Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 55

Thread: A Ceremonial Mayor for Cochituate Village?!

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Wayland MA 463 Old Conn Path
    Posts
    382

    Talking I will explain more

    Hi Liz,

    The document in question is a marketing plan requested by a group to revitalize the Village of Cochituate. The term Village of Cochituate is displayed boldly on a town fixture on the Loker Green so this term is recognized by Wayland as being internal to Wayland and a part of Wayland.

    The marketing plan to revitalize the village included many aspects that could be considered. All of them were offered as suggestions to a fledgling group which will most probably grow as the years go by. Some had to do with stationary as a personal choice, upkeep of signs, displaying old pictures in stores (something that many business's do now in other places in Wayland) and to revitalize the history of the village and Wayland and as a part of Wayland through school activities and plays. All very legitimate things to do.

    In fact, the history of the northern portions of Wayland are equally as fasinating. Just one tidbit has to do with a disagreement of a farmer landowner who did not want is property in Sudbury to become part of East Sudbury (now Wayland) and convinced the Selectman of that day to maintain his borders in Sudbury. Today that 'polyp' like border juts into Wayland proper and (unfortunately) is now called the Sudbury and Wayland landfill's. There is so much more and any part of Wayland can and should reach back to its history. These can also be done via school activities.

    My priority is Wayland PERIOD... and thats why I volunteer, spend my money, my time and help all who ask me for help. Including the CVS Cochituate group who has very large concerns about the preservation of their neighborhood and their way of life.

    My priority was to help Wayland increase its tax intake by putting 100's of hours in endless meetings on zoning, planning, BoS, conservation, wastewater and negotiation with the town center principals in the developer's agreement.

    My priority was to help all citizens in Wayland by avoiding a federal lawsuit which was going to force us to put a private cell tower in an undesirable location on RT20 which would only accommodate one carrier and provide no income for the town. I fought hard and worked hard to analyze and justify a location on Reeves Hill which had 5 telecom carriers thereby avoiding additional towers and built on water department land thereby providing an additional revenue stream to the entire town.

    My priority was to help all neighborhood streets in association with town center traffic like Glezen and Bow by considering their solution sets and asking for logical rollouts of these solutions so that their solutions would fit the cycle and not spill into other streets because its just one big inter-connected maze.

    My priority was to help take into inventory, upgrade and propel into the future, the Nike Site restoration project and to provide 48 units of quality affordable housing within our borders in Northern Wayland.

    My priority was to intercede and educate people on zone one and zone two water radii around town well assets for both our Northern and Southern wells.

    My priority was to maintain an excellent public safety and ambulance capability such that both RT20 and Cochituate Fire Station 2 would be fully capable and have minimum response times for all geographic areas of Wayland.

    and much more....

    Liz, never be confused by my Wayland priorities.
    When I was a Wayland Selectman I was your Wayland Selectman.
    Whether I have your support or not this will always be true.

    But I hope you will reconsider me and ask your friends to do that too.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    726

    Default

    To Gretchen, Jeff Horan and Pauline: I appreciate the context for the document you have provided. And Alan, I appreciate the time and effort (and good ideas) you have contributed to respond to the questions from the CVS group. I also appreciate the care and concern you have for the town.

    That said... Alan, I do not believe the "Ceremonial Mayor" part of your piece is what has attracted so much concern among people. I also don't think people would object to much of your thought piece, which has some nice ideas for Cochituate.

    It is the part in which you suggest organizing and assert "control[ing] the agenda of Wayland" that has me concerned. I cannot imagine a scenario in which half of the population organized to control the agenda, and the other half sat back and watched. And I shudder to imagine the scenario in which the two geographic halves of the town do such organizing and try to do agenda control.

    No one would suggest that residents not work to protect the town or neighborhood in which live. And no one would suggest that members have no right to organize as you have described.

    The real question is not whether there is a right to organize as you have described -- of course there is. The real question is whether it is appropriate and should be encouraged. And I think the answer is that of course it is not.

