Staying on Message

You have to hand it to the Globe. Despite the fact that the blogosphere is alive with recent revelations contained in the hacked emails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, the Globe is sticking to its guns that global warming is settled science.

Rather than run a story and some analysis of the information contained in the emails and what impact that information might have on the global warming debate, the Globe chooses to stay on message tonight and run a front page piece on Boston.com trumpeting the future inundation of the City of Boston by rising sea level as a result of you guessed it, global warming!

The report produced by the "World Wildlife Fund and insurer Allianz warns that sea levels could rise along the U.S. coast a whopping 26 inches by 2050 as the world warms. That would place assets worth 7.4 trillion dollars at risk along the U.S. coast."

Rather than speculate on events 40 years from now how about taking look at events unfolding right under their noses? If the reports of the contents of these emails are true, global warming skeptics will have a field day in mocking the essence of the global warming model.

Don't get to excited about your property in Burlington soon becoming ocean front.

According to reports of the content of some of these emails, it seems as though some of the data being used by the IPCC (International Panel of Climate Change) may have been falsified or manipulated in order to achieve the result that the scientists needed to advance their AGW (anthropogenic global warming) theory. If that is the case then the entire IPCC gloomy global warming forecast would now be under a cloud of suspicion.

If one statistic or measurement were called into question it might not be a problem but it appears as though there is a constant theme running through these emails and communications that exposes the scientists as politicians trying to make a case for legislation (and perhaps green business) rather than unbiased members of the scientific academy prepared to have their theories suffer through rigorous peer review.

Since this issue has enormous geo-political and economic consequences, all the data supporting the pro climate change position ought to be available to anyone with an opposing point of view and skeptics with legitimate criticism should be encouraged to air their data.

That does not seem to be the message being conveyed in these emails by the major figures and proponents of the AGW theory. Requests for data are being stonewalled and people and journals that seek to challenge conventional wisdom are being shunned or marginalized.

With the Copenhagen meetings coming up and with cap and trade legislation on the table in Washington, this issue should be taking a front page position in the main stream media.

If the Globe continues to ignore this controversy, it would be one more example of the degradation of the Globe as a journalistic institution and another nail in its coffin as an ongoing business enterprise.

Trash Review

Back in May of 2008, the selectmen asked for and received permission from town meeting to award a five year contract for trash collection instead of the regular 3 years allowed by state law. The reasoning behind the request was to allow the winning contractor a longer period of time to amortize the cost of new equipment necessary to implement an automated trash collection system.

This new system would save money in a couple of different ways. One was to reduce the personnel on each truck since one person could do the pickups versus two or three under the old system. The other way would be to reduce the amount of tonnage going to the incinerator by increasing the amount of recycling.

This proposal was introduced in conjunction with a new contract that the town was signing with NESWIC. This was a compact of communities that had been put together in the early eighties to construct the incinerator up in North Andover. At the end of that contract the tipping fee the town was charged for each ton of trash was $140 per ton.

With the contract expiration the town was now free to negotiate with any incinerator or land fill and the result was the fee dropped substantially to around $73 dollars per ton. Since the town disposes of nearly nine thousand tons a year you can see that the savings were significant.

The new automated pick up system was implemented this past July and so far the program has lived up to its billing. Knowing that the tax payer would be moving out of their comfort zone with a new system, the town and DPW leadership took great pains to reach out to every homeowner with a variety of different education programs. Mailings were sent, demonstrations were set up at various town events, local cable news and other programming was used to tout the benefits of the new system.

When the kick off date came around on July 1, I took a long ride around town to sample the results and found that the participation was remarkable. Every where I went I saw the blue containers standing on the side of the road in proper position like toy soldiers at attention.

So how has the first quarter gone? According to DPW Superintendent John Sanchez just about as advertised. Year over year the numbers look like this. Last year for this quarter we had approximately 1905 tons of trash, and recycled 280 tons of paper and 115 tons of mixed plastic and glass. This quarter we have 1575 in trash, 350 tons in paper and a whopping 170 tons of glass and plastic. The net result is that in a short time we have increased our recycling rate from about 17% to nearly 32% on an annualized basis.

As time goes by and a little more effort that rate can still be increased substantially. Town management is right on with this issue, in good times or bad it simply makes no sense to throw money in the trash.

Dominoes

Many in political circles in Burlington are keeping their eyes glued on the special election to fill the vacant Massachusetts senate seat.

Not a lot politically happens in Burlington unless acknowledged front runner, incumbent Attorney General Martha Coakley should win the seat.

That event could possibly trigger a domino effect through out the town.

As you may or may not know, when that office becomes vacant it is filled by an appointment by the legislature. Since the house far outnumbers the senate then it can be deduced that the likely appointee would be a sitting house member or their designee.

Here is where it gets politically delicious for the Burlington political gadfly. Our own Representative Charles Murphy is rumored to be interested in the position. Having already shown his influence in the house by virtue of his appointment as the Ways and Means chairman, it would automatically seem that Charles is in play.

Add to his interest the fact that for a change we have a potential political appointee with credentials. Charlie is a former Marine captain assigned to the Judge Advocate’s office. His education credentials also seem to be a match having graduated from the following schools, Villanova University '87; Vermont Law School '90, Kennedy School of Government '02.

So let’s assume for a moment that Charles does get the appointment. He would then have roughly nine months to get powered up to run in a state wide election next November. In the mean time, a special primary and general election would have to be set up district wide in order to fill his rep vacancy.

The domino effect now comes into full play because of the plethora of candidates already in town wide offices that might make a run to fill Charlie’s seat. A list that is by no means complete might include the following rumored candidates in Burlington; planning board members Jane Hyde and Joseph Impemba, board of selectmen members Ralph Patuto and Sonia Rollins as well as ways and means committee member Tim Cummings to name just a few that might have interest.

So let’s hope Burlington’s stature is increased by having a member of our community holding a constitutional office and then let’s get strapped in for the domino effect!

Real Deals Only

Over the last two years, the planning board has recommended and the town meeting has passed four very large zoning changes or planned development districts. The one thing that each had in common was that proposals significantly increased the development rights on each of the parcels.

Those development rights greatly increased the resale value of the parcel to the landowner, however, without an actual building going up it has done absolutely nothing for the town's tax base.

The town wouldn't have considered these deals if there wasn't some inherent justification for the proposal. Some of the changes were driven by the need to upgrade aging properties while others added ancillary uses which may contribute to the tax value at some point in the future.

The position that the town now finds itself in is this, we now have granted development rights for new buildings somewhere in the order of 4 or 5 million square feet. The development is so massive it is hard to actually get a complete picture of what the town might look like and what demands would be made on infrastructure if a good deal of this actually got built out.

The good news is that the absorption rate for this amount of space could range anywhere between 20 and 25 years. A good example might be the original Trammel Crow PDD on Cambridge street. That was approved sometime in the middle to late eighties and that project is still not completely built out. The building that was recently finished seems to be standing idly by with no apparent tenants.

The bad news of course is from a planning stand point. Are we going to grant these development rights continually increasing the density of the community and piling on building after potential building with no concern for the competitive consequences on our existing tax base?

A non industry connected consultant should be assigned the task of analyzing the future revenue stream from the tax base as well as answering a few questions. For instance, with all of the building that we have done over the last five years why is the tax burden shifted dramatically back to the home owner?

In 1999 the commercial industrial sector of the town paid 65% of the total tax. By 2007 it had slid down to 54.96%. The last two years seemed to stem that trend however according to the assessors office there will be a drop in residential values this year but it will be exceeded by a larger drop in commercial values shifting more of the tax burden to the resident.

http://burlington.org/AssessorsDepartment_files/HIST-C~1.pdf

This flies directly in the face of current thinking in the town. Many of the leaders who promote continued growth do so on the basis of the need to keep the residential tax burden down. Although counter intuitive, a strong case can be made that less is more. A simple example is the market for retail space. We have simply over burdened the market with new space and potential new space and we suddenly find that retail values are falling and may continue to fall in the future. In addition of course is the unknown effect of the increase in the state sales tax. Will our retail tenants begin to see declines in sales beyond those driven by recession?

Perhaps it is time to slow the promise program down. Instead of passing bylaws that increase density or planned development districts that grant additional density rights we ought to take a more pragmatic approach. Bring in a project with a real tenant that is going to bring value to the resident not just appraisal and resale value to the landowner.

Death of an Option

The announcement this past week of the chapter 11 filing of Erikson Retirement Communities should be the death knell for the Patriot Partners option and proposal to develop the Land Locked Land. As you know, Erikson was a key component of the proposal by Patriot, citing the enormous need for senior assisted type living in the region. The re-organization filing immediately begs the obvious question, if there is such an enormous need how is it they were not financially viable? They have 20 of these large communities and they could not pay their bills?

This event confirms the town's decision not to engage in any kind of a deal with the proponents. Can you imagine the financial complexities the town might have faced had a deal been in place and a bankruptcy resulted?

There is a certain irony in these events as the last two companies involved in the property have also gone into some kind of bankruptcy. In fact, the only reason Patriot has ownership of the option is because they purchased it from the Delaware bankruptcy court.

The events point out the need for the town to be ever more vigilant in any development proposals that are brought forth that includes any involvement by the community. Much of the same rhetoric was used by the original development proponent of the property over 20 years ago. Cadillac Fairview had trumpeted the opportunity that was available to the town and the tax revenue that would be generated and the wonderful companies that would be attracted to the development. Shortly after the town rejected the overtures, the company went out of business.

There seems to be still some glimmer of hope in some minds that the deal will still go through. Strangely, the town administrator is quoted, "if it is not Erikson, someone else will step into the void." He is further quoted in the weekly paper this way, "No decision has been made regarding the Landlocked Land." That is not entirely true since a multi board committee deliberated for several months two summers ago and rejected the idea of any further discussions and the town meeting ratified that decision. So to did the board of selectmen since they have been unwilling to enter into any discussions with Patriot.

According to Mr. Mercier, the next step is that a group favorable to Patriot will submit a petition to the board of selectmen asking for a referendum question in April. Considering the filing by Erikson, it will be interesting to hear the proponents justify how such a question would be in the town's best interest. Based on current events, the board is certain to reject such a request and will suggest to the proponents that they are free to collect the 1500 plus signatures necessary to put the question on the ballot themselves.

Even if those signatures are collected, whatever the language of the question, it would be non binding. Within a month of any election results, Patriot's option will run out and this chapter of the Land Locked Land saga will end.