Civic Recreation Center Plans Survive Referendum Challenge, Water and Sewer Rate Hikes Debated, and Murray Field Lights Set for Removal-September 16, 1981

Plans for a $2.2 million civic recreation center survived a high-stakes municipal referendum yesterday after opponents failed to secure the rigorous 20 percent voter margin required under town charter to overturn prior town meeting approval.

Civic Recreation Center Referendum Defeated

The referendum tally recorded 2,532 votes against the center and 1,799 in favor. Because town rules mandate that at least 20 percent of registered voters must oppose a town meeting action to reverse it, opponents fell well short of the 3,399 votes required out of Norwood’s 16,993 registered voters.

District 7 town meeting representative Stanley J. Wasil, who led the campaign against the facility, attributed the low turnout to steady, drenching rain throughout the day. “I figured it would be difficult,” Wasil said. “The weather hurt.” The project—approved during the June town meeting by a narrow 66-50 vote—would establish a modern recreation facility at the former Aaron Guild Elementary School on Washington Street, featuring a swimming pool, locker rooms, saunas, an elevator, four lighted tennis courts, an elderly drop-in center, and meeting rooms. The new facility is intended to replace the town’s previous civic building, which was sold to Norwood Hospital in 1980.

Despite the referendum outcome, opponents vowed to continue their challenge at the upcoming special town meeting scheduled for September 28, where selectmen have included further debate on the warrant. Proponents of the project, including District 2 representative Gordon Smith and District 7 representative Edward F. McKenna, expressed surprise at the level of opposition—partially fueled by a pro-and-con letter mailed to nearly 20,000 residents by selectmen and the finance commission prior to the vote.

Special Town Meeting Date Reconsidered

In administrative business, selectmen unanimously recommended postponing the special town meeting from September 28 to October 1 to avoid a scheduling conflict with Rosh Hashanah. Board Chairman John F. Kinnaly consulted with Rabbi M.A. Birnbaum, who confirmed that October 1 would be suitable, noting that the following week coincides with Yom Kippur. Formally changing the date, however, remains subject to the attendance of members on September 28.

Murray Field Lighting Decision Upheld

Reaffirming a vote taken the previous week, the Board of Selectmen voted 3-2 to let stand their decision to remove the lighting poles from Murray Field at the high school following petitions from neighborhood residents. Town Manager John J. Carroll stated, “As soon as we can, we’ll take the poles down.” Selectmen Alan Rockwood and James Ginley defended the decision, with Rockwood noting, “I couldn’t change my vote, and I never will.” Selectman Frank Farinacci cast the lone dissenting vote against removal.

Public Hearing on Proposed Water and Sewer Rate Hikes

A public hearing regarding proposed water rate increases and new sewer charges drew sharp pushback from local residents and study panel members. Under the proposals, water bills for average residential customers would jump 22 percent (from $84 to $102 annually), while a new sewer charge calculated on water usage would add another $61 per year. Industrial users would face a 40 percent hike.

Citizens and town meeting representatives—including District 9 representative Joseph W. Shone and resident Thomas Corrado of Bristol Drive—slammed the proposed user fees as an attempt to circumvent the tax-cutting mandate of Proposition 2 1/2. Shone criticized the fees as a regressive tax penalizing large families, noting that homeowners cannot deduct utility user charges from income taxes like businesses can.

Town Manager John J. Carroll defended the adjustments, explaining that the town must operate utilities on a self-sustaining business model to eliminate an average $80,000 annual water division deficit and a projected $415,000 sewer deficit, while responding to federal and Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) pressures to adopt user fees rather than relying entirely on property taxes. Selectman William J. Plasko added that the board had been examining utility deficits prior to Proposition 2 1/2. Selectmen ultimately postponed action on the proposed rates for further review.

Archival Note: This article has been dynamically reconstructed from the original public record print archives of the Patriot Ledger