It’s time to let the cat out of the bag. Despite its cheerful, benevolent-sounding moniker and messaging, it’s time to pull back the curtain on the truly stellar marketing campaign called “Amherst for All” that is now ”Amherst for Change.”
It’s time to ask, who is “all” and what is meant by change?
AFA was started by a handful of developers and friends, two of whom recently lost their bid to rezone four properties in a residential neighborhood that would have allowed for the building of a large apartment complex.
This rezoning request, seen as destabilizing to the neighborhood and detrimental to long-term residents and abutters, was challenged at Planning Board and then overwhelmingly voted down by Town Meeting.
Although Town Meeting members come from all walks of life and political leanings, many are committed to a balanced, smart approach to development that does not sacrifice Amherst’s neighborhood communities and the town’s quality of life in the process.
Born out of the failure of their Town Meeting bid to rezone, AFA was created ostensibly to study our town’s government but primarily as a means to put an end to Town Meeting.
Time and again, Town Meeting has stood up to the power of big money on behalf of residents. Town Meeting has sought balance in its role as part of Amherst’s government, weighing the costs and benefits of proposed development projects against their impact on the community and residents.
And Town Meeting is far too big for any one group with any one agenda to manipulate and influence. It’s virtually impossible to buy or control the disparate voices of over 200 residents from across town, on any issue. There’s a reason why approximately 80 percent of the towns and cities in Massachusetts continue to operate under town meeting including municipalities much larger than Amherst such as Lexington and Brookline.
The name “Amherst for All” sounds lovely and the advertising has been brilliant; Don Draper of “Mad Men” would be proud. But connect the dots. On March 29, vote for the residents of Amherst and vote no on Question 1.
C. Brown
Amherst