As someone commented elsewhere yesterday, I took the past weekend off from blogging. That I did. With the weather breaking more weekends off may become a more common occurrence.
The blog can tend to get to be more of a chore than anything, especially during the "slow" season.
The blog can tend to get to be more of a chore than anything, especially during the "slow" season.
I enjoy the back and forth on the issues when it happens, which is too seldom. I like getting e-mails from folks on topics and information they want to share. Occasionally some of you simply write because you want to blow off steam. Not a problem at all, seriously.
But absent that hot button issue, and believe me I am not looking for one nor want one with the name "Fairhaven" in it anywhere, I usually have to shake the cobwebs to find something that I am willing to write about.
There is absolutely plenty of "stuff" out there to do a piece on. It comes down to want the end game is or should be really. You always should have an end game in mind, at least I think you should.
Take the blog itself. There is definitely an end game in mind for this blog, along with shall we say an end frame.
Enough of that for now ...
Seems like I didn't miss too much by the difficulty in viewing the on-line S-T yesterday morning. Old news is still news right?
The Selectmen will be dealing with various appointments to the different Boards and Committees under their jurisdiction and appointment powers (so will other elected entities which make such appointments).
Based on a e-mail received, there is apparently some chatter about this. Whether it is simply a result of the cold and chilly mornings or something more, time will tell.
Over the course of the years there have been a few attempts to limit the number of boards and committees any one individual can serve on. There are some very valid points both for and against this proposition. Imagine being a petitioner for anything, facing one board and then appearing before another board with jurisdiction on another aspect of your project/petition seeing some very familiar faces.
In some instances the make up of a particular committee requires a specific appointment from various other town committees or boards. In those instances however the jurisdiction is usually limited to specific purposes dealing with very limited matters.
So there couldn't be any blanket prohibition.
Some other committees, in the nature of ad hoc or advisory committees, well to me there is nothing wrong with appointing people to these types of committees if they serve elsewhere. There is nothing wrong with it so long as everyone committees remain as ad hoc or advisory committees.
When committees have decision making powers however, this can lead to some interesting scenarios.
Additionally, the Selectmen (or other Board where applicable), as team mangers, have the ultimate say it who goes into the line-up card for many committees. So, as far as any prohibition, it depends on your faith in the manager I suppose.
Part of the problem will always be getting people to serve. So do you turn down an otherwise qualified candidate, sometimes the only candidate because he or she serves elsewhere?
Government has to run folks, and with volunteer boards and committees, the way it runs is by the people who are willing to step to the plate. The manager ultimately fills in the line-up based on the people willing to take a swing at bat.
You may not always agree with who gets appointed or who gets by-passed. Often there are very solid reasons as to why. sometimes, I agree, you have to wonder why.
Town Meeting has been presented with options in the past limiting the number of swings for any one individual. Town Meeting has rejected that option.
So, it is what it is.
No matter what your preference, the solution in the end is people willing to get involved. Without that, you can complain about the manager all you want, but you have to have enough people to play the game, if you don't it is a forfeit.
That's it for today. Want to publish early enough so no one has withdrawals. Be safe.
But absent that hot button issue, and believe me I am not looking for one nor want one with the name "Fairhaven" in it anywhere, I usually have to shake the cobwebs to find something that I am willing to write about.
There is absolutely plenty of "stuff" out there to do a piece on. It comes down to want the end game is or should be really. You always should have an end game in mind, at least I think you should.
Take the blog itself. There is definitely an end game in mind for this blog, along with shall we say an end frame.
Enough of that for now ...
Seems like I didn't miss too much by the difficulty in viewing the on-line S-T yesterday morning. Old news is still news right?
The Selectmen will be dealing with various appointments to the different Boards and Committees under their jurisdiction and appointment powers (so will other elected entities which make such appointments).
Based on a e-mail received, there is apparently some chatter about this. Whether it is simply a result of the cold and chilly mornings or something more, time will tell.
Over the course of the years there have been a few attempts to limit the number of boards and committees any one individual can serve on. There are some very valid points both for and against this proposition. Imagine being a petitioner for anything, facing one board and then appearing before another board with jurisdiction on another aspect of your project/petition seeing some very familiar faces.
In some instances the make up of a particular committee requires a specific appointment from various other town committees or boards. In those instances however the jurisdiction is usually limited to specific purposes dealing with very limited matters.
So there couldn't be any blanket prohibition.
Some other committees, in the nature of ad hoc or advisory committees, well to me there is nothing wrong with appointing people to these types of committees if they serve elsewhere. There is nothing wrong with it so long as everyone committees remain as ad hoc or advisory committees.
When committees have decision making powers however, this can lead to some interesting scenarios.
Additionally, the Selectmen (or other Board where applicable), as team mangers, have the ultimate say it who goes into the line-up card for many committees. So, as far as any prohibition, it depends on your faith in the manager I suppose.
Part of the problem will always be getting people to serve. So do you turn down an otherwise qualified candidate, sometimes the only candidate because he or she serves elsewhere?
Government has to run folks, and with volunteer boards and committees, the way it runs is by the people who are willing to step to the plate. The manager ultimately fills in the line-up based on the people willing to take a swing at bat.
You may not always agree with who gets appointed or who gets by-passed. Often there are very solid reasons as to why. sometimes, I agree, you have to wonder why.
Town Meeting has been presented with options in the past limiting the number of swings for any one individual. Town Meeting has rejected that option.
So, it is what it is.
No matter what your preference, the solution in the end is people willing to get involved. Without that, you can complain about the manager all you want, but you have to have enough people to play the game, if you don't it is a forfeit.
That's it for today. Want to publish early enough so no one has withdrawals. Be safe.
Qualified for a position, or not so qualified, it takes a serious commitment of time and effort to do justice to an appointment.
ReplyDeleteAnd regardless of how qualified an appointed party is, there always exists a likelihood that decisions will be scrutinized by someone who doesn't want to take the time or make the effort to get involved.
Can you imagine how many candidates there might be, if it was easy to serve, and there were no Monday morning quarterbacks?
Maybe some of the monday morning quarterbacks should try play the Sunday games before they gives us their opinions.Many times the game players give their best and are defeated when the managers take the ball and play a different game. The players intentions are skewed when the managers are playing for themselves an not the team.AKA town of Fairhaven.
ReplyDeleteWhat you describe will only be realized when those in the grandstands come forward to play on the team.
ReplyDeleteYou're right. All of the most talented players can be on one team, but a bad manager can still prevent them from being successful.