Vision for a Better Belmont: Elizabeth Dionne

This is the first of a new series of interviews with Belmont stakeholders about their vision for Belmont’s future. This interview was conducted by Jeffrey North. It has been edited for length and clarity. – Ed.

BCF: Congratulations on your election to the Select Board earlier this year. What have you learned about how Belmont works—either well or not so well?

Overall, having served in an official capacity in Belmont for the past seven-and-a-half years (Town Meeting, Warrant Committee, Community Preservation Committee), I am pleasantly surprised that there are not many surprises. While municipal governance can be daunting and sometimes slow, the town has truly outstanding professionals in place. They are excited about the town’s future and implementing progress on multiple fronts.

What I have found personally a bit daunting is the wide range of subject matter areas in which I need to make decisions. I had an excellent grounding in the town’s fiscal challenges and situation, but I have also had to learn a lot about energy, water management, buildings and park maintenance, public safety, and human resources. Currently, my most important skill set is learning who I can reliably call upon to give me accurate, unbiased information. I can’t become an expert in every area, so I need to identify people on whose judgment, discretion, and integrity I can rely.

Prior to joining the Select Board, I knew that Belmont had a very dispersed governance structure, but the Select Board has even less authority than I realized. For example, building committees are creatures of Town Meeting, with members appointed by the town moderator. We [the Select Board] have zero authority regarding the choice of budget, architects, project managers, or general contractors. Appointed building committees, composed of dedicated volunteers, make all of those decisions. When problems arise with construction projects, residents look to the Select Board for solutions, but we have no real authority to intervene or otherwise guide projects along the way.

Belmont has more than 60 committees, commissions, boards, and regional groups. This is great for citizen participation, but it also impedes quick strategic action or policy changes in response to pressing problems. It can also make it difficult to figure out who is ultimately responsible for a particular problem. 

The Select Board controls appointments to a majority of these bodies, but a significant minority are independently elected and do not answer to the Select Board. Even when we make appointments, we have limited powers of oversight, as members have fixed terms, and many of these bodies (such as the Planning Board or Zoning Board of Appeals) have administrative powers that are completely independent of the Select Board and its policy preferences. We have almost no power to remove members who may not be acting in the town’s best interests. We must wait until terms expire to make new appointments.

Following on my first point, what works extremely well right now is the Select Board office and the various town departments. Town administrator Patrice Garvin works closely and collaboratively with each Select Board member. She gives well-reasoned advice and counsel, but she is very aware that the Select Board sets the policy agenda for the town and is deferential to our ultimate authority. Roy Epstein, Mark Paolillo, and I have different skill sets (respectively an economist, an accountant, and a lawyer) and personalities, but we have great mutual respect. We work in a collegial and collaborative fashion for the good of the town. Patrice has made some excellent hires as department heads. They are dedicated public servants who are working through some really difficult circumstances, especially as the town is significantly understaffed, particularly in the Department of Public Works and the Office of Community Development.

I am continually impressed by the time and expertise Belmont residents donate to ensure that the town runs efficiently and well. The town literally could not afford to compensate staff for the time and work product volunteered by residents. There are so many people of goodwill working together for the common good.

BCF: What are some positive steps or improvements in town governance you have seen in the past year?

By far the most significant improvement in town governance is the voter-approved switch from an elected treasurer to an appointed treasurer. There were significant staffing and quality control problems in the treasurer’s office during fiscal year 2024, particularly related to appropriate booking of revenue. 

In contrast to prior years, the Warrant Committee (on which I previously served) did not receive timely or accurate revenue reports from September 2022 through Annual Town Meeting this past spring. The treasurer’s office is in the process of reviewing all revenue dating from July 1, 2022, for accuracy before the state Department of Revenue can certify our free cash number later this fall. Without that number, the Select Board cannot accurately forecast money available for future operating budgets. As a result, we will be late in setting the amount of the anticipated override request in April 2024, which in turn complicates the entire budgeting process. We will get through this latest problem—somehow we always do—but I am relieved that Leslie Davidson (our recently hired treasurer) is working with remaining staff to modernize and systematize processes in the treasurer’s office.

The town has hired a talented town planner, a key element in our plans to rewrite the town’s byzantine and archaic zoning bylaw. We are out of sync with our neighbor and peer communities, most of which have adopted form-based zoning. They are quite literally eating our lunch as businesses leave Belmont for friendlier homes. Without clear, rational, and internally consistent building standards, we can’t attract small business or appropriate commercial development, and current homeowners can’t make common-sense updates and additions necessary to remain comfortably in their current homes. Rewriting the town’s zoning bylaw will take time and significant public input, but it is a necessary first step to steering Belmont toward a vibrant and fiscally sound future.

I am really excited about all of our recent appointments, especially to the Planning Board, the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Economic Development Committee, and the Vision 21 Implementation Committee. These four bodies are now working together in a thorough and creative manner to think about the town’s future. In each instance, exemplary professionals have stepped forward to serve the town in a significant way. Despite our current challenges, people are feeling excited about Belmont’s long-term future, which I believe has resulted in a new wave of talent coming forward.

