For Immediate Release

February 23, 2017

Contact: Jason Ferreira | 413-887-4404 | info@holyokecpa.org

CPA Proponents Press for Commonsense Changes in CPC Ordinance

Yes for a Better Holyoke has reviewed the proposed Community Preservation Committee (CPC) ordinance
as passed out of the Ordinance Committee on February 14th and does not support its approval as written.
Yes for a Better Holyoke advocates for checks and balances in government, greater community
involvement, and for independence and accountability in the CPC structure. Our disagreements with the
draft ordinance fall into four areas:

1. Yes for a Better Holyoke does not support the "removal clause as written. This new committee
should be removed from political pressure. Members must be free to act without fear of being removed
without cause. Other Holyoke boards do not allow appointing authorities the power to remove members at
will and without cause. Other communities do not allow their legislative bodies such power over CPC's.
Having the removal of CPC members be possible without cause from the same body (City Council) that
approves final distribution of funds is a recipe for corruption. The clause as written undermines the very
purpose of having a CPC. The CPC becomes a dependent functionary of City Council rather than an
independent source of expertise and advice for Council.

2. Yes for a Better Holyoke does not support giving any of the four optional seats to a City Councilor.
Already by state law, Holyoke City Council has the final vote for all allocations of the Community
Preservation Act (CPA). There is no need for a Councilor to sit on the CPC, exerting undue control over
which projects are discussed and moved forward. All four optional seats should go to residents of Holyoke
who are not members of City Council nor employees of the City. This way, we can encourage new energy
and perspectives in our city government.

We reject the argument that a councilor is needed on the CPC to move its processes forward efficiently.
The vast majority of CPA communities do not have members of the legislative body on their CPCs. Already,
the CPC will have five members from existing boards and commissions with experience in government. The
idea that the CPC requires a councilor reflects an elitist and anti-democratic view of government. Instead,
the CPC's work should be community-driven, with the opportunity for as much citizen engagement as
possible.

3. Yes for a Better Holyoke advocates that two CPC seats be filled by at-large election and the other two
be filled by appointment. This would increase community awareness around CPA and provide direct voter
input into the process. We are disappointed Ordinance Committee chose not even to discuss the possibility
of elected seats.

4. Yes for a Better Holyoke advocates for proportional representation on the CPC. Proportional
representation would ensure a more accurate representation of our demographics, and it would
encourage our existing commissions to be more inclusive and representative. There should be a way to
prevent exclusion of significant minorities, like Latinos, who are nearly half our population, or women, who
already exceed half yet remain underrepresented. CPA can strengthen or transform neighborhoods; there
should be a way to encourage members from all wards. We are disappointed Ordinance Committee chose
not to discuss this idea nor to incorporate it in their draft. We believe proportional representation is worth
councilors' public consideration, thoughtful crafting into draft language, and comment for why they choose or
reject this possibility.

Yes for a Better Holyoke looks forward to a public hearing on the draft ordinance. We encourage interested
members of the public to participate, and we look forward to hearing councilors' responses to greater
community input.

###