Chatham town meeting changes regional school agreement, blocks changes to airport

CHATHAM — Town meeting on Saturday changed part of the Regional School District agreement, blocked changes to Chatham Airport, and left the question of what will be done with 19 acres of town-owned land up in the air. 

The day started out with Spring in full swing, but by 3 p.m. there was an overcast of clouds, and folks either reached for their jackets or wished they had brought one. 

The town meeting was held at 1 p.m. on Saturday outdoors at Veterans Field due to precautions about COVID. Around 700 voters showed up to participate. 

Town Budget 

Article 9, the town’s operating budget, passed with no debate. The budget for fiscal year 2023 is $35 million, a 6% increase from the fiscal 2022, according to the warrant. The budget included money to hire seven new employees, including two full-time firefighters/EMTs, a part-time fire department administrative assistant, a housing and sustainability director, a public works laborer, an assistant conservation agent, a health inspector, and an information technology assistant. 

Amendment to the Regional School Agreement 

In Article 10, voters amended the regional school district agreement which effectively asks each town in the district to pay for its own elementary school, rather than sharing costs.  

Proponents of the measure said the current regional agreement was unfair, since a decrease in enrollment in Chatham’s elementary school raised costs for each individual student. This forced Harwich to pay an exorbitant amount to support Chatham elementary school. Monomoy Regional School Committee member Danielle Tolley said Harwich currently pays 75 percent of Chatham’s elementary school budget, which is unfair. She also said if this were to continue, Harwich would have to decrease its investment in the school, which would lead to a lower quality of education.

More:Opinion: Shortening the Chatham airport runways would be the opposite of safe

Opponents of the article said the amendment was premature, and that the initial agreement between the schools contained mutual benefits as well as sacrifices. Eric Whiteley said that historically, when the agreement was first made Harwich benefited greatly from Chatham’s investments, so it is unfair those investments be forgotten. 

The article passed by a majority vote. Voters also approved the next article on the warrant setting aside an extra $739,747 to support Chatham Elementary. 

19 acres in Goose Pond Forest 

Voters faced dueling articles about what to do with In Articles 62 and 63 were related to 19 acres of town-owned land in Goose Pond Forest. Article 62 asked to use 15 acres for conservation, and the other four for affordable housing development. Article 63 asked for all 19 acres to be dedicated to conservation.

Neither measure received the necessary two-thirds majority to pass, so the town will likely need to figure out what it wants to do with the land at a later date. 

More:Chatham annual town meeting seeks 7 new positions, preschool tuition, operating budget

Proponents of Article 62 made the usual arguments for the need for affordable housing: the lack of workforce housing, the exodus of young people for the Cape, and the negative impacts on year-round businesses. They argued the proposal was a sensible compromise, using most of the land for conservation and part of it for affordable housing, which they said the town so desperately needs. Voter David Oppenheim said Chatham is the best town on the Cape for conservation, and the worst for affordable housing. 

Opponents  said they support the concept of affordable housing, Goose Pond Forest was the wrong place to put it. The land is not near any sort of public transportation or local commerce, like grocery stores. 

They also said affordable housing should be developed in already disturbed areas.  

Voter Sarah Griscom said climate change made the town rethink its policies, and using Goose Pond Forest for affordable housing is “death by a thousand cuts.” She said there are better solutions to the affordable housing crisis, like accessory dwelling units. 

Chatham Airport 

Voters shot down Articles 56 and 57 that called for making changes to Chatham Airport.

Article 56 called for making the runway 800 feet shorter for aircraft to take off and land. The petitioner who brought this forward argued the current runway is a safety hazard, since there are businesses and homes are within the Runway Protection Zones. 

Proponents of the article argued this would give the town a chance to bring the issue before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and that displacing the runway would move homes and businesses out of a dangerous zone. 

More:'We struck gold': Comics Lenny Clarke, Jimmy Tingle play brothers for short film in Chatham

Opponents of the article said a shorter runway was less safe for aircrafts. David Oppenheim, a pilot who got his flying license at Chatham Airport, said the airport was one of the safest he’s ever flown to or from, and that shortening the runway is dangerous. 

Voters rejected Article 57 to limit the size of aircraft accommodated at Chatham Airport so that large commercial airplanes could not land or take off. The petitioner said the restriction would prevent the airport from becoming too commercial and preserve the character of Chatham. 

Supporters argued Chatham Airport does not have the capacity to handle large aircrafts. Voter Bruce Gibbs said commercialization of the airport would be catering to the wealthy. 

However, opponents said passage would have legal ramifications, as the airport had agreements with the federal and state government, and it could not discriminate against aircrafts based on their size.