While the record for comments on a post was by no means close to broken over the past few days, I noticed a bit of interest from the page views nonetheless.
Today's question, if you want to answer one: If you had the final say on just one change to the structure of town government, what would you change, and why? I know actually two questions, but hey consider this a two for one day.
I will also be allowing open line format today. Still not sure what if anything makes it into this post, so just in case it turns out to be another nothing day, I will put that option out there too.
So where are we going today, next week, over the next few months? Who the heck knows?
We all have ideas, opinions, criticisms, etc. We all seemingly know best. Proffering solutions and ideas as readily as taking a breath of air. We does include me, I know.
Where does it get us? Not very far.
While a journey of a thousand miles does indeed begin with one small step, the path is very treacherous at times and quite frankly the journey is a long and tiring one.
I am beginning to see more and more the attraction for jumping on the band wagon. I really am. Just need to find a wagon with some room on it.
Everyone has an easy solution to every problem that will resolve the problem to their advantage, We have some groups and boards throwing out suggestions that usually amount to nothing more than a tit for tat, a muscle flex, a desire to look important. That by the way is not, repeat not, intended to reflect on some recent actions commented in some recent posts.
There is simply no central direction. No real consensus. No mechanism to form it.
Many feel the recent storms we have faced on the political front are passed us. We are simply in the the calm of the eye. If there is change, that in itself will cause more difficulties that will have to be dealt with, not the least of which is the battle to get to it.
If we do little or nothing to change what we have the existing structure will continue to be battered until it simply collapses under its own weight.
Either way, we are on a stormy path for about five years, and admittedly that statement is based purely on an individual perspective. The difference at the end of that time period will either be a town on the road to a planned "recovery" or a town then faced with deciding how to recover.
So after such an uplifting read to this point, I will again ask the questions: If you had the final say on just one change to the structure of town government, what would you change, and why?
Be safe.
Stop allowing any individual to serve on multiple boards.
ReplyDeleteEasy to say, and logical to want, but impracticle until more citizens, hopefully with at least a remote background in the board's scope of concern, are willing to step forward and volunteer their time (or serve for the small $ amount paid to some boards).
DeleteDo the boards that currently have members who serve on other boards have more than the minimum number of members? I can imagine the BOH doesn't, but what about the Board of Appeals or Planning Board? If a board already has the minimum number of board members, then someone shouldn't be allowed on that board if he/she already participates on another board. He/she should have to decide which board they want to serve.
DeleteWe need a Board of Health, but could there be 5 members instead of 3? With the current board at 3 members, we see the same two members always in agreement and the other one on the opposite side of the fence. Perhaps having a couple other members will add insight to the discussions and break up the monopoly.
ReplyDeleteIf town worker's salaries are public record (and made readily available by the FNN,) why aren't their benefit packages? And could the town benefit by having an expert in the field of negotiations do so?
ReplyDeleteCan we privatize more town services? It would allow us to shop for service and value.
ReplyDeleteA negotiator for town wages an benefits is a novel idea,but town meeting ,many members being town employees keep this in there favor.Plus the promoting of former union employees to lead the departments keep this system intact.
ReplyDeleteIt is pretty ridiculous that some town meeting members are allowed to vote for their own department's budget. It's a flaw in the system.
DeleteYup! a legal flaw,only in America like the man says........
ReplyDeleteI didn't say 'legal' flaw.
ReplyDeleteI meant it's a flaw because workers in the private sector usually don't have a say in the corporation's budget.
To allow it when dividing the town funds seems like a conflict of interest.
When all employees in every level of government are automatically enrolled in Obamacare, then we might hear an uproar about what's legal.
ReplyDeleteLegal flaw,conflict of interest,call it as you may it still gives the same results ,a vote to raise your pay.Obamacare you say ,I thought we were applying for Healthcare.gov.which is almost a mirror image of the Mass. Health care we now have.Unless of course the reference is to the tea party acronym for health care under Obamas presidency..
ReplyDeletePeople weren't being forced onto Mass. Health care. Companies weren't decreasing employees' hours so that they didn't have to cover them under the government plan. The comment has no intended reference to the tea party.
DeleteGet a full time Conservation Agent.
ReplyDeleteGet rid of tourism director and replace with economic development.
Get a town manager.
Write policies and procedures for all boards. And don't allow people to sit on boards that are a conflict with day jobs. As well as sitting on more than 1 board, we don't want to burn out all volunteers.
Nobody was forced into Mass. Health care ,but they are being fined if they dont get some type of health care.Sound familiar..Retired employes of the town are not forced into Medicare,but the private sector retirees.Lets finally clear up all expenses that should be charged to the enterprise funds to let the ratepayers know what the real costs are ...
ReplyDeleteTechnically no, however there have always been tax consequences for not being enrolled, Retired employee now are required, i.e. forced to enroll in medicare. It took a change in state law to do it, despite the financial benefit to the town when it could have been done otherwise, This applies to all future and the bulk of present retirees. There are essentially a handful that were "grandfathered" out. The town essentially now acts as the supplement insurer, and part D provider.
ReplyDeleteFinally,now we can now work on adjusting the pension liability which assumes unreasonable rate of returns which we the taxpayers fund..Our pension returns on the open market seem to fall in line with the economy.Seems like the ma. governor is looking to address this problem.
ReplyDelete