Vote NO: History of Question#1: Posted for Author Bob McLaughlin

The Wakefield Home Rule Charter was approved by voters at a special town election held on November 3, 1998. The Town Charter Section 7-5 Periodic Review, Charter and By-laws states: "[A] Charter Review - At least once in every ten years, in each year ending in eight, a special committee shall be appointed by the town council for the purpose of reviewing this charter and to make a report, with recommendations, to town meeting, concerning any proposed amendments which said committee may determine to be necessary or desirable."

In 2018, a committee was appointed to fulfill the requirements of section 7-5A. After several months of reviewing the town charter, a total of twelve charter amendments were inserted into the warrant for the regular town meeting (which ran from November 5th-8th, 2018). Ten of the twelve charter amendments were approved by town meeting. Procedurally, amendments to the charter that are voted in the affirmative (which have passed) are placed on the ballot for the upcoming town election. On April 23, 2019, voters will be voting on charter amendments one through ten.

Charter Amendment Number One, also described as "Question 1," is a significant change to our town's charter. If passed, it would eliminate the current charter's mechanism for taking an article passed at town meeting to a town wide vote. If Question 1 passes, this is a forever vote in my opinion. I do not see a reversal at any future date because all seven of our town councillors are in favor of it. As a citizen and taxpayer, I am very disappointed by the prospect of this happening. Writing a petition, which is a legal document, and gathering signatures for it are not easy tasks. If it were easy, this process would have been exercised more than just five times in the past twenty years.

Currently, the path for an article to go to a town wide vote requires 200 certified signatures gathered in 10 town business days. Question 1, if it passes, changes the number of signatures from 200 to 466. In addition, the time to gather said signatures would change from 10 town business days to 12 calendar days. One informal rule of thumb is that around 20 percent of additional signatures are needed because there are often errors that occur in this process, for instance when signatures cannot be certified because the person who signed the petition is not a registered voter in Wakefield. Depending on what day the clock starts on gathering the signatures, the passing of Question 1 would likely reduce the time to gather the required signatures. It also more than doubles the amount of signatures required.

By voting Yes on Question 1, you are giving up your rights for not only yourself but also for future generations of your fellow townspeople. When the late Phyllis Hull and the pioneers in Wakefield pushed for our town's Home Rule Charter in 1998, they were well aware that from time to time, town meetings are stacked to influence a particular article. Several people show up to vote for one particular article and then leave soon after. This is why Phyllis Hull and others chose to give townspeople the right to petition an approved article. It is an example of checks and balances. The state of Massachusetts is also aware of town meetings being stacked, so there are laws governing local ballot measures, including that all charter amendments passed at a town meeting must go to a town wide vote.

In doing research for this letter, I reviewed the last twenty years of town report books since the charter was adopted in 1998. In twenty years, Wakefield has had a total of 52 annual, regular, and special town meetings. 977 articles were debated in those twenty years and only FIVE articles have been challenged at the ballot box. Of those five, only three have reversed a town meeting article that had passed. This is not a process that is used often or taken lightly.

The change that Question 1 proposes is unnecessary, in my opinion. I consider it a power grab and a tool to continue to limit our rights as citizens and stakeholders of our town. This change makes it virtually impossible to gather the required signatures to bring a future article to a town wide vote.

By voting Yes, you are asking your fellow townspeople to gather what I believe to be over 550 signatures to cover errors that may occur in trying to get 466 approved, certified signatures. Gathering 200 approved signatures is not easy on its own. I know this because I have been involved in the referendum process twice. Not one person who is going to the post office downtown is willingly running to a person holding a clipboard asking to speak with him or her. People are more often running the other way. Vote No on Question 1 for yourself and for Wakefield's future generations. This charter amendment, in my opinion, is just plain nonsense and it needs to be defeated.

Bob McLaughlin