Proposed Streetlight Policy Sent Back To Committee. Delays In Adoption Of Ranked Choice Voting Decried.

Report On The Meeting Of The Amherst Town Council, August 7, 2023. Part I 

By Maura Keene

Because neither of the council clerks was available for this meeting, it was held entirely over Zoom. The recording can be viewed here. 

All councilors were present. Shalini Bahl-Milne (District 5) joined at 7:30 p.m. and Michele Miller (District 1) left at 10 p.m.

Staff: Paul Bockelman (Town Manager)

There were eight people in the Zoom audience.

Tension continued between those who support a proposed streetlight policy to reduce light pollution and those who worry about the decrease in safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users in the proposal. These differences resulted in the proposal for a new streetlight policy for Amherst being referred back to the Town Services and Outreach (TSO) committee of the council, as well as to the Finance Committee (FC), the Governance, Organization and Legislation (GOL) committee, and the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) for more input. The council will take up the policy again on November 20. TSO has been working on the policy since November 2022. The previous policy dates to 1991.

Proposal co-sponsor Mandi Jo Hanneke (at large) pointed out that most of the criticism of the proposed policy has to do with the placement of streetlights, but the sponsors were asked early on to remove locational specifications from the policy because it is such a controversial topic, and have done so. The current version requires lights to be shielded to remove glare (see dark sky initiatives) and remove trespass of streetlighting onto private property. She did not address the safety issue other than to say that making streets safer for pedestrians and bicyclists involves more than just lighting; it also involves street design and safety education.

Cathy Schoen (District 1) noted that parts of the policy that specify the type of allowable or required lighting, especially in the appendices, seem overly technical to the point of micromanaging. She also said that the proposal in the council packet is very different from the version presented almost a year ago for a first reading. Therefore, she said, the vote should not take place at this meeting. Andy Steinberg (at large) agreed, saying that the FC has not had a chance to consider the financial implications of the current proposal and should.

Anika Lopes (District 4) said that everyone seems to be on the same page as far as wanting to reduce light pollution, but the differences in opinions center around safety and walkability. She felt that taking a pause would give the council a chance to look at walkability holistically — from the views of people who depend on public transportation and those who walk or bike for leisure purposes, as well as seniors and those with a disability. She added that there was no need to rush, but the sponsors have been spending a lot of time on the proposal, and the council needs to determine at what point it should vote.

Shalini Bahl-Milne (District 5) said that TSO needs a clear process to solicit feedback from TAC and other committees, and to have them review the changes made to ensure that safety is not being compromised. Jennifer Taub (District 3) said she wanted a policy that TAC is comfortable with, as well as one that was financially feasible for the town.

Public Comment
Peggy Matthews-Nilsen said she believes the benefit of reducing light pollution far outweighs any need to maintain or increase streetlights for safety reasons or to induce people to walk, ride bicycles, and use public transportation. She felt reducing glare was more effective at improving safety than more lighting. Smith College Astronomy Professor James Lowenthal, who has been advising the sponsors and TSO, said that glare causes more accidents than too little light. 

Eve Vogel said she supports reducing unnecessary lighting, but wants strategic streetlighting for safety and comfort, especially for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vulnerable users of sidewalks and street shoulders. She has been part of a 15-year effort to reduce the use of private vehicles, since transportation is currently the number one contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in Massachusetts. Although she sees beneficial aspects of the current proposal, she said she feels that it will significantly worsen nighttime safety, and that lighting should not be reduced in areas north of downtown with a lot of late-night traffic, such as North Pleasant Street and East Pleasant Street, which does not have sidewalks, and other streets where the lighting is already inadequate. (See here, here, and here for Vogel’s three-part series on the prospects for supporting dark skies AND safe streets.) 

TAC Chair Tracy Zafian agreed, noting that the majority of deaths and serious injuries to bicyclists and pedestrians in Amherst have occurred at night. 

Rob Kushner lamented the light pollution that prevented him from seeing the Milky Way from his backyard as he was able to in the past, but agreed that a new lighting plan needs to promote safety for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Council Vote Delayed Until November
Pat DeAngelis (District 2) praised the rich and varied input on the plan and called for a meeting to analyze where conflicts exist and resolve these issues in order to make the policy work. TSO will review the policy with TAC, and the FC will discuss the financial implications. GOL is responsible for assuring that the policy is clear and consistent. The full council will again discuss it at the November 20 meeting.

No Progress On Ranked Choice Voting
Andy Anderson spoke during the public comment period noting that nothing has been accomplished to install ranked choice voting in town elections since his last appearance before the council in May. The council did not approach the attorney general as he had suggested, but instead went through the town attorney, who said nothing could be done. Now, the earliest the measure can go into effect is November 2025, four years after it was submitted to the legislature. He decried what he called “procrastination” on the issue.