‘I am a centrist’

Mr. Blye's incendiary front page article, “Is a farright takeover of Greenwich's RTM possible? If so, bipartisan coalition aims to fight it” (Oct. 14), repeatedly mischaracterizes candidates running on the Sensible Greenwich platform. I am a registered Independent running for Representative Town Meeting with Sensible Greenwich. I am not “farright,” nor am I part of an “extremist push” nor would I ever call myself a “hard-liner.” I am a centrist, a mother, a conservationist, a former executive, and a concerned citizen who sees our beloved town being taken over by ill-conceived state zoning laws and partisan national organizations that promote trendy policies that do not set up our town for success and do not set up our students for success.

What inspired me to run for the RTM, the final straw so to speak, was the RTM's close and contested vote to take $500k from a powerful, partisan “election integrity” organization, The U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence. This funding was for our town's election office, which didn't even need the money as they typically end the year with a budget surplus. Most are well aware that these types of donations have been outlawed in many states as the optics of an election office taking outside money is clearly not ideal. But now Greenwich's election office is a designated “Center for Election Excellence” and our registrars and staff will be trained throughout the year by this outside organization, funded by partisan actors. What new standards and innovations will be promoted? We don't know. A slim majority of the RTM voted to take the money regardless of the risks to our town's election integrity.

I am proud to join with more than 180 other sensible citizens seeking RTM seats, who represent the mainstream views of our neighbors and will ensure that our town remains strong. We agree that raising academic performance in our public schools and improving school facilities are priorities. We agree that low taxes and a stable mill rate make investing in a home in our town an attractive proposition. We agree that spending on our town services and related infrastructure is important. No one, as James Waters asserts, is looking to put “sand in the gears of a functional government,” nor is anyone looking to “force on the town cuts to our public school system (and) to infrastructure projects.” This is absurd.

We want a well-managed town and to be stewards of its future for our children and new residents to enjoy and prosper. And while I don't speak on behalf of all Sensible Greenwich candidates, I will say that we do share sensible core values: high quality education, low taxes, appropriate spending, and strong local zoning to keep Greenwich green and buildings right-sized. These sensible values are not far-right, extreme nor hard-line to any of the residents we speak with. I hope that Mr. Waters and Mr. Dan Quigley will reconsider their erroneous characterization of Sensible Greenwich candidates and cease to “throw sand in the gears” of the democratic process. Let the voters decide.