one wrong thing, people remember that.” I couldn’t help but think of that saying after the June 27 Presidential debate. President Biden was not on his usual game as he spent most of his time, necessarily, trying to correct Trump’s misinformation and outright lies. that was a task in its own, but the President also had a cold.
I compare his performance with his brilliant March 7th State of the Union address of just 3 months ago, when he was direct, lucid and displayed his many years of experience as Senator, Vice President, and President. However, I’ve learned, through a few years, to vote for a candidate based on his/her record.
This past Feb. 29, 2024, I wrote a letter to the editor sharing the website www.whitehouse.gov/therecord, which elaborates the Biden-Harris record of development of 15 million jobs (current number), 7x more than the last 3 Republican presidents combined. In addition, 47 million out of the 49 million jobs created since Ronald Reagan left office were created by Democrats. The only thing the last 3 Republican presidents have in common: recessions.
In addition, the site notes vast infrastructure efforts, the lowest unemployment record in the history of the country, the lowest unemployment rate among Black Americans, and the lowering of families everyday expenses in areas of health insurance, clean energy tax credits, prescription drugs for seniors, and $0 tax increase for families earning less that $400,000.
Biden’s fought to preserve Social Security and lowered seniors’ health care expenses by capping out-of-pocket prescription drug expenses at $2,000/year. Medicare recipients will not pay more than $35/month for insulin and all Medicare recipients will receive free vaccines. Biden’s trying to make these benefits for all non-Medicare recipients
In and effort to level the tax playing field, Biden also put in place a Senator Warren initiated 15% minimum tax on billion-dollar corporations and a 1% surcharge on corporate stock buybacks. The Biden-Harris administration also lowered the national deficit with the single largest annual reduction in American history.
Note, most of the big corporation CEO’s for whom former President Trump negotiated the 12-2017 two (2) trillion dollar tax cuts used those cuts not for “trickle down” job development but for buying back their own stocks!! Trump has openly planned to give even more tax cuts to the big corporations and well connected, many of whom have historically paid $0 in taxes or certainly less than the current 15% minimum billionaire tax.
I”ll vote for President Biden again for President based on his strong remarks of Friday, 06-28-24: “I may walk slower, talk slower, debate not as well…but I tell the truth, and I get things done!” There’s no way I’ll abandon Joe Biden because he has a moral compass and because of what he’s done for the American people over these many years and particularly in the past 4 years. I don’t need his opponent to dismantle all the good that President Biden and his administration have done.
???????Donna Segreti Reilly
With Regards To 3A Zoning
Dear Town Council Members:
Government has the power to define law, but it also has the responsibility to promote and provide for the health, safety and welfare of its citizens, and to protect the well-being and tranquility of the community, as provided under the 10th amendment of the Constitution. Furthermore, our government has the duty: to apply the law to all citizens in an equal, uniform and non-discriminatory manner; to not apply excessive penalties/sanctions; and to not infringe upon constitutionally protected individual rights. For many reasons, already presented by Winthrop residents to our elected officials, it appears that the MA Zoning Act, ch 40A, sec 3A (i.e. The MBTA Communities Act) has seriously failed to meet these requirements.
The Town Council has the obligation to protect Winthrop residents from a law that abrogates our citizens’ rights and is detrimental to the quality of life in our whole community, and most specifically in the proposed designated zones. This mandated statute deserves to be legally challenged before there is any agreement by Council for town compliance. I believe that the Council should vote a resounding no on 3A, until the court rules on: the validity of this law; the legality of its specific mandated requirements; the law’s unequal application to selected town residents, living in designated zones; and the unauthorized power of the administrative body (the EOHLC, formerly the DHCD) to set and enforce specific regulations, beyond guidelines, for non-compliance under 3A. The first of these challenges is scheduled to go before a full panel of the SJC in October, 2024 (i.e. The Milton Case). The initial ruling is likely to provide clarity on what we are actually voting for. Early voting by our Council has the potential of prematurely locking Winthrop into avoidable, overreaching state mandates.
Below are my concerns and questions, which I request that the Council weigh seriously, before voting on 3A of the Zoning Act. Other residents have already raised opposition to 3A, including but not limited to: the elimination of some important town zoning restrictions and procedures that ensure livable conditions for residents; the issue of density and over-population; traffic congestion; safety issues; the drain on town resources; and higher expenses due to the greater demand on our infrastructure and services.
My intent here is to present some additional information and concerns for the Council’s consideration before voting on 3A.
1. 3A’s Related Costs and Lack of State Funding for Compliance
This law includes no guaranteed financial compensation to our town, nor any defined positive benefits. Rather, the state expects our town to absorb all the additional costs, resulting from this law’s mandated compliance. Winthrop certainly cannot afford this extra financial burden! If the state was operating in good faith, 3A’s law would have included immediate funding to the identified MBTA communities to incentivize their compliance, rather than threatening the loss of “possible future grant funds”. Future grant money is not guaranteed! Previously, our town received about $2.3 million from a Massworks Grant. Although $2 million is helpful, it will not nearly offset all the increased expenses to the town under 3A with overdevelopment and occupancy increases. We should not build our town budget on the “hope” of possible future funding that the state is dangling before us for compliance. The rumor that the town could receive upwards to $15-$20 million in future grant money is completely ludicrous, given the competing financial needs of all the other 350 Massachusetts towns and cities, and our States’s own significant financial woes!
In addition, some town officials have suggested that we may have just “paper compliance” to 3A, based on overlays in some proposed zones, with little or no new development, although this is questionable. It seems highly unlikely that the state will reward us with huge grant funding for little or no new development. The town is risking far too much with 3A compliance without any defined benefits stated in the law!
2. 3A’s Requirement for Designated Zones.
The application of 3A’s district zone requirement is blatantly discriminatory and unfair to residents in these proposed designated zones. They will be subjected to 3A regulations and rules, different than those for other town residents, who will be protected by current town zoning laws. This unequal treatment under the law will selectively target only some residents, in which they and their properties will be adversely affected and deprive them of their equal rights as citizens. Who will be the “sacrificial lambs” in our town if 3A is approved by the Council?
Residents in the designated zones will not only bear the burden of overdevelopment in their neighborhoods but will also be negatively impacted with the lifting of zoning restrictions and procedures under this law. 3A prohibits restrictions on the number of occupants per unit and on the number or size of bedrooms allowable per unit.
Thus, it will be permissible for existing units, designed for 2-4 people to double or triple their occupancy. This is particularly concerning in the proposed zones with existing buildings, which house many units (e.g. Fort Heath, Governor’s Park, et al). If you doubt that this could happen in Winthrop, then please look at our surrounding communities. There is direct evidence (and first-hand knowledge) which shows that Individual units/ apartments are adding more bedrooms, reducing their sizes, converting living & dining rooms into bedrooms, and eliminating most common space. Individual bedrooms are being rented to unrelated occupants, resulting in 7-8 individuals crowded into units/ apartment designed for 2-4, who share one bathroom and a small kitchen, with rents per room about $1200 – $1400/mo. Under 3A, without occupancy restrictions in zoning districts, it would it be permissible for owners of apartment buildings (e.g. Fort Heath Apartments) to increase their occupancy rate. It may also be allowable to construct an extension or additional building on the premises currently used for parking. The negative consequences to neighborhoods in the proposed designated zones appear obvious. Do we want Winthrop to mirror other surrounding communities and be forced to deal with potential problems to health and safety, related to over crowdedness?
Council members, I urge you to vote NO on 3A. It will divide our neighborhoods into zones, which will unlawfully discriminate against selected citizens, will allow for unequal application of 3A, and will deprive these residents of equal rights and zoning protections now offered to other town residents. Pitting residents against each other is very bad for our community.
3. Proposed Designated Zones that include Condominiums.
There are proposed zones with large condominium complexes (e.g. Seal Harbor 1 & 3, and Governor’s Park), and other proposed zones with smaller condominium buildings. These owners and their units have been regulated and protected by their condo documents since their existence. It is my understanding that the 3A Zoning Act and its requirements WILL SUPERSEDE the existing condominium documents, their rules and regulations. The language of 3A seems clear, so condos within designated zones are NOT EXEMPT from 3A and its requirements. If your understanding is different than mine, then please obtain in writing a clear legal statement from the State and/or Secretary Augustus (EOHLC), stating to the effect that: When 3A is put on a condo building or over land zoned for condos, then the condo rules apply, not 3A. Securing this legal statement from the State is essential, so that there is no misinformation or speculation regarding the legal impact on condo owners residing in the proposed designated zones under 3A.
