Disability Commissioner Patricia Sheely tells the council that she feels much safer on reconfigured North Street. Right, Councilor at Large Karen Kalinowksy disagrees with the city solicitor's opinions on her ballot question.

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The City Council on Tuesday shot down Councilor at Large Karen Kalinowsky's attempt to place a question on the Nov. 7 ballot that asks voters if North Street should return to a four-lane way.

After weeks of confusion, it voted against sending the question to City Clerk Michele Benjamin; Councilor at Large Pete White motioned to table with the intent to rescind in two weeks.  

The decision came after an hour of unclear debate on whether or not a January vote secured the question on the ballot.  

"I don't really understand why this is becoming such a big issue. I don't. I just believe that the voters should have the right to vote on this," Kalinowsky said.

"I know a lot of people have passion on what's going on and I get it but how else to allow people to have voice than to allow them to vote?"

At the beginning of the meeting, handfuls of residents spoke of safety concerns with a four-lane North Street and in support of bike lanes. 

Disability Commission member Patricia Sheely is against putting a safety issue up for a vote. While she understands that the majority wants to get somewhere faster, she said the minority needs to be considered.

"When there were four lanes of traffic, two lanes going each way on North Street, it was a challenge, even at a crosswalk," Sheely said.

"And now with the bike lanes, it is safer to cross, traffic is slowed down, and I don't feel like I'm taking my life in my hands every time that I want to cross the street so this is not a topic that should be decided by a vote. Safety is for everybody, not an inconvenience."

Over the summer, a report was presented to the council that revealed a 77 percent decrease in crashes with the new configuration.

"In this case, we are setting our voters up for failure," Ward 6 Councilor Dina Lampiasi said.

"There is a possibility of returning to a situation of death for some people. Somebody just died on West Street and we're actually debating whether or not to have more people die on North Street. This is ridiculous."

In January, the council voted in favor of Kalinowsky's petition to place a question on the general election ballot to return North Street to four lanes of traffic with turn lanes. In the draft question, a "yes" would require the city to remove the existing protected bike lanes from North Street and a "no" vote would allow the protected bike lanes to remain on North Street.

President Peter Marchetti said this was unclear because the question makes no reference to bike lanes, as the language was amended out the question for repetitiveness, but the summary refers to bike lanes.

There was a perceived understanding that it would be referred to the city solicitor for revisions and returned to the council at its next meeting. Two weeks ago, a charter objection hauled conversation on the petition because there was confusion on whether the former vote confirmed it on the ballot or not.

On Tuesday, City Solicitor Stephen Pagnotta gave the panel three possible actions: to approve the question and place it on the ballot, to say it is unfinished business, or to rescind the vote councilors took two sessions ago.

It was determined that reconsidering the petition under unfinished business was not allowed and two options remained.

"[The City Council] can vote to send it to the clerk's office and if it votes to do that, then the petition, as drafted, gets on the ballot," Pagnotta said.

"If it votes it down, then I don't think it's on the ballot because it's not getting referred to the clerk's office to be placed on the ballot."

Ward 1 Councilor Kenneth Warren made it clear that he would vote against the ballot question in November but argued that previous actions had already placed it on the ballot.

He, Kalinowksy, and Ward 2 Councilor Charles Kronick voted to send the question to Benjamin. Ward 7 Councilor Anthony Maffuccio was absent.

"I think the vote's been voted," Warren said, adding that there should not be an immediate motion to rescind so that further research can be done.

Councilor at Large Earl Persip, who was not present for the January vote, observed that there was "confusion like no other" on this topic. Residents speaking at open mic also cited confusion.

"I don't know how we could say that we voted for something that wasn't final. You voted for what? That's what I still don't understand," he said.

Benjamin was not comfortable with taking on this question given its shaky introduction.

"There is so much confusion here tonight I would never want to make the decision of this question on what to put on the ballot," she said.

"The question doesn't match the 'yes' and 'no' and everyone here is still completely confused.  Every resident in the city is probably confused but I can say that I would not want to make a decision on what the 'yes' or 'no' should stay on the ballot."

Before tabling, the council voted to clarify the language of Kalinowsky's question. In the updated language, a "yes" vote would require the city to return North Street to four lanes of traffic with turn lanes and a "no" vote would allow the two lanes to remain.

• Most Read

• Most Comments

• All News

• Blogroll

• Photos