    I like Wayland working together as a whole, and think the idea of a geographically based PAC is very bad for Wayland.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Let me say at the outset that I'm all for geographic pride. I take pride in being a member of my neighborhood, Cochituate, Wayland, Massachusetts, the United States, ...

    When I first joined the School Committee in 2000, I learned that the PTOs had spent the prior decade developing a "One Wayland" philosophy that cast aside the old north/south "split."

    Not only did they espouse this philosophy in words, they did so with the formula they used to disperse raised funds. Regardless of the geographic SOURCE of these funds, they allocated them out to the three elementary schools on a 40%/30%/30% basis (CH/HH/LO) reflective of costs incurred by pupil population and building size.

    I found myself inspired by the PTO work to achieve "One Wayland" and encourage that as a continuing guiding approach for all Waylanders going forward.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1

    Thumbs up Doug Leard

    Hi all:

    I just thought I should forward to you the following piece of information realtive to everyones "over reaction" to Alan Reiss' comments regarding "Cochituate Village".
    Many of Wayland's older residents knew of a former "ceremonial" dignitary in Cochituate Village: the "Mayor of Cochituate" Mr. John McEnroy (former Wayland Selectman).
    'Ceremonial Mayors' of Cochituate have existed in the past and they never caused a separation from Wayland. Obviously Alan was never suggesting that "Cochituate Village" be the 352nd city/town in the Commonwealth.
    Thank you for allowing me to set the record straight.

    Doug Leard




    Newspaper article from our research archive:
    <GetPubLogo.aspx>
    `MAYOR OF COCHITUATE' REMEMBERED FONDLY
    Article from:The Boston Globe (Boston, MA) Article date:August 4, 2002 Author:Bryan K. Marquard, Globe Staff More results for: "mayor of cochituate" |Copyright information
    WAYLAND - Given the slightest encouragement, John McEnroy would delineate the boundaries of Cochituate Village. His friends, though, might argue that it was Mr. McEnroy who defined the village, just as it defined his political career and, in many ways, his life.

    After Mr. McEnroy died July 23 at 89, he was buried, as he lived, in Cochituate.

    The village, which makes up the southern tip of Wayland, was his passion through a career in local government that spanned three decades. Even during his last months in a nursing home, it was his favorite topic.

    "As long as he was able to talk, he liked to talk politics," said....

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    As for ceremonial posts, let's not forget our Fence Viewers, Field Drivers, Measurers of Wood and Bark, and Surveyors of Lumber. Hearing Moderator Peter Gossels announce these positions at Town Meeting each year never fails to put a smile on my face.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Wayland, MA
    Posts
    52

    Default Architectural Preservation District

    By Passing Articles 28 (4/13) and 6 (4/15) at the 2009 Wayland Annual Town Meeting, I believe Cochituate could be protected from "Wal-Marts" and other construction that could change (ruin) the flavor of Cochituate.

    In the obit of the last "ceremonial mayor", Cochituate is described as the "southern tip" of Wayland. It is not the southern half of Wayland. There is a map in the Warrant that describes what the definition of Cochituate would be. (page 57)

    I don't know about you, but one of the selling points for me in moving to Wayland was the Starbucks - pathetic, but true; and I still frequent it (1.7 miles from my house). I say Wayland has much to offer: the village of Cochituate, Dudley Pond and the more rural/suburban part of it.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Note the even smaller "Cochituate Architectural Preservation District" on page 114 of the 2009 ATM Warrant (relating to Article 6). I note with some amusement that my property is included, but not that of my next door neighbor to the East. In fact, there are a number of contiguous properties that are for some unknown reason not included. I wonder how one gets exempted?

    Actually, my reaction should probably not be amusement, but rather, trepidation, as Article 6 likely makes it more difficult to modify my property. I note with some interest that the Finance Committee voted unanimously AGAINST approving this article.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    96

    Default the core concern

    Whether Alan Reiss's "mayor" would or wouldn't be "ceremonial" is the least of the issues that have concerned me. The core issue is the seeming call for a Cochituate voting block to "control the agenda of Wayland", which are the very words that Alan used in Section 8 of his memo (which was titled "Village of Cochituate Lobby").

