Well, I did get a look at the draft warrant for the Special Town Meeting. Loads of stuff. Well not quite loads. Missing is any reference for articles 5, 6 and 7. Seems those articles are still be mulled over.
These are the proposed DOR related articles. Presumably no. 5 will be seeking the appointment of a town manager, with the abolishment of the elected BPW and Personnel Boards. Article 6 is the combination of the treasurer with tax collected, or so I am guessing. Article 7, well that would be the revamp of the Finance Committee.
The fact that the articles weren't even listed (the draft goes from Article 4 to Article 8. Not even the normal one line "Article 5 -" for example). Not to sure as the why on that. It is something out of the norm. So what can it mean?
Well could be as simple as the order hasn't been determined. Could be that one or more of the articles actually won't make the ballot. Could be a bunch of things.
The one that most definitely should be on the warrant is the treasurer/collector. It is the one that really should pass with hopefully little difficulty. It should be done whether you want a town manager or not. It makes sense, if done right it will stream line the way money is handled, and should result in savings to the town.
The next one with the best odds of passing would be some revamp of the fin com make up. Is some change needed to the fin com by-law, yes. does that mean the change has to involve a reduction in numbers, no it doesn't. I truly can make compelling cases for either side of that particular specific.
It is a matter o opinion whether 13 is to many.
The biggest issue with a big number committees is the need to insure to fill vacancies. there are various ways to solve the problem that our current system creates.
the method of appointment is indeed unique. Following the law for our town to the strict letter, that right for 12 of 13 members rest solely with the chair for each precinct. In a growing trend over the years, chairs have been appointing members by vote of the precinct at a precinct meeting. Certainly an acceptable method, in my humble mind.
I am not in any way supportive of one proposal being tossed about to get rid of the requirement of specific representation from each precinct. While members should always be cognizant of the fact that they are members of the TOWN's finance committee, providing representation from each precinct does much to provide a town wide perspective on issues.
Like it or not, areas of Fairhaven still consider themselves to be separate enclaves in a bigger encampment. While that can be problematic at times, it is also not a bad thing. The fact you have different representation from the various segments of town provides a more diverse perspective on issues.
Last, but not least, I am comfortable with the system.
You can say what you want, but with a perspective going back decades, I don't see the fact that we have two members from each precinct, with an at large member, as being the specific cause of any problems, real or perceived. I don't want to see a smaller committee potentially made up of a majority of members who very well could be appointed from a distinct area in Town.
No matter how impartial you believe you are, not matter how fair you plan to be, no matter how many good intentions you have, no matter whether you lean left or right, the human tendency is to favor the "local" perspective.
As far as ensuring people with proper financial experience, I have never been 100% convinced of that concept. Do you need people with the ability to grasp the concept? absolutely. Can I perhaps point out examples of appointments over the years that perhaps should not have been made, in my opinion? Absolutely.
I could also definitely point out appointments of people who would most definitely meet the qualifications briefly discussed in the DOR report and bandied about which in hindsight should not have been made. Just as I can point out such appointments which most definitely would not have been made under the potential new qualifications, and which would have resulted in very good and solid members being kept from serving.
You will have good and bad appointments under any system, with any number of people on the committee.
In the end Town Meeting will make the choice. In the end the Finance Committee is an arm of the Town Meeting body. How it functions and under what method will be left to the decision of that body.
What amazes me most however the simple fact that with just over 6 weeks to town meeting, we still do not have any of the proposals. Maybe we will see those proposals as soon as Tuesday. That assumes the Selectmen take a votes on Monday. An event it seems as rare as an eclipse.
Okay, that is it for today. The spring time snow surprise has set me behind for the morning (actually I forgot to hit the publish button before I went out to deal with the stuff). Outside of there being too much of it, it could be worse. Nice and fluffy. Roads are pretty good. Just remember, Be Safe.
I have to admit that I am still somewhat unsure about a major department choice. On the one hand an article to ban the BPW altogether. OK, on the other hand to keep it as is. But what is it and what is it about to be?
ReplyDeleteIs the BPW member engaged in a seat for Selectmen to remain on BPW if elected to Selectmen? How do we know someone will automatically resign? It would make sense if the person had resigned first, so that another empty seat had gone on the ballot. If the incumbent automatically forfeits their BPW seat, then an appointment prior to town meeting by the incumbent, now as a selectmen and the rest of BPW? I suppose.
The town seems concerned about the makeup of committees, in which precinct they represent, for very obvious ethics about fairness, but absolutely no discussion about the current members of an elected BPW, all living in precinct five, and then a new appointment to BPW, who lives where? To someone who lives in precinct five or should they not be allowed to apply? Will that be the first time we have an appointment to an elected seat, but one sixth of our population need not apply?
Come to think of it, the guy to replace the BPW also comes from precinct five. So there it is, sewer and water issues are paramount issues to precinct five, containing the problems and smells of two sewer treatment plants and a multitude of well, septic and sewer issues. It’s a good thing the Sconticut Neck Sewer Extension Project was not currently being planned, or the entire BPW might have to abstain!
So until the town issues become precinct six issues or precinct one issues, or maybe they are about to be…
I don't get all this hubbub, or lack thereof, about precinct five representation on the BPW. Everyone on that board earned their seat by winning their election and they deserve to be there. If one wants better representation from other precincts there is an easy way to do it: get them elected and accept the result.
ReplyDeletePhil Washko
Exactly! So then lets stop the hubhub about Finance Committe members having to be appointed by precincts or precincts chairs. We should be allowed the best Finance Committee members no matter where they reside, just as each and every other single board and committee in town. Either we all elect them or have the moderator appoint, solely on qualifications.I could accept that result.
ReplyDelete"We should be allowed the best Finance Committee members no matter where they reside, just as each and every other single board and committee in town."
ReplyDeleteYou are not seriously attempting to argue what I think you are arguing with this statement are you?
They should be registered to vote in Fairhaven.
ReplyDeleteMr. Code IMHO you are comparing apples to oranges. The BPW is an elected board by the whole town. At one point the BPW did constitute a member from each precinct but that was changed in the 1970's or 80's for good reason. As all elected boards, planning schools, selectman ect are elected by the whole town and it comes down to elections as always.
ReplyDeleteThe finance committee is the advisory board to town meeting. The type of Town meeting we have has representatives from all six precincts (elected by precinct). Therefore the finance committee should reflect that as well. Whether it is 7 members (one from each precinct and one at large) or 9 (one from each precinct and two at large) or the current formation or 13. Each precinct should have a seat on the fin com to maintain its credibility to TM. Otherwise you lose the checks and balances that it provides now. The moderator can appoint or precinct chair i have no preference each has their pluses and minuses respectively.
Scott Fernandes
Fin Com
Precinct 3
We all fail to realize that the Fincom is an advisory board.Whether you have a membership of all professional people or a random board,their votes will ultimately be decided by town meeting.Any attempt to supposedly stack the deck of appointees will be thwarted.
ReplyDelete