Another significant appointment was to the board of Belmont’s Retirement System (which controls a large and growing portion of Belmont’s annual operating budget). For years, the Warrant Committee has identified excessive administrative expenses and inferior pension fund investment returns as joint problems for the town’s operating budget. I am cautiously optimistic that by next spring we will have resolved both these problems. 

Pensions are an absolute obligation. Saving money on administrative expenses and improving investment returns have zero impact on pensions received by retirees, whose rights are fully protected under state and federal law.

The Vision 21 Implementation Committee and Economic Development Committee have taken the Select Board’s charge to investigate anti-business provisions in the zoning bylaw and make recommendations for reform, particularly related to restaurants, for Special Town Meeting in November. They are likely to raise the issue of hotels at Annual Town Meeting next spring. Their energy and vision are contagious.

There is tremendous enthusiasm among citizens around making some necessary changes, particularly in the agenda that will come before Special Town Meeting in November. This is true across the political spectrum. Not all of these changes will happen immediately, but they will start some important conversations:

• Voting to put an appointed Board of Assessors on the April 2024 ballot
• Voting to have the police leave Civil Service so that we can address significant staffing shortfalls and develop a more diverse force. Underinvesting in our police force is penny wise and pound foolish. (We are not addressing the fire department at this time.)
• Filing a home rule petition with the state legislature to exempt us from the provisions of MGL 61B (which, among other things, gives a 75% property tax break to wealthy golf courses)
• Streamlining and simplifying the zoning bylaw to make it easier to open restaurants
• Simplifying sign requirements so that businesses don’t have to go before the Planning Board to seek special permits. (The Planning Board should be spending its precious time and expertise on higher-level strategic planning.)

If we don’t address both our structural and fiscal challenges, we will be left with the worst of all worlds, homeowners who bear a property tax burden which is among the heaviest in the state, while still underfunding our schools and town services.

The Select Board has committed to a systematic program of making PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) requests from the major nonprofits in town (particularly the Belmont Hill School and Belmont Day School), removing this responsibility from the current elected Board of Assessors.

BCF: What do you see as Belmont’s areas for improvement? What do we need to work on in the areas of a) the mechanics of town government, and b) town fiscal policy?

In June of 2022, the Edward J. Collins Center for Public Management at UMass Boston published an in-depth review of Belmont’s governance structure and fiscal challenges. (See “Have You Read the Collins Report?”, November 2022 BCF Newsletter) They pulled no punches—the report was damning. If we don’t address both our structural and fiscal challenges, we will be left with the worst of all worlds, homeowners who bear a property tax burden which is among the heaviest in the state, while still underfunding our schools and town services. Our future as a town depends on tackling these problems head-on.

We have already made the most significant structural change, shifting to an appointed town treasurer who answers to the Select Board. The second most important change is the one coming before Special Town Meeting this fall; asking Belmont’s voters to support an appointed Board of Assessors.

The Collins Center report recommends examining whether we should shift away from other elected officials/bodies. However, I am concerned about moving too fast on some of these positions, particularly in areas that are working well such as the Town Clerk’s office, which is exemplary. If voters approve the shift to an elected Board of Assessors, then our entire finance team will be fully aligned under the leadership of the Select Board: treasurer (collects taxes), accountant (pays bills), assessors (assesses properties and sets the tax rate), and the finance director (sets the annual operating budget). With these four offices aligned, we will have addressed our most pressing structural problems.We need to rewrite our zoning bylaw to be what I call “pro-Belmont.”

• We need to rewrite our zoning bylaw to encourage thoughtful, high-quality commercial development. The bylaw is now so complicated and internally contradictory that no one—including the hard-working staff in the Office of Community Development—can figure out how to get small businesses from A to Z.
• We need to adopt form-based zoning, so that homeowners know what they can build or modify as-of-right on their homes. Our current zoning bylaw is arbitrary and irrational. The vast majority of lots are nonconforming, which means even minor changes require review by either or both the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals.
• We need to better protect current open space by designating it as such on our zoning map, so that zoning matches current use and intent. 
• Despite the provisions of the Dover Amendment, there are steps we can and should take to protect our communities from relentless expansion by the Belmont Hill School and Belmont Day School, neither of which currently make any payments in lieu of taxes (PILOT) despite making full use of the town’s public safety services and roads.

BCF: Belmont calls itself The Town of Homes. That seems like a dated, perhaps incomplete description. What’s missing? How do you think we should describe our town in one sentence? 

One sentence? Belmont: vibrant neighborhoods, great amenities, world-class schools, thriving families, engaged individuals.

Frankly, we currently are a “town of homes,” and that is a problem. We pay extremely high taxes, but we still don’t have the necessary revenue to fully fund schools or adequate town services. If we value the future of our community, we need to move beyond this overly narrow conception of Belmont’s current and future identity and encourage high-quality commercial development.

