It is going to be a bumpy road

Not an overly long blog today, at least not in the sense the issue to be addressed will get the attention it deserves.  I am going to need some time to put together the piece I have in mind after attending last night's government study committee meeting. Before I get to that., some town news.

Seems there now exist the potential for a contested race for Selectmen.  Steve Riley, current member of the BPW amd its chair, has taken out papers to run for selectmen.  