By Patrick Brodrick

            Three years ago, when Joseph Notaro Jr. was campaigning for a seat on the Clinton Board of Selectmen he filled out the political profile for the Times & Courier, and in the portion reserved for the candidate’s favorite quote he typed something along the lines of, “You come into this world with a cupful of integrity, and outside of a few minor spills, you should leave with the same amount.”

            The attribution to the quote was simply listed as a saying from a friend’s father. It’s a profound quote, and one that I’ve since tried to remember – it’s just too bad that Notaro, apparently, already seems to have forgotten it.

            When I recently read a quote from Notaro, who also serves as chair of the Open Space Acquisition Committee (OSAC), the group tasked with finding funding to purchase 62-acres known as the Rauscher Farm on Clamshell Road, claiming he had no idea the town’s failure to enact a conservation restriction on the Wekepeke land in Sterling could affect the town’s ability to secure grant funding to preserve the open space, I realized that maddening dripping noise I could hear inside my head was a little more integrity splashing over the metaphorical rim of Notaro’s cup.

            Drip… drip…

            While several of the officials I spoke to for a recent story on the repercussions of failing to enact the protective order stopped short of calling Notaro’s claims of ignorance a lie, one has to wonder if it’s possible that he didn’t know about the possible conflicts.

            Partly because of my old life as a journalist, but primarily because I was a staunch supporter of purchasing the Rauscher Farm, I attended a lot of OSAC meetings, and I clearly remember Jim French, land acquisitions coordinator for the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, mentioning the importance of finalizing any unresolved issues regarding open space. And I’m not alone; several people I spoke to that attended the meeting remember French’s comments as well.

            But French wasn’t the only one heralding the potential conflict between securing grant funding and the unresolved conservation restriction.

            At a tour of the Rauscher Farm this past summer, Ian Bowles, secretary for the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, joked that “he didn’t have his checkbook with him” but the town was in a good position to secure grant funding as long as there were no unresolved issues regarding open space.

            It should be noted that Notaro chaired the meeting with French, and led the walk-through of the former dairy farm. And while I wasn’t privy to any advice offered by Sudbury Valley Trustees, one of the most prestigious firms in the state in dealing with land acquisitions and was working with the town in its efforts to buy the farm, I’d be surprised if its representatives didn’t raise any warning flags as well.

            Drip…drip…drip

            But the question isn’t who knew what and when, or even how could the chairman of the Open Space Acquisition Committee not know about this possible calamity.

            The question that needs to be asked is, what does this mean for the town? And, in my humble opinion, a wrong decision regarding this issue could spell financial doom for Clinton.

            When efforts to purchase the Rauscher Farm were beginning to ramp up, supporters, including Notaro, trumpeted the better-than-average chances the town had of securing funds through the Self-Help Grant.

            And now that the state came through with more than $350,000 in grant money, the same people that all but promised us that funding are using slight-of-hand tricks to pull it off the table like some crooked three-card-Monty dealer.

            Chairman of the Board of Selectmen Robert Pasquale Jr. said at the board’s last meeting that, “voters approved purchasing the land for $2.6 million.” And while he is correct, voters were assured the town would get that grant money by officials and private residents lobbying for votes.

            Could you imagine if those same officials stood up at Town Meeting and said, “Well, we have a good chance at getting more than $350,000 to help offset the cost of purchasing the land, but if we do we might not accept it because we don’t like some of the rules that are attached to it.”

            Whatever official even tried to toe that line would have been lucky to make it out of the building without being skinned alive.

            Refusing to enact the conservation restriction is also putting in jeopardy the millions of dollars that could potentially come pouring into town from Nestle, the world-renown chocolate manufacturer looking to harvest water from the Wekepeke, who is lobbying to have the conservation restriction put in place to protect the water quality.

            The possibility of losing that small fortune alone would cause any rationally thinking politician to wake in the middle of the night, soaked in sweat and a scream trapped in their throat at the political repercussions of such a colossal misstep.

            But those greenbacks are a pittance to what Clinton would lose if our elected officials simply turned their noses up and walked away from $350,000 in grant money. We’d never see another dime of state money. In fact, you’d be able to hear the screaming laughter from the statehouse every time a grant application came in with a postmark from Clinton.

            Make no mistake about it, if officials refuse to sign the Conservation Restriction it will spell financial ruin for this town.

Drip…drip…drip…drip…

            Like a full-scale prison riot, this situation has the dangerous potential to spin completely out of control, the only difference is in this instance it’s the residents of Clinton that are going to get screwed.

            There has been talk of holding a special Town Meeting because voters “didn’t know what they were voting on” when they approved placing the Conservation Restriction on the Wekepeke several years ago.

Are you kidding me? Since when do town officials get to hold vote after vote until they get the desired result they are looking for?

            People have said this is a complicated situation. I disagree. In fact, I think it’s frighteningly simple. The voters have spoken. They want a Conservation Restriction placed on the Wekepeke, and any elected official trying to spin this situation to make themselves, or the town, look like a victim need to fall the fuck in line.

            And for Notaro’s sake I hope the revelations come soon because otherwise that cupful of integrity he mentioned several years ago is soon going to be empty.

            Drip…drip…drip… drip…drip….