    It is not enough to say, as Alan has, that any group of people has a "right" to organize politically. Legalisms like that merely avoid the more important question of whether, in a particular instance, it's a "right" that should be encouraged. The historic north-south divide in Wayland was dysfuntional; it's resurrection should not be encouraged, and the smoldering embers in those hearts where it still resides should not be fanned into flames. What's even worse is the reaction that it would produce: as Kim wrote, "I cannot imagine a scenario in which half of the population organized to control the agenda, and the other half sat back and watched. And I shudder to imagine the scenario in which the two geographic halves of the town do such organizing and try to do agenda control."

    In his posts above, Mr. Reiss characterizes his memo as "a marketing plan requested by a group to revitalize the Village of Cochituate", but it goes well beyond this purpose in seeming to advocate for a divisive political agenda. When I spoke with Alan last Thursday, he expressly disavowed such advocacy and he asked me to write a post to this effect on his behalf. In words that he approved before I posted them, I wrote that he had asked me to "make clear that [his memo] was in no way intended as a 'political manifesto' (my words) or as an 'us against them' tract (my words again)", that "he'll seek to clarify this intention when he's back and has an opportunity to do so", and that "he agrees that political differences among Wayland citizens should be reconciled, and divisiveness should not be encouraged or exacerbated".

    I'd like to believe that Alan still adheres to this view, despite what his memo said.
    Last edited by Steve Perlman; 03-29-2009 at 09:35 PM. Reason: correction of typo

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Wayland MA 463 Old Conn Path
    Posts
    382

    Wink continued...

    Steve,

    I see that you don't have a problem between using 'ceremonial' or not but I had a major problem with that because if you didn't use the term 'ceremonial' you would be saying Mayor all by itself and to all I have spoken to, this is a legal term that would supplant the government of Wayland and, in fact, be indirectly saying that Cochituate should be separated from Wayland.

    The fact is that when that word was left off, all kinds of opportunities occurred for those who compete with me for the 2 selectman seats to gravitate towards terminology which painted me as a separatist - which I am not. One caller on the Gossels show talked about a separate post office for which I was not being painted as advocating. One poster here brought up visions of Montreal and country division. It wasn't just the initial title it was also the text of the initial thread which also got changed. The insurrection that you speak of was much more towards my campaign and it spun out of control.

    I know what we talked about on that parking lot cell phone call and I was very sure that I didn't want the translation of separatist for this document and that is what I meant by non political - But I didn't do a good job in that hurried phone call with you or in agreeing to the language so I left open the idea that I would clarify when I got back.

    So I'm back and now I'm clarifying.

    I also sent a copy of my document to Michael Wyner of the Crier and said that he was free to write an article about this document if he thought I had crossed the line. He told me that he read it and it looked fine to him - he said "made sense to me". That was an important sanity check for me. You know Michael Wyner, call him and ask him yourself.

    I've shown it to others and I the responses I got back were nothing even close to what I'm getting on this discussion forum. But this is good healthy discussion and I'm glad to be able to be part of it.

    Please note:

    The CVS group is already lobbying and they lobbied the planning board obviously because article 28 is on the warrant.

    The CVS group is already forming a political group because they know that there are other land use issues that they need to be concerned about in the future and they need to work within the system to forward their agenda.

    My marketing paper on helping the village admittedly went beyond a marketing plan and moved into the area of political organization and that made sense to me because they were already doing this and were talking to me about it. I laid out what is possible under the law and what is possible by working within the Wayland governmental system. If they didn't already know these details they should have and they do now. In fact, with the publication of my marketing plan, every group in Wayland, no matter how they are organized can now see what is possible for them. Why not? We have a number of groups who have issues and who lobby and who put up candidates and who organize and some are much more successful than others.

    We both know and we both discussed that we now have a very powerful group in town which is just not organized around geographic boundaries but rather, around school boundaries, and now its clear to me that, because this organization is diffuse geographically, then its much more palletable or politically correct in its configuration to you and others who object to this document. Its the land boundaries which are the problem isn't it? I learn something new everyday !