4. Consequences to the Submittal of Plans for 3A Compliance
There are only two fully state-approved 3A plans, while the rest remain in the queue, after having signed on the dotted line. Submitting ANY compliance plan has the effect of “Agreeing” to the terms of the state’s mandate. Thereafter, the state can adjust, expand upon, redline, and tweak the town’s initial proposal. A premature Yes vote by the Council significantly hurts the People of Winthrop by agreeing to an ambiguous law that expressly requires continuous compliance to all changed requirements.
Isn’t it far better for the Council to vote NO now and maintain control and self-determination over our zoning, rather than relinquishing this control to the state? Once the state gains a foothold in our town, we will have no control over future changes to state regulations within our designated zones.
5. State Mandates and 3A Zoning.
It has been suggested that 3A Zoning is no different than other State-mandated requirements, such as a flood zone overlay. This is entirely false, which is why Justice Georges refused to grant Attorney General Andrea Cambell’s request to fast-track the Milton case. The Justice noted that the State’s zoning mandate involved novel questions of law which required a hearing before a full panel of judges, and input from experts via Amicus Briefs, to understand, and make a determination on a case that will have widespread implications across the Commonwealth.
3A of the Zoning Act is the first time, since home rule was passed, that the state has ever mandated local zoning, which involves local implementation (not preemption, like 40B). 3A requires ongoing compliance with the EOHLC’s ongoing requirements within our locally implemented 3A Zones. Any changes that the town deems necessary for our residents require special approval by the EOHLC, so as not to decrease the anticipated unit compacity within these zones. Our land is no longer our own. This is unprecedented.
6. Winthrop defined as an MBTA Community
The assumption is that more development and higher occupancy rates in town will result in greater use of the MBTA. Is there any available evidence that more residents will rely on the unreliable MBTA and relinquish their cars? Public transportation is not so easily accessible in Winthrop, with no train station or a bus route to Beachmont station, only to Orient Heights station. It seems unreasonable that Winthrop should bear the burden of 3A, based on precarious assumptions, while neighboring East Boston with five train stations and bus lines is exempt.
7. The Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities (EOHLC), formerly the Dept of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) – Lack of Legal Authority and Power under 3A of the Zoning Act.
According to a Memorandum by Alexander Whiteside (3/23, see attachment), the requirements set forth by DHCD/ now EOHLC are not supported by the 3A law. Thus, this administrative body is exercising power and authority not legally given to it by the state, nor stated in the language of the 3A statute. Whiteside states that it “…seeks to impose numerous substantive legal requirements and restrictions so as to greatly expand the scope of the municipal zoning obligations required by Subsection (a) and to impose a litany of specific steps which MBTA communities must take to meet their newly defined obligations” (p. 12). According to Whiteside: “With respect to Section 3A, this body has not been given regulatory power by the Legislature and has no authority to issue regulations” (p. 8).
Based on precedent in previous court cases, Whiteside states that these cases “support a conclusion that this body’s Compliance Guidelines for Muti-family Zoning Districts under Section 3A of the Zoning Act cannot be legally enforced”. He states that this agency does not have the legal authority “… to impose the substantive requirements and directives contained in the Guidelines” (p. 11). “The conclusion is inescapable that the Guidelines are legally ineffective and unenforceable” (p.12).
Based on this information, therefore, it seems reasonable and responsible for the Council to vote NO on 3A.
8. Town Council Vote.
It has been suggested that the Council vote Yes now, and that they can always change it to a No later. If this change in position was attempted, it would involve stopping projects in mid-development and filing a lawsuit against the state! This “strategy” does not seem feasible or wise! Changing a Yes to a No vote to stop on-going development would likely have major legal issues and ramifications for the town; completed projects would not be reversible, and zoning changes if already applied to existing dwellings (e.g. no occupancy limit) could not be undone. Also, how would the town possibly fund a sole lawsuit against the state?
A better strategy is to vote NO on 3A now and unite with other opposing communities, who are legally challenging the 3A law on many issues. There is safety in numbers and certainly less costly to join other opponents, than for Winthrop to go it alone!
9. Action by the Town Council.
For all the reasons presented in this letter, and in conjunction with previously expressed concerns by others, it seems that the most responsible and reasonable action by the Council is to vote NO on 3A of the Zoning Act. This NO vote will protect our community and its best interests, so Winthrop residents will not be unduly burdened by the irreversible consequences of this legislation.
N.B. As requested in #3, I look forward to receiving your written legal response, regarding the application of 3A’s requirements to condominiums within the proposed zones, and whether 3A requirements “supersede” condominium documents?
Council Members, thank you for your time and consideration of this letter.
Carol A. Facella,