Tell us a little about yourself. You can include your personal background, family, outside interests that are important to who you are as a person and a candidate.
I have lived in New England my entire life. My husband Rob and I moved to Lexington with our two daughters from Cambridge in 1991; we were lucky to buy a modest little cape during the housing downturn. Given our circumstances at the time, we wouldn’t be able to afford a home in Lexington if we were buying today. We chose Lexington for its reputation for excellent schools, and we weren’t disappointed. Our daughters had a wonderful experience from elementary through high school, gaining the skills and knowledge they needed to thrive. I worked at MIT for many years in a variety of administrative roles, finding its intense and dynamic environment both rewarding and consuming. When I retired, I found time to engage with Lexington’s dynamic community and was fortunate that Lexington encourages and values the contributions of its many volunteers. I have a passion for the outdoors, and have found my niche with groups including the bike committee, the ACROSS Lexington committee, the conservation stewards and, for the past two years, leading weekly Wake Up and Walk activities for anyone who would like to get up early and take a walk in the woods.
Why are you running for Town Meeting?
I first ran for Town Meeting in 2009, shortly after becoming a member and chair of the Bicycle Advisory Committee. Despite having lived in Lexington for 17 years, I realized I knew very little about town government or its departments—my time had been consumed by full-time work and family responsibilities. A colleague on the bike committee offered me valuable advice: “If you want to understand how things are done and who does them, you need to join Town Meeting.”
Over the years, both through my involvement in Town Meeting and my work with town staff on initiatives to improve bicycle safety, infrastructure, and overall bike- and pedestrian-friendliness, I have been continually impressed by how well Lexington is managed and how the decision-making process—including Town Meeting—adheres to a shared set of principles and values. I’ve also come to appreciate the truth in the saying, “Democracy is not a spectator sport.” Today, that sentiment feels more relevant than ever—both within Lexington, where we continue to face important and sometimes contentious issues, and on a much wider scale, at the highest levels of our own government and elsewhere. Being part of Town Meeting provides a meaningful sense of contributing to the democratic process and helping to shape the community’s future.
How has your past experience — whether in your professional life, elected office, or as a community leader — prepared you for a role in Town Meeting?
During my administrative career at MIT, I held various positions focused on aspects of the academic program, collaborating directly with faculty and student groups to navigate and resolve numerous complex and sensitive issues. These experiences deepened my understanding of the importance of calm, strategic, and persuasive leadership in facilitating effective consensus-building. Effective oversight and management of the Town of Lexington demand the same thoughtful leadership and decision-making, including within Town Meeting and among our boards and committees, where we confront challenging and sensitive matters on behalf of all residents and interest groups. As chair and member of the Bicycle Advisory Committee for 14 years, and as a member of a variety of working groups (including the Center Streetscape Committee and Transportation Safety Group), I have worked to apply the lessons learned during my working years, including the importance of listening and working well with others to find common ground.
What is the most important issue in this election to you personally, and what ideas do you have about how to address this issue?
For me, the most important and contentious issue confronting Town Meeting is the ongoing debate about the unexpectedly rapid rate of the development of multi-family housing projects under the MBTA housing mandate—certainly more rapid than when Town Meeting voted two years ago for Article 34. Citizens’ Article 2 (to amend Section 7.5 of the Zoning ByLaw, also known as the MBTA housing mandate) to be debated and voted on during the March 17 Special Town meeting proposes that a pause in the current process be undertaken to take into account possible adjustments to allow for more careful growth. The article also proposes to remove some areas from districts. Many of the projects already in the pipeline are within the borders of Precinct 8 as well as other parcels that appear on the existing zoning map for future development. Residents in Precinct 8 and elsewhere have concerns about the impact of too-rapid development on school enrollments, traffic, and general town services, as well as the size of some of the multi-family developments already in the pipeline. The development proposed at 3-4-5 Militia Drive is an example of housing that, in the opinion of many, is too dense and too tall for the surrounding area and for the impact on traffic. At the same time, it is extremely important for Lexington to provide more multi-family and inclusive housing; such options barely exist, and our community is the poorer for it. (When we moved here in 1991 there were more such options but it was already clear that Lexington was hardly a community that provided lower cost, attainable housing. Our modest cape is now certainly a tear-down for something much more expensive, not to mention larger.) There are credible arguments and advocacy groups on both sides that need to be heard and considered, and there is data being promoted that is either accurate or questionable. The next Planning Board public hearing on this article will be on February 26. I expect that many Town Meeting members and candidates for TM will be listening carefully and asking good questions of the Article 2 proponents, opponents, and Planning Board members.
I’m a good listener with a strong interest in people, which helps me understand and appreciate different perspectives. My ability to connect with others comes from a genuine curiosity about how our personal stories shape the way we see a situation or interpret facts. When it seems appropriate and possible, I share information or my own point of view that might offer new insights, but with respect and, I hope, without diminishing someone else’s opinion.
Last year, I was one of a small team of volunteers organizing the first annual Bikeway Block Party, an ambitious and ultimately very successful undertaking that required our small and determined planning group to work as a team, agree on a shared vision, collaborate on ideas, and communicate often. It was difficult at first: each of us had our own particular idea about what sort of all-day festival we had in mind and who had time and expertise to take the lead in various areas. We were a group who learned quickly to communicate, to value consensus over inflexibility, and to use humor often—good lessons for us all.