    In fact, about 45% the town does sit back and watches the other 55% control the major agendas. If you don't believe me then just look at the ballot and election results going back about 8 years. But I think you believe me.

    So your uneasy-ness about this confuses me. A powerful PAC / BQC with a consistent 55% voting margin that is not geographically organized does not stir up the fear of insurrection in you but an internal village who organizes itself based on land use or even taxation issues and happens to be geographically organized does stir up that fear ?

    I can't come to any other conclusions about this.

    Steve, on your next posting back, if there is one - please address it to the CVS Cochituate group. Its their legal rights and their organizational options that you are challenging or expressing concern about here - not mine.

    In any event, please let it be known that I believe in One Wayland.
    Because I do.

    Again, thanks for your help last week.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    726

    Default

    Alan, sorry to address this to you, not the CVS group, but it is not what they are doing, but what you have written that I think requires discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by AlanJReiss View Post
    I see that you don't have a problem between using 'ceremonial' or not but I had a major problem with that because if you didn't use the term 'ceremonial' you would be saying Mayor all by itself and to all I have spoken to, this is a legal term that would supplant the government of Wayland and, in fact, be indirectly saying that Cochituate should be separated from Wayland.

    The fact is that when that word was left off, all kinds of opportunities occurred for those who compete with me for the 2 selectman seats to gravitate towards terminology which painted me as a separatist - which I am not.
    Alan, I am quite confident that the title of the post, which probably should have been "Is Alan Reiss suggesting a Cochituate PAC?" was not the source of complaints about separatism. I think it was the ending part of your thought piece which triggered that. I know you are focusing on the mayor piece, but everyone I've seen write or talk about this focuses on the "agenda control" aspect, not the ceremonial mayor. Certainly, my title didn't say "A Mayor and separate post office for Cochituate?!" :-) (on the other hand, isn't there already a post office in Cochituate? Maybe the caller was thinking about that part of the document where you specified all the assets of the town which are located in Wayland)


    Quote Originally Posted by AlanJReiss View Post
    Please note:

    The CVS group is already lobbying and they lobbied the planning board obviously because article 28 is on the warrant.

    The CVS group is already forming a political group because they know that there are other land use issues that they need to be concerned about in the future and they need to work within the system to forward their agenda.
    All well and good, and just a small subset of the sort of organizing and # of people that you are actually advocating in the document. Further, the "CVS group" could well be comprised of people throughout town. I, as an example, did not support the CVS proposal, and I joined the CVS yahoo group as well. People beyond Cochituate Village care about the future of Cochituate.

    Quote Originally Posted by AlanJReiss View Post
    My marketing paper on helping the village admittedly went beyond a marketing plan and moved into the area of political organization and that made sense to me because they were already doing this and were talking to me about it. I laid out what is possible under the law and what is possible by working within the Wayland governmental system. If they didn't already know these details they should have and they do now.
    Alan, you didn't talk about what they could do, but what they should do.

    "Cochituate should understand that it can control the agenda of Wayland and its time for Cochituate begin to do that. Ultimately, this is where such an effort would lead. It has to because power will always grow to its appropriate level and until now, Cochituate is viewed as a tear down McMansion farm, as a place to dump 40b’s and as a place to threaten with school reconfigurations or fire station close downs when override season is upon us."
    That isn't divisive? Haven't you just said that Cochituate needs to organize and fight back because people from North Wayland don't respect it?? Wow... You really think that people from North Wayland view Cochituate as a place to "dump 40b's"? You think the school reconfiguration was a North/South issue? And what does this have to do with CVS?
    Last edited by Kim Reichelt; 03-30-2009 at 10:17 AM.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Wayland MA 463 Old Conn Path
    Posts
    382

    Exclamation Met with Crier today

    Kim,

    This morning I was interviewed by the Wayland town Crier as all candidates are. In that meeting I re-asked Michael Wyner if he wanted to do a story on my Cochituate Village document with respect to..

