By Beth David, Editor
In another bizarre Fairhaven meeting. this time with the Planning Board, the public may not have realized just how bizarre it was.
At its public hearing on 10/28/24 to discuss the proposed 40R Smart Growth Overlay District (SGOD) that will be voted on at the Special Town Meeting on 11/19/24, the Planning Board limited discussion to the changes being discussed at the meeting, which was also the first time most members of the public learned about the changes.
Consultant Adam Costa told the board that the state had he incorporated the state’s changes into the final document he was presenting. He said he felt confident that the state would approve the district if TM passed the changes.
But the weirdness was more about the attendance, or lack thereof, of board members. Patrick Carr and Ruy DaSilva were not sitting at the table with their fellow board members, and PB chairperson Cathy Melanson made no mention of their absence.
At the beginning of the 40R SGOD public hearing, Mr. DaSilva was in the room sitting with the public. At the end of the meeting Mr. Carr was in the room sitting with the public, but Mr. DaSilva was not.
Both have been called out a repeatedly for possibly having a Conflict of Interest (COI) because they both own property in the proposed SGOD Waterfront District.
They have both said in past meetings that they were allowed to participate and discuss the issue as board members, but they will not vote.
Both Mr. Carr and Mr. DaSilva have said in open meetings that people should contact the Ethics Commission if they have a question, implying that their actions on the board are not a conflict. However, despite repeated requests, neither of them has ever provided any emails or other correspondence from the Commission supporting their assertions.
The workings of the State Ethics Commission are largely hidden, with the Commission usually going public only when a fine is issued to a public official. However, individuals who make a complaint are not constrained by that rule. More than one reader has informed the Neighb News that they have made formal complaints to the Commission regarding the COI potential for both Mr. Carr and Mr. DaSilva.
Mr. Carr also has an additional COI possibility because he owns a storage container company and the PB is also proposing bylaws changes pertaining to containers.
When the Neighb News told Mr. DaSilva he was supposed to tell people that he was recusing himself and not simply sit with the public, he said he was not required to say anything. Mr. Carr continued his practice of not answering questions from the Neighb News.
The purpose of the vote was to make a recommendation to Town Meeting which will vote to approve or not approve the zoning changes.
With Mr. Carr and Mr. DaSilva sitting it out, the vote was 4–2, with Jessica Fidalgo and Kevin Grant voting “no,” and Cathy Melanson, Sharon Simmons, Diane Tomassetti, and Rick Trapilo voting yes; and two recusals/abstentions.
The absence of the two board members, for whatever reason, does not change the configuration of the board. It is still an eight-member board, and, therefore, requires five positive votes for any measure to pass.
The 4-2-2 means the measure did not pass.
The Neighb News sent an email to the PB chairperson and several other town officials noting that the measure failed despite Ms. Melanson’s assertion that it passed, and asked if Town Counsel does indeed dispute that assertion, to forward the reasoning.We had no response to the email by press time.
Meanwhile, during the actual public hearing part of the meeting, Mr. Costa went through some of the changes suggested by the state.
Ms. Melanson told the public they could only address the changes and not bring up anything that had already been discussed, saying they already had several meetings.
Board members, however, did not seem to have that constraint.
PB member Rick Trapilo asked a series of questions to Mr. Costa mostly revolving around how many meetings and how much time he spent on the proposal for the town. He also asked if former Select Board member Bob Espindola was at a specific meeting, although it is unclear why he asked that.
Mr. Espindola did weigh in, asking the same question he asked at the Select Board meeting, noting that the incentive money from the 40R project should be considered one-time money and should not be used for ongoing expenses. His letter was read into the record in its entirety by Land Use Coordinator Bruce Webb.
PB member Diane Tomassetti asked Mr. Costa how much buildout other communities have had and how long it took.
“I hate to repeat myself,” said Mr. Costa as he referred to a spreadsheet he handed out at one of the meetings that explained that information on all the municipalities in Mass. that have adopted the 40R.
PB Member Jessica Fidalgo did limit her questions to the changes, asking for clarification and details on the changes in height limits and asking for clarification on several aspects of the project.
PB member Kevin Grant discussed the regulations regarding the affordable units with Mr. Costa, coming to the conclusion that only a handful of those units would in all practicality end up being occupied by Fairhaven residents.
The formula is somewhat complicated and includes a requirement that the residents mirror the demographics of the wider metropolitan area.
“I can’t give you a number,” said Mr. Costa, explaining that it depends on the “responsiveness and marketing” of the units, and will depend on the makeup of the community, “on a given day at a given time.”
Mr. Grant read a statement, saying that he believed the 40R “holds great potential” for the town, but too much damage has been done due to the COIs with the inclusion of the Waterfront in the district.
“I cannot support the inclusion on the waterfront of twenty lots of land into a 40R district simply because one developer ‘may’ — eventually — move forward with a friendly 40B on one plot of land. That justification makes no sense, especially since the last time the public weighed in on this the decision was to remove said district from the 40R proposal. The district was reintroduced in a closed-door meeting between two individuals who do not now — nor have they ever — lived in the Town of Fairhaven,” said Mr. Grant. “I cannot tacitly approve a process which has been hostile to opposing views and public input, one where voters are demeaned and yelled at and cut off after two minutes and told what they may or may not discuss, one where elected officials are censured and insulted for doing what they have been elected to do.”
During the public comment part of the hearing, Michelle Costen tried to get some answers to questions, but her time turned into a verbal slugfest with her and Ms. Melanson talking over each other as Ms. Melanson tried to stop Ms. Costen’s line of questioning.
Ms. Costen tried to make two points.
One was that the Waterfront District had only been added back in this summer, so they should not be saying that the public has been weighing in on it since 2022.
The other was to point out that the PB has three real estate agents, and she asked if they would be allowed to sell the condo units that would undoubtedly be built in the Waterfront District and would sell for very high prices.
She did not get an answer.
The 40R proposal must be approved by Town Meeting. A special TM is scheduled for 11/19. Although the 40R is a zoning change, it will only require a simple majority to pass, as the state has relaxed the rules to encourage the development of housing.
The PB will also be holding two “coffee and conversations” sessions to discuss the 40R proposal on Friday, 11/1, in the Town Hall Auditorium. (See page 5).
•••
Click here to download the 10-31-24 issue: 10-31-24 HauntedTH
Support local journalism, donate to the Neighb News with PayPal
