Pity the Pool

Welcome back!

It’s that time of year - the snow ice is (slowly) melting, and there are subtle signs of spring all around us. Most notably: the Town Election is in full swing.

This week Sudbury Weekly is happy to present you with its annual Q&A’s with the candidates for Select Board. All the candidates were kind enough to take some time to answer a batch of questions that covered a broad set of issues. You’ll find them at the top of the News Roundup below.

There’s plenty of hard news to cover on the site and in this edition as well—the Atkinson Pool is once again at the center of some controversy, but this time it’s quite a bit more… existential for the pool itself.

Here’s what we have for you this week:

1. Transportation FlashVote Yields Mixed Results

2. SudburyWeekly.com News Roundup

3. LWV Voters’ Guide Now Available

4. High School Musical - Regional Agreement Review to Proceed

Let’s get into it!

Transportation FlashVote Yields Mixed Results

By Kevin LaHaise

The Town of Sudbury recently conducted an online survey, called a “FlashVote,” to gather resident perspectives on the bevy of transportation programs operating in Sudbury these days. There are six transportation programs currently providing services in Sudbury:

1. Sudbury Connection Van Service
2. MWRTA Dial-a-Ride: Sudbury Connection Van Service Supplement
3. Go Sudbury! Taxi Rides Program
4. Go Sudbury! Uber Rides Program
5. Catch Connect Sudbury
6. Sudbury-Wayland Boston Hospital Shuttle

Each program has its own eligibility criteria, service areas, service hours and costs. While it would appear that there’s something for everyone, the Flashvote revealed that surprisingly few residents know about most of these services. The Senior Center Van was the option that the most respondents had heard about, with the MWRTA’s Catch Connect service coming in second. “None of these” was a close third, while none of the other four services cracked 20 percent.

The survey showed a strong dependence, or even preference for using personal vehicles to get around. 84 percent of responses said they haven’t used Sudbury services more often or at all because they “have a vehicle.” Another 42 percent said it was because they “Don’t know enough about them.”

While respondents demonstrated a preference for personal vehicles, a question remains if a communications gap is deflating what would be otherwise heavier use of the services.

The survey also demonstrated that the services that are most in-demand are a little different from what’s being offered. Residents voiced a strong desire for shuttles to commuter rail stations or Logan Express in Framingham. Notably, after-school shuttles took third place, while 19 percent said that none of the options suggested “sound faster or easier to me.”

As is tradition in Sudbury, the open response section was at times harsh. One resident said “No, but I do not get why this is a concern; this is a semi rural suburb that would require a personal vehicle regardless, and we have no sidewalks. It seems like a waste of money to me.”

One theme in the open response question was a focus on sidewalk improvements and connections to the rail trails. “Bikeshare would be a huge improvement! We also need protected bike lanes (or sidewalks at the very least!) on major roads so people can ride safely. The rail trail is great since it goes directly to the West Concord CR, but unless you live right near the rail trail, you have to ride on some dangerous roads to get there.” Another resident replied “I think Sidewalks should get some focus - Quality and locations. Connector pathways/sidewalks from the new bike path to businesses and community locations (library, schools, grocery, etc.).”

Several residents voiced their satisfaction with the services “I think it's working just fine. We're lucky to have it,” and other residents were happy to learn about the services, with one saying “Am a relatively new 55+ resident and am glad to learn more about Sudbury transportation options. Thanks!” Another resident spoke out for vulnerable populations “I don't use a lot of the services personally, but my neighbors who are seniors or people with disabilities rely on them. I think they're great to have!”

Many questioned the use of tax dollars on the programs. “Outside of senior transportation Sudbury should not be wasting tax dollars on public transportation. The low amount of use does not justify the cost.” Another said “This is an issue that doesn’t exist for most residents. Do something that benefits citizens tax payers for a change.”

Some of the commentary seemed to be assuming that local taxpayers were funding all the programs. At least $250K in free cash has been appropriated for transportation programs ($100K in 2022, and $150K 2023). The Select Board also allocated $135K in ARPA funds (Page 77) to transportation programs, and the Transportation Committee has also brought in grant funding and other subsidies.

It’s unclear what the results of the FlashVote mean for Sudbury’s transportation services moving forward. While residents don’t appear to have a lot of knowledge about the programs or their funding sources, the results illustrate that Sudbury residents have strong opinions about public transportation, rail trails, after school programming, walkability, traffic, and services for vulnerable populations.

SudburyWeekly.com News Roundup

LWV Voters’ Guide Now Available

By The League of Women Voters of Sudbury

The Voters’ Guide for candidates in the March 31 Annual Town Election is now available on the League of Women Voters of Sudbury website, www.lwvsudbury.org.  

The digital guide includes clickable links to available candidate websites and social media, photos of the candidates, and a statement from each candidate outlining their priorities for their term. New this year, voters can click on a candidate’s image to hear the candidate introduce themself in their own voice. This feature will be available beginning March 5 after the Candidates’ Forum has been recorded.

“We are very excited about this new feature,” said LWV Sudbury Voter Service chair Nell Forgacs. “We think that it will make it easier for voters to access the information they want about the candidates.”

The Sudbury LWV is also hosting an in-person, drop-in Meet the Candidates event Sunday, March 16, from 2 to 4 p.m. at the Goodnow Library for candidates running for town offices and school committees.  

All candidates in both contested and uncontested races are invited. Members of the community can stop by any time and talk to the candidates. Students are encouraged to come and ask questions. Families are welcome. Light, allergy-friendly refreshments will be served.

According to Forgacs, “The League wants to make informed voting as easy as one-two-three. We encourage voters to start with our Voters’ Guide, to begin learning about the candidates. Two, we suggest our Candidates’ Forum programs, which will be available beginning March 5. The Candidates’ Forum takes a deeper dive into issues that voters have identified as important to them for this election. Three, we invite members of the community to our informal Meet the Candidates event on March 16. Voters can talk to the candidates face-to-face, ask them questions, and share with them their thoughts about how Sudbury should run. It’s a great opportunity to get to know your public officials and inform your vote. Every member of the Sudbury community is invited.”

The election is Monday, March 31, with contested races for Select Board, Sudbury School Committee, and Lincoln-Sudbury Regional District School Committee.

The Candidates’ Forum with separate programs for the three contested races will air starting in early March and will be easily available for on-demand viewing via a link in the Voters’ Guide. The forum will also be available on SudburyTV’s cable channels and on-demand at sudburytv.org.  A cable subscription is not needed to view the on-demand version on a computer or smartphone. A separate forum with uncontested candidates will also be available in early March.

The last day to register to vote in the town election is Friday, March 21.  You can check your registration status and register online to vote at www.VoteInMA.com. You can also register in person at the Town Clerk’s office in Town Hall, 322 Concord Rd., or by mail.  Download a registration application here.

If you want to vote by mail in the election, you need to apply for a mail ballot. Applications from 2024 have expired.  You can find the application form here. 

High School Musical: Regional Agreement Review to Proceed

By Kevin LaHaise

The February 25 meeting of the Lincoln-Sudbury Regional School Committee opened with a brief and unexpected performance of what sounded like “Question” by The Moody Blues. After a good laugh, the members got down to business. (1:25)

After scheduled presentations, they discussed the regional agreement between the Towns of Lincoln and Sudbury that governs the regional district. Chair Ravi Simon gave an update from the Regional Agreement Review Subcommittee, recommending a focused review of the agreement designed to bring it into compliance with current laws.

The committee discussed engaging outside authorities including the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) and potentially the Massachusetts Association of Regional Schools (MARS!).

They also discussed sequencing of reviews with each Town’s Select Board, ensuring the recommended edits are reviewed by the full school committee first, and scheduling informational sessions for all relevant parties as needed.

Member Kevin Matthews recommended adding member Maura Carty to the Regional Agreement Review Subcommittee.

The committee voted unanimously to add member Carty to the subcommittee, and then charged the subcommittee with reviewing the agreement in order to recommend amendments for “ministerial, legal, and technical changes to bring the regional agreement into compliance with state law and regulations.”

The committee discussed broadly noticing the subcommittee meetings to the community, and recording them for SudburyTV - ensuring the public can follow the process.

Parting Thoughts

As is fairly common in Sudbury, an old issue has been reborn this week. The Capital Night discussions about the Atkinson Pool were highlighted by a blunt question of whether or not the Town should be in the pool business anymore. In 2003, a MetroWest Daily News headline said “Sudbury may pull plug on pool.”

You can read the 2003 article or watch Monday’s Capital Night recording, and it’s hard to discern any differences. The contours of the conversation are nearly identical.

Whatever happens with the pool in the future; it’s interesting that it has been 22 years since the conversation rose to this level of interest, yet no action occurred after that.

Now, inaction on a community pool isn’t exactly a large-scale social issue. But it does make you wonder why there hasn’t been some collective action around the pool. Mancur Olson Jr. could help explain that with his famous work “The Logic of Collective Action.”

Olson addresses the distinctions between small groups and large groups. He theorized that a smaller group was more likely to take action because small groups can exert more direct social pressure to incentivize action. But more importantly, his theory explained why a large group with a common interest might just sit on their hands anyway.

The core of his theory was the free-rider problem. Basically, there are people who benefit from a public good or service without contributing to its cost. The larger the group, the harder it can be to deal with the free-rider problem or get organized.

Millions listen to public radio every day and have never donated a dime to keep the service going. But they reap the benefits. You get the idea…

And that’s where Enterprise Funds come in, believe it or not?

They fund municipal services through fees collected for providing the service. For the most part, a small group of pool users pay for the Atkinson Pool; as it is operated largely out of an Enterprise Fund. If you want to use the pool, you have to pay. Olson called that “selective incentives” where only the contributors get the benefits.

Maybe the Enterprise Fund model is a form of collective action… in action?

On the other hand, Sudbury taxpayers have also put some money into the Atkinson Pool over the years. And a modest amount of the Town’s operating budget goes to the Park and Recreation department each year. Taxation was positioned as a solution to the free-rider problem—Olson categorized it as a form of coercion into collective action.

So the pool has a hybrid model as a public good (let’s ignore the debate about rivalrous v. non-excludable public goods for a moment…). On one hand, it exists today because of “selective incentives,” and on the other, its existence is also attributable to “coercion.” Everyone in Sudbury pays something for the pool (event if they don’t want to), but the people who use it pay more (even if they don’t want to).

The funding model is almost begging for two small groups to exert equal and opposite force on the fate of the pool. Could that be what has driven the long-term gridlock?

Olson’s theory argues it’s entirely rational for someone to want to contribute the least amount possible and derive the greatest personal benefit possible from a public good. Could that explain the standstill since 2003? Two small groups organizing effectively in opposite directions to maximize their benefits or minimize their contributions?

And to think—the initial construction of the pool was made possible by collaboration across multiple Town committees, special State legislation, and a philanthropic contribution from the Sudbury Foundation… which is why it’s called the Atkinson Pool.

Onward!