    -- Alan being divisive
    -- Alan wanted to cleave Wayland into two pieces
    -- Alan not wanting to represent all of Wayland as a candidate

    Mr. Wyner said that there is no story here.
    He said that there is no reason to do a story. He read the document, he saw no problem with it and "it made sense to him". I did this because I wanted to jump out of the forest and see the trees (so to speak) and wanted an outside Wayland 3rd opinion. I got it.

    Protecting the village extends into zoning, planning, 40B's, traffic, wastewater and lifestyle as closely related to taxation. A group in Wayland, any group in Wayland, has the right to form a group, a political group or lobbying group and candidate selection group, a ballot question group and this is regardless of its organization being based around schools, bodies of water, business's, or geography. Speaking to those groups and providing them with information about marketing, politics and their political options is not divisive and its a service provided by a volunteer. The same service that I would provide to any group any where in Wayland.

    The original thread start post was incindiary and I am happy that you chose to modify it, the title with its omission of 'ceremonial' provided a starting viewpoint which was not accurate. It fed the fire of gross exaggeration against me and it occurred at a time which was remarkably close to April 7th, 2009.

    This morning, it is my understanding that Wayland Voters Network published an article - an editorial on the circumstances of these events and I have to believe that you are not pleased by this.

    I have no control over WVN nor do I dictate what they write, just as I have no control over what you write... I can make suggestions, but I have no control.

    Your latest post seems now continues to raise the stakes and seems to also add to the fire. Those who wish to spread falsehoods about me are doing a disservice to me and to the voters of Wayland and I want those things to stop.

    Because of the escalation of these events I have created a webpage called "Cochituate Village" on www.AJReiss.com.

    On this page I have proudly posted a link to my document, to this thread and to the article written by Mr. Short of WVN.

    I have also posted a list of FAQ's.

    At this point, I believe that I have said all that I can say here, in this forum and about this matter and I have put all information out there about this.

    If anybody wishes to communicate with me further on this matter then they should email me at: Alan@AJReiss.com

    I thank you and I ask all for their consideration of their vote on April 7th, 2009.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    726

    Default

    Alan, I am not seeking to "escalate", but to discuss.

    As a result of the discussion, I am able to conclude that we have a difference of opinion as to whether urging the formation of a PAC based on geography that comprises half the population of the town is divisive. I'm happy to leave it at that.
    Last edited by Kim Reichelt; 03-30-2009 at 01:41 PM. Reason: make post more coherent

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wayland, MA
    Posts
    235

    Default You reap what you sow

    Someone asked whether we want a Cochituate PAC and a North Wayland PAC. This is like the head of the Republican Party asking whether we really want a Democratic party.

    Wayland is highly politicized. At the moment, one well-organized group dominates. While its cause may be worthy, the "ends justify the means" attitude displayed by some of its members has forced other groups of Wayland residents to band together out of self-protection.

    I'll cite the traffic implications of the Town Center as a blatant example, where attempts to understand and quantify the safety threat to the residents of streets like Bow Road and Glezen Lane were met with derision and dismissal in public forums by SOS members hell bent on locking down increased tax revenues from the Town Center -- no matter what the impact on anyone else. Did residents of Bow and Glezen form "PACs" to protect their children's safety? We had no choice.

    Alan's letter was completely harmless -- every third paragraph includes a statement making clear that Cochituate is a part of Wayland. Yet posters here feign shock, and label it a radical separatist manifesto. What transparent hypocrisy.

    You reap what you sow, folks, and the way things are going, the current level of polarization will look downright pastoral a couple of years from now. What a great environment for raising children that will be...

    Dave

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Wayland MA
    Posts
    1,431

    Default

    Wait a second, there's still a Republican Party? [grin]

    The better analogy, I think, is asking the Union whether it wishes the Confederate States to secede.

    For the record, I'm not suggesting in any way that Alan was advocating for secession.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wayland, MA
    Posts
    235

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Dieffenbach View Post
    The better analogy, I think, is asking the Union whether it wishes the Confederate States to secede.
    Exactly why would that be a better analogy, Jeff?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •