I was debating about posting today. In fact I told myself yesterday that I would take a few days off. I have been toying with the idea of actually stopping this exercise in its entirety. I am thinking sometime after Town Meeting might be the time. If not permanently ceasing the blog, at least a summer hiatus. The frequency is definitely going to go down though.
Could be a bunch of things ending, or at least changing right after Town Meeting. Right now it is just as likely there will be a bunch of things staying in place.
An interesting point on the staying in place concept, it appears the selectmen adopted a policy and procedure book/guide/format. Not a bad thing in and of itself. Actually a very good thing. Presumably it will be available very shortly for all to see.
The interesting thing was the proposal voted on apparently did not reference an executive secretary where appropriate, but rather a town manager. At least that is what I understood after listening to the discussion last night.
The correct point made prior to approving the "policy" was that reference to town manager should be changed to executive secretary. As was noted, we don't have a town manager. Chalk it up to wishful thinking, or simply word for word appropriation from another document, seems any proposal submitted right now is in fact extremely premature if it includes reference to the town manager.
There are three distinct camps forming on the concept. The first is it is not needed.
These people seem to be splintered into two factions. One is of the opinion that there is simply no need for change. I had an interesting discussion with someone yesterday in this camp. She believed that the solution was simply better communication between various boards, etc. would solve what is wrong.
In an ideal world, this might be all that is needed. Open and honest, frank discussion to a common goal. It would last until someone got a hair across a certain part of their anatomy and decided they were right and everyone else was wrong despite the decision.
It would last only until one board decided that it had been slighted by another board.
I don't need to go on, you get the drift.
The second faction of that "no change" camp fears the centralization of power. Well you essentially have it now. It isn't a complete coup d'etat which has pushed aside the structure in place, but it exists in large part. It reached its highest point of efficiency about 8 years ago. It has slowly be crumbling ever since.
It is leading to stronger pockets of Resistance in some quarters, and resigned and reluctant allegiance in others, not to mention a whole lot of fence sitting.
The second camp want a town manager form and believe it is needed now. The change is warranted and this particular move is a necessary component to doing what else is needed. I started out in this camp. I still believe we need a town manager concept, I believe sooner rather than later might be good, and am reserving final judgment for the proposal which we are told is coming.
But the ever growing word on the street, not to mention the whispers behind the scenes, seem to indicate that there is no immediate prospect of this happening through a vote at Town Meeting this May. I wouldn't bet money against a town manager passing, but neither would I bet against such a proposal being defeated.
The third camp is any proposal needs to be done only after a charter committee or a town government study committee authorized by Town Meeting. There are "whispers" that we may see some type of alternate article being submitted at Town Meeting. Again, until such an article actually surfaces, I reserve my judgment.
I truly believe such a study is needed. Even if a town manager is appointed presently (i.e. after adoption of special legislation etc., about an immediate year away), the proposal should, and for me must, include a provision for the formation of a study committee to deal with the other aspects of town government structure.
Suffice it to say, a significant refrain building in volume is from people who support a Town Manager concept, but aren't going to vote for it presently. I don't count this as a fourth "camp" as the "goal" is not to appoint a town manger immediately (as defined above). This puts them squarely in camp three. The reasons are radically different though. If you can't guess why that is, think just a bit and it should come to you. If it doesn't, well I haven't reached the point where I am ready to state the argument.
Town Meeting this May is indeed going to be significant. It is going to establish by its votes just what it thinks about the implementation part of any revenue policy. It is going to establish just what it thinks about the leadership perspective going forward, and it is going to send messages that a great many people should be paying attention to.
Enough on that headache ...
The other significant point from last night's selectmen's meeting was the adoption of the town's harassment policy. I suppose the good thing is we now have a formal one. Since it has been adopted it would seem that now is the time the public may review it, comment on it and then it could be changed if warranted.
I was a bit confused about why you couldn't put a draft proposal for something like this out to the public for comment prior to adoption. But I won't fault the vote, as something newer in place has to be better than than what is on the books. Right?
Let me know what you think of it when you read it.
There is a candidate's night Wednesday. It is at the Council on Aging building. Don't remember the actual time, but this is the one run through the Govt. Access Channel. If it is going to be conducted along the same lines as last year, the only good thing about the lack of candidates and contested races will be this one will mercifully be much shorter this year.
Facts are going to have very little to do with the contested races this year. Turnout, pure and simple, will determine the races. Even a low turnout could hold some surprises.
That's it for today. Be safe.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Prior to posting a comment, please review "Comment Rules" page.