When my wife had to have major back surgery, I felt so fortunate to be a member of a union – the Massachusetts Society of Professors, the faculty union at UMass Amherst – which had worked hard to secure paid family and medical leave for its members.
I was able to take time off to be with her through a long recovery. It was a priceless gift to our family. But should it be a matter of luck that I landed at UMass and was able to have this benefit? The Senate, led by our own Stan Rosenberg, the other day answered with a resounding, “No!”
The chamber voted overwhelmingly in favor of legislation to allow every worker in Massachusetts to have access to paid family and medical leave. The House didn’t take up the bill, so it won’t become law immediately.
But with its vote the Senate placed a marker down. There is a strong sense that the House leadership wants to join the Senate in passing it when the legislation is re-introduced next January.
That most nations in the world already offer this right shouldn’t dampen our appreciation of Massachusetts activists in the Raise Up Massachusetts coalition, which developed the legislation, and our own senator, who helped win this important victory.
Max Page
Amherst
What me worry?
Stop all the bossiness about water use
A recent article on the mandatory water restrictions in Hadley was biased and one-sided and didn’t give equal time to the pro-waste side.
I want definitive scientific proof that there is a water shortage and feel there need to be more studies before we take any action that limits our freedom to waste water.
The truth is that people who conserve water are all wet. It could rain tomorrow and then we’d have conserved for nothing. If the government can take away your freedom to waste water, soon they’ll take away your freedom to waste energy, food and even waste money.
That would sink the economy. Conservation is a conspiracy by conservationists to force us to adopt their conservative lifestyle.
What about a market-biased solution to the water shortage? The government could give out vouchers so when the well runs dry we can buy our water at the Mega-Mart. That’s what they do in Flint, Michigan, and everyone seems happy with it.
But I digress.
If you make watering your lawn a crime, only criminals will have nice lawns. Why can my neighbor water his vegetable garden, but I can’t wash my Hummer? That’s the type of politically correct elitist moral relativism that liberals use to destroy America.
As an American I have the God-given right to waste all the water I want. As long as it flows when I turn on the tap, why should I worry about wasting it? There’s a huge silent majority of Americans who waste water on a daily basis and it’s time for us to come out of the water closet before we see our rights go down the drain.
Andy Morris-Friedman
Hadley
Following Beacon Communities’ enticing presentation to the Amherst Select Board, proposing 130 one-, two- and three-bedroom apartments, and 22,000-square-feet of business space on 6 acres of the W.D. Cowls former saw mill property, several members of the audience were invited to make brief comments.
One comment ended with the question, “What does Amherst want?”
There are many more questions that need answers, but they will have to wait for hearings before the Zoning Board of Appeals because the Planning Department and Select Board only play a regulatory role in the process and Town Meeting is excluded from the state’s 40B project that is being proposed.
No one has anything but compliments for Beacon Communities and its management of units at Rolling Green. This Boston firm has successfully developed and manages properties that include low-income housing in several states. The company would undoubtedly do a good job, but … is this what Amherst wants?
Does the Beacon project to build 26 units of affordable housing justify accepting a 40B proposal when the town has spent thousands of tax dollars and hours to develop its present over 11 percent affordable units with more to come?
Does such an “affordability cushion” justify a more than 100 percent increase in density and lot coverage allowed by current zoning, in order to make it viable and profitable to Beacon Communities?
Does the project fit with the Master Plan with regard to Amherst’s economic development and the COM zoning of the property?
Does another restaurant, nail salon, fitness or art gallery (suggested business opportunities) fill the existing and anticipated residents’ need for local services, job opportunities and neighborhood vitality and sustainability?
Does another apartment complex meet the need for housing diversity when home ownership in North Amherst is less than 20 percent and the market rate for a one-bedroom unit would be $1,900 a month?
Does this 40B project set a precedent for overriding the Amherst Zoning Bylaw when other parcels become available for development?
Does Amherst need this project? Does Amherst want it?
What do you think?
Melissa Perot
Amherst
Shutesbury solar project will serve town well
As former chairs of the Shutesbury Select Board, we feel compelled to write this letter to offer public support to the proposed solar project in Shutesbury.
We are well aware of the controversy that has surrounded this project from its beginning and want to offer a different perspective. W.D. Cowls Inc. has deep roots in Shutesbury and the company is a good steward of the land it owns.
They sold the development rights to thousands of acres in Shutesbury and Leverett. They retain the right to log and do so in a way that uses the highest standards of forestry practice and maintains healthy biodiversity. The public has access to many miles of trails for year-round recreation. There is no evidence that they are disrespectful of possible Native American sites on their land.
Solar energy is a hope for the future, moving us away from reliance on fossil fuels. The proposed solar farm will occupy 30 acres set within a 700-acre parcel owned by W.D. Cowls Inc.
Through a long process, the Shutesbury Planning Board has worked tirelessly with a group of abutters and several other individuals, the developer and W.D. Cowls Inc. to ensure there will be minimal environmental impact on the site.
As a result, Shutesbury has an opportunity to be a part of something positive and good for all of us, including significant revenue to the town over the next 20 years. We are fortunate, as a small town with only property taxes available to fund our growing budget, to have this new source of revenue. We encourage others to share their support for this project.
J. April Stein & Elaine Puleo
Shutesbury
