Town Meeting Has Spoken

Welcome back!

Annual Town Meeting came and went this week. Sudbury’s legislative body was remarkably decisive (and verbose) on virtually all of the articles. We were publishing actively on the website throughout the week, so we’re running a couple of those articles in the email newsletter today.

Here’s what we have for you:

1. SudburyWeekly.com News Roundup

2. Water District Voters’ Guide Available

3. Town Meeting In Review

4. L-S Students Take Up the Mantle

5. Sudbury Town Meeting Stands Firmly Behind Community Preservation Act

6. State Aid in Sudbury

Let’s get into it!

SudburyWeekly.com News Roundup

Water District Voters’ Guide Available

By The League of Women Voters of Sudbury

The Voters’ Guide for contested candidates in the May 20 Sudbury Water District election will be available Friday, May 9, on the League of Women Voters of Sudbury website, www.lwvsudbury.org. You can find the Guide here. 

Robert H. Sheldon, an incumbent, and Robert Crane are running for the three-year seat on the Board of Water Commissioners.

The League will record a Candidates’ Forum with the two candidates on May 14. That forum will be available on SudburyTV via video-on-demand and on cable shortly afterwards. Once available, voters can access a link to the forum via the Voters’ Guide. Email suggested questions for those candidates to [email protected] by 5 p.m. Friday, May 9.

A cable subscription is not needed to view the forum on-demand on a computer or smartphone. The forum will run on SudburyTV’s cable channels, Comcast 22 and 1074 and Verizon 30 and 2130. Viewers can find the SudburyTV cable broadcast schedule here.

The digital Voters’ Guide includes a photo of each candidate and a statement outlining their priorities for their term. 

The Water District election is Tuesday, May 20, from 3 to 7 p.m. at district headquarters, 199 Raymond Rd., before the district’s annual meeting, which starts at 7 p.m. Information on voting and absentee ballots is here. The annual meeting warrant and a specimen ballot are here.

Uncontested candidates in the water district election are Craig Blake for moderator; Thomas Travers for treasurer; and Susan O’Connor for clerk.

Town Meeting In Review

By Kevin LaHaise

Sudbury Weekly published the vote counts on the website each night of Town Meeting. But here’s the complete list. Articles that failed or were indefinitely postponed are listed in red. Articles not listed were passed on the consent calendar vote, with the exception of Articles 2 and 9, which were indefinitely postponed on that same vote.

Article 1 – Hear Reports – Passed overwhelmingly
Article 3 – An amendment to move $200K from the Reserve Fund to the Vocational Education line item failed 46-228, Article 3 passed 248-21
Article 4 – Capital budget passed 214-24
Article 13 – Capital Stabilization Fund Transfer passed 187-14
Article 14 – Pool Enterprise Fund Adjustment passed 150-14
Article 15 – Pension Stabilization Fund failed 103-107
Article 16 – Accrued Leave Fund passed 116-88
Article 19 – EV Chargers Revolving Fund – passed 175-38.
Article 24 – Indefinitely postponed.
Article 26 – Weights & Measures Fees – it passed 230-9
Article 27 – The Specialized Stretch Energy Code – The vote came in 168-118. It passed.
Article 28 – Accessory Dwelling Unit Bylaw – A resident made a motion to amend. That failed 33-240. Article 28 passed 225-51.
Article 29 – Purchase of a Fire Engine – This one passed 268-9 with little debate.
Article 30 – Ambulance replacement – Passed 270-11.
Article 31 – Roads, Culverts and Drains – This one zipped right through, passing 263-18.
Article 34 – Atkinson Pool Renovation Additional Funds – The vote tally came in 209-23, with applause and cheers erupting in the crowd.
Article 35 – DPW Emergency Operations Center Cost Share – Passed easily 185-21
Articles 40/41 – School Roofs – Both were indefinitely postponed.
Article 42 – Sudbury 250 Committee Funds – Passed 189-12
Article 43 – Acquisition of MBTA Buildings – It passed 186-14.
Article 44 – Fairbank Community Center Court/Pavilion/Landscape Master Plan – It passed 174-28
Article 46 – Sudbury Housing Authority Funding for Scattered Site Duplexes – This was indefinitely postponed upon a motion by the SHA. They didn’t have architectural renderings in time for Town Meeting, so this may come back later. The vote was 189-15.
Article 47 – Housing Trust Allocation – It passed 167-33.
Article 48 – Hosmer House Collection – It passed 160-23
Article 49 – Hosmer House Envelope – It passed 170-21
Article 50 – Hosmer House Wooden Roof – It passed 175-18
Article 54 – CPA Surcharge Cut (Citizen Petition) – It failed 32-163
Article 55 – Update Means Tested Senior Exemption (Citizen Petition) – This one passed 129-7
Article 56 – Sidewalk Funding (Citizen Position) – This one failed, 30-111

L-S Students Take Up the Mantle

By Kevin LaHaise

Sudbury’s 2025 Annual Town Meeting has been slow moving, particularly considering the outcomes of the votes haven’t been very close. Yet one article, Article 34, inspired an urgency that was absent in most of the other articles.

Article 34 would provide additional funds for repairs to the Atkinson Pool. When the article came up on Tuesday, May 6, Town Meeting attendance was at its peak. The hall was filled with voters, but also with Sudbury’s youth. Some were of voting age, some were not. The message to the hall was clear: Sudbury’s kids wanted to keep the pool. Sudbury’s kids wanted the town to fix the pool.

It was not clear if Article 34 would pass at the start of Town Meeting. The Atkinson Pool has been at the center of several contentious local debates in recent years. That started with the new Fairbank Community Center, which took roughly a decade to gain approval from voters. The project included an expanded viewing room for the pool and new locker rooms, but no major changes to the pool itself. The pool, built in the late 1980’s, had never undergone significant renovation. It is still sporting the original roof, which is nearly as many years past the useful life of a roof as the expected useful life of a roof. The pool’s exclusion from the community center project baffled some residents, though others felt that omitting the pool from the project would keep the price of the project tolerable for voters. The recent challenges at the pool cropped up long after the Town designed the community center.

As for Article 34, it was the second bite at the apple. Town Meeting approved an article in 2024 to renovate the pool. But the bids came in high. Article 34 was an ask for more funding. Nearly $1 million more. That didn’t sit well with some voters, and criticism has surfaced on social media in recent weeks. But a shutdown during swim team season earlier this year has tempered the criticism, as the visceral experience of losing the pool hit home for Sudbury’s swimmers.

After a detailed presentation from Combined Facilities Director Sandra Duran, the Town Moderator opened up discussion to the hall.

Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School (L-S) student, Graham Skelly, who is on the swim team, got the microphone early in the discussion period. The moderator first verified that Skelly was of voting age, which Skelly confirmed. What happened next was equal parts a triumph in direct democracy, and a celebration of the values espoused by Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School for decades.

The Courage to Speak

Town Meeting in Sudbury is itself a tradition in many ways. But inside that tradition is yet another tradition—there’s a core group of residents who tend to do most of the talking. It’s daunting for the average resident to stand up, take the microphone from a Scout, and express their thoughts to an auditorium of voters. There’s no escaping it. For most people, it’s incredibly intimidating.

That didn’t stop two L-S students. It didn’t even slow them down.

Graham Skelly and Joslin Halsey raised their hands confidently, if not eagerly. They commented one after the other, captivating the hall. Skelly went first, standing in the back third of the auditorium. Heads swiveled from the front rows when they realized a student was commenting. The moderator may as well have called the vote at that moment, as the outcome was all but certain. But the hall was instead gifted something in the moments that followed that meant more than a mere vote on an article at Town Meeting.

A Legacy of Civic Engagement

L-S has a longstanding tradition of civic engagement. It’s written into the mission statement of the school.

“The school culture also seeks to join academic skills to an active civic concern for the Lincoln-Sudbury community, American society, and the world beyond.”

It’s also reflected in the L-S “Portrait of a Graduate.” That calls for students to be “Global Citizens” and reinforces a time-honored motto at the school “Think for yourself, but think of others.” That motto was adopted by the faculty and staff in 1997, according to the Lincoln-Sudbury Alumni website.

The tradition of civic engagement isn’t just words at L-S. It’s expressed in action and art as well. That includes the school’s response to the September 11 attacks, politically-themed murals on the walls of the old building, walkouts, and various other demonstrations.

It was fitting that Town Meeting was located in the heart of L-S on this night… A night that belonged to students, not just in the hall, but outside the front doors where students handed out flyers for a petition to lower the voting age in Sudbury to 16.

The Moment

The microphone was passed down the row to Graham Skelly, who stood unassumingly, almost relaxed, amid the crowd. He explained to the hall what the pool meant to him as a competitive swimmer at L-S and a coach for the Sudbury Swim Team, but also what it meant to him on a personal level “I know personally the four years I’ve spent on the L-S swim team have been the best four years of my life. I’ve made countless connections…” He then focused his attention on the younger swimmers that hope to follow in his footsteps “Taking that away from younger swimmers that I know would be awful.”

Skelly’s comments then turned the focus to future generations: “As a coach, I’ve made connections with many younger kids in town. Seeing these kids in the pool, having fun with their friends and becoming better swimmers throughout their time with me and many other coaches has been great. I just want to say taking away this pool takes away an outlet for kids to make connections throughout an entire town.”

Joslin Halsey, a member of the L-S Girls Swim Team, took the microphone next. She expressed similar sentiments, but added a bit of (hard-earned) L-S Athletics pride. She told the hall, of the L-S Swim Team and Sudbury Swim Team, “It is the best sense of community that I’ve ever been a part of, all around.” She went on to say “The women’s team over my four years has gone third, first, second and second at States. We are one of the best teams in the state and it’s frustrating to see that the pool has been left for so long.”

Skelly and Halsey were speaking to their fellow voters. Their fellow students. Their community. And there wasn’t much self-interest at play. Skelly and Halsey are seniors. Their swim careers at L-S have come to a close. It was other Sudbury students who would benefit if the article were to pass.

Their ask was simple: vote yes for Article 34. Vote yes for Sudbury’s pool. Yet it was hard not to hear “Think for yourself, but think of others” when the vote came in at 209 in favor to 23 opposed.

The article passed by well more than a majority of the legislative body—many of whom are not on a swim team, are not Atkinson Pool members, but opted to “think of others” when the time came.

Feature image: SudburyTV

Sudbury Town Meeting Stands Firmly Behind Community Preservation Act

By Kevin LaHaise

On Wednesday, May 7, Sudbury Town Meeting rejected a Citizen Petition that would have cut the Community Preservation Act surcharge from 3% (the maximum) to 1.5%. The vote was 32 in favor and 163 opposed to the article. The vote came on the third and final night of Sudbury’s Annual Town Meeting.

With 84% of Town Meeting voters rejecting the petition, even with lower turnout than the first two days of Town Meeting, the Town’s legislative body sent a clear message. It supports this program enthusiastically. The hall was also tasked with voting on five CPA-funded articles, and all of them passed by similar or greater margins.

Discussion in the hall was robust. Multiple committees, commissions and boards had prepared formal statements opposing the article. Several residents weighed in as well. Two residents spoke in favor of the article, but they were vastly outnumbered by residents who offered impassioned pleas to defeat the article.

Sam Markuse is a member of the Community Preservation Committee in Sudbury, but spoke as a private citizen. His comment opened with a bit of humor, but turned serious quickly. He emphasized how little taxpayers would save with this cut, and how much they would lose in the types of projects that he felt made Sudbury the town that it is today. He evoked the character of the town, and cited how the Community Preservation Act funds help to preserve and advance it.

Select Board member Janie Dretler offered her thoughts as a resident, delivering unapologetically firm opposition to the article and total support for the Community Preservation Act. She explained what she saw as the negative municipal finance ramifications of the proposed cut in simple, clear terms.

John Drobinski, a former Select Board member and current chair of the Rail Trails Advisory Committee, told the hall that these funds were critical to making Sudbury look the way it looks today. He emphasized the importance of these funds in bringing the Bruce Freeman Rail Trail, a project that has been transformative for the town, to fruition.

Jan Hardenbergh, who serves as Town Historian, but was speaking as a private citizen, presented an exhibit of a muster roll of Captain John Nixon’s Company of Minute Men. He explained how CPA funding helped preserve it, evoking Sudbury’s sense of pride for its history and role in the American Revolution.

Cheers and applause bubbled up once the article was defeated. The energy in the hall made it clear: Sudbury is all-in on the Community Preservation Act.

State Aid in Sudbury

By Kevin LaHaise

Sudbury Weekly recently covered the release of a Town of Sudbury Financial Report and Reference Guide that provides a detailed analysis of Sudbury’s financial position, including comparisons to similar communities. Sudbury Weekly then published a follow-up on school spending, and will continue to cover some of the insights brought forward by the report.

This week, we’re looking at Sudbury’s State aid. Here’s the breakdown of the aid the Town received in recent years:

That light blue section is Chapter 70 aid that goes to Sudbury Public Schools. The light green is unrestricted general aid that goes to the Town and can be used for any municipal purpose.

Each type of aid has it’s own formula or means of calculation, and everything is dependent on State budgets. Setting aside the manner in which the State doles out aid, the report provides a helpful view of similar communities:

Since Chapter 70 aid to schools is the biggest portion of State aid, it’s important to note that Sudbury is in the bottom five in Chapter 70 aid among the towns in the analysis.

As for unrestricted general aid, Sudbury is right in the middle of the pack. That’s likely driven by how that aid is calculated. The report states “Those communities with a lower Equalized Property Valuation (EQV) receive a higher share.”

During Sudbury’s Annual Town Meeting this week, there was much discussion about challenging fiscal years ahead. The same is true for the State, which is in the thick of their own budget season. The Massachusetts Municipal Association (MMA) knows the state has a “cautious” outlook for the next fiscal year, and is advocating for local aid increases on behalf of municipalities. In a recent article, they emphasize the extraordinary challenges facing Massachusetts cities and towns.

Yet another hot topic at Town Meeting was sidewalks. There was discussion about how towns are not allowed to use Community Preservation Act funds for sidewalks. That eliminates a valuable funding source for sidewalks. But another funding source, albeit through reimbursement, is the state’s Chapter 90 program. Sidewalks are eligible for Chapter 90. But Sudbury’s Chapter 90 has, according to the Town report, declined since 2017, all while cost escalation and inflation were skyrocketing.

The data in the report, combined with the gloomy headlines about the State’s 2025-2026 budget, one thing is clear: Sudbury can’t expect the State to alleviate local budget pressures.

Parting Thoughts

You might think everyone gets a week off after Town Meeting, but the Municipal Government Life™ isn’t quite that forgiving. At the end of Town Meeting, the clerk swears in a bunch of the folks elected or reelected during the March Town Elections. From there, boards and committees typically take the opportunity to reorganize - which is usually just a fancy way of saying “pick a new chair and vice chair.” Why is that noteworthy? The chair sets the agenda and presides over meetings, among other responsibilities.

But the reason to care is because reorganization meetings are the most delightfully awkward meetings of the year. Every committee does reorganization a little differently, nobody wants to vote for themselves as chair, even if it’s clear everyone else wants them to be chair. And best of all, there are plenty of pregnant pauses along the way. It’s basically as awkward as high-fiving a fist-bump, or fist-bumping a high-five.

Anyway - a bunch of committees have reorganization on the agenda for their meetings next week. Check ‘em out on the Town Calendar.

Onward!