Regionalization - another chapter; and an Appeal

Another Chapter

As all of you are acutely aware, we are consistently bombarded with bits and pieces touting the benefits of regionalization. In principal, the concept makes sense. In practice, it becomes somewhat less of a benefit when applied over a broad spectrum.

Why this topic and why today?

Yesterday's post, One Special Act At A Time, is a prime example of just how much an attempt at regional anything can run amok. How what you think you are getting involved in one thing, turns into something entirely different.

The problem with regionalized services is the fact that the concept is "allowed" under the law. Laws can and do change, i.e. see yesterday's piece. Look at the structure of the regional school system we are apart of (G.N.B.R.T.H.S.). When Fairhaven, Dartmouth and New Bedford adopted the compact, the agreement signed was subsequently changed by the act of the legislature. 

  

There are certain aspects, and certain concepts where regionalization can work. The biggest benefit is it does provide an economy of scale. Done right, multiple communities can realize a savings in personnel costs, equipment costs, and administrative costs. Purchasing in bulk can result in tremendous savings.

It would not be a situation where you could automatically halve the costs in say a two town situation, or by 2/3 in a three community scenario, yet, initial savings and long term operating costs would, or should I say "should" be less.

I think we can all see the potential. Do we realize the significant and potential, not to mention actually existing drawbacks.

The biggest one, the fact that a change in the law allowing for the regionalized services can result in a change of the agreement, with essentially no recourse. How many of you would enter into an agreement with anyone, knowing that a third part could modify it?

Other drawbacks, think bigger sized schools, lack of local oversight if you don't dot your i's and cross your t's (which can happen even if you do), even in some circumstances increased costs.

Would Fairhaven have agreed to regionalization for a vocational school system if at the time its was told it would end up paying more per student after state aid then New Bedford? Would Dartmouth if it knew the same concerning Fairhaven and New Bedford?

Would Town Meeting have approved the first amendment to the special act scheme establishing an advisory committee if it had known what was coming down the road?

Not sure of the answers, but I wish I knew then, what I know now.

An Appeal

Another article on the Town Meeting Warrant seeks to make the Board of Appeals an elected board. Let us do away with an pretense about the intended effect of such a move. Plain and simple it is to get a board in place that will do what you want it to do. Here it is:

  

ARTICLE 21 – ELECTED APPEALS BOARD

We the registered voters of the Town of Fairhaven petition the town meeting to vote on the Article to To see if the Town shall vote to adopt a by law to be enacted immediately, commencing with the spring election of 2013, and to take any other action relative thereto, as follows: The Appeals Board will be an elected board with the same responsibilities as currently exist. The terms of office to be three years.

Fortunately, the law authorizing an appeal board General Laws, Chapter40A, Section12 sets out the specific procedure for the appointment of one, and the alternate procedure, being unless otherwise provided by charter.  In our case, as it exists, it would mean a petition to the legislature for another special act.  

I could be wrong on this, but this is a dimes for dollar bet as far as I am concerned, as written the article would not receive such special legislation if passed.

Nor should it be passed in my opinion.  

We can all question the wisdom of some appointments that have been made over the years.  Do we want a board with the function of this particular board to be an elected one?  

As far as I can determine only two communities in the Commonwealth have a specifically elected Board of Appeals. Certainly not a reason in and of itself to disregard the option.  Yet one that should make us stop and think as to why that is.

Hey if this is what people want, so be it.  But do we really need another board in town that is going to be influenced in the decision making process by whether the decision will affect its members chance at being re-elected?  We are not talking leadership positions here.  

We are dealing with positions where people are suppose to interpret existing law and make a decision based on the law and facts before it, not whether they personally like what is before them.

I am not trying to kid anyone by assuming that personal opinions do not come into play.  What we all should think about is whether a personal opinion might be one of many factors involved in such a decision, or the primary factor.  

In the end it will be what it will be.  

Sorry, but I have to add once again the fact that this being one of a number of articles submitted by a certain group, had a little more thought gone into what needed to be done, and how to write the article, we wouldn't be spending time talking about the fact that the article "as is" would be ineffective (putting a p.c. spin on it).

I thought I read somewhere a statement by someone they were confident the articles would pass muster?  Heck some of the articles we have to deal with would be worth passing, just to see the fallout from passing them.  One should never bite their own nose just to spite someone else's face however.