Apart from homes, Belmont has a significant number of nonprofits which pay no property taxes. These include the Belmont Hill School, the Belmont Day School, McLean Hospital, and Mass Audubon’s Habitat Education Center and Wildlife Sanctuary. Only Habitat provides a true public benefit for Belmont residents. A fifth nonprofit, the Belmont Country Club, receives a 75% property tax deduction on its extensive golf course. We need to reach PILOT agreements with each of these entities. In the case of Habitat, I believe they already provide a significant public good that counterbalances any financial contribution they would otherwise owe the town.

I personally don’t love the “Town of Homes” tagline, which, per Jane Sherwin, actually originated with a coal company. This is a quote from a talk Jane gave on the subject:

Once our farms had gone, who were we? The ‘Town of Homes” phrase suggests the difficulty of defining a new identity. Dick Betts [our late town historian] reports that the earliest reference he has found to this phrase was in advertising by the McGinniss coal yard in Waverley Square in the 1920s and 30s: “We heat Belmont, the Town of Homes.” A ‘Town of Homes’? Doesn’t it go without saying that, if you are a town, you have homes? Are we a Town of Homes because we have nothing else? Are we to be defined by an advertisement? Perhaps our agricultural history can help widen our understanding of who we are.

While drafting annual updates for Belmont’s FY2025 Community Preservation Act Plan, I persuaded the Community Preservation Committee to remove the “Town of Homes” reference in the open space section. At this point in our history, the phrase feels exclusionary and backward-looking. Belmont’s future will involve many types of homes, particularly if we implement requirements of the MBTA Communities Act to make the town more transit friendly and accessible. “Town of Homes” certainly doesn’t evoke a sense of great restaurants, cultural opportunities, athletics, and an accessible town friendly to cyclists and pedestrians. The Belmont of the future will certainly retain significant open space and tree-lined neighborhoods with a bucolic feel, but it will also include more densely developed areas with small businesses, medical office space, a few attractive hotels, and potentially even lab or commercial space close to Route 2.

BCF: What steps do you believe we need to make in the short-, medium -, and long term to enhance the quality of life in Belmont and to achieve a sound fiscal future that includes vibrant neighborhoods, excellent municipal services, and world-class schools?

We need to tackle our structural operating deficit where recurring expenses regularly outstrip recurring revenues. We constantly strive to find and implement efficient best practices such as with the Belmont Retirement System expenses and investments, but we ultimately must enhance our revenue stream if we want to fund world-class schools and excellent services. This can only happen by enhancing our commercial tax base, moving away from a 95/5 residential/commercial split. My hope is that we can achieve an 85/15 ratio (which is still a modest compared to fiscally healthy towns). Belmont is a wonderful community in a great location. We should be attractive to developers, but our zoning bylaws and policies have discouraged high-quality investment.

Short-term: We need a successful operating override to buy us time to implement other parts of our fiscal plan. Town Meeting needs to adopt the agenda I outline above in order to signal to voters that we have a realistic plan for growth that doesn’t just involve squeezing ever more money out of family budgets. Making these immediate changes is the only way we can convince voters to entrust us with an override until our plans for reasonable commercial growth can bear some financial fruit.

Medium-term: We need to rewrite the entire zoning bylaw to allow high-quality commercial development, reasonable renovation of our aging housing stock, some attractive and appropriate hotels, and higher-density housing in clearly demarcated mixed-use neighborhoods, which in turn will support a lively street scene and healthy small business districts.

. . . We ultimately must enhance our revenue stream if we want to fund world-class schools and excellent services. This can only happen by enhancing our commercial tax base, moving away from a 95/5 residential/commercial split.

Long-term: We have to look at western Belmont, the only stretch of truly open space in our geographically constrained town. We need to protect current open space (Lone Tree Hill, Rock Meadow, Habitat), which ironically is currently zoned single family. At the same time, we need to approach the town’s largest landowner, the Belmont Country Club, about potential development of some of their property.

I am extremely concerned about the current direction of our public schools, prioritizing so-called equity over academic excellence, particularly in the area of mathematics. Academic excellence and all kinds of diversity can and should co-exist, including intellectual diversity. As a special education attorney, I passionately believe that we need to serve the needs of all students, from those who require intensive academic support to those who simply want the freedom to explore their “affinities” (a term used for Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) students who have particular, in-depth interests or abilities.) Some children (often called “twice-exceptional”) need access to advanced subject matter to feel fully welcome in Belmont schools, and it is punitive to insist that they remain at an arbitrarily determined grade level that does not correspond to their affinity. 

If we do not protect our schools’ reputation for academic rigor and excellence, that will have a devastating impact on our sense of community. It will also remove a key reason that so many people want to live and work in Belmont and undermine next year’s override request, a major reason Newton’s override request failed this past spring. If we drive out dedicated families who value academic excellence, losing them to private schools or other communities, we will lose key pillars of support for robust school funding and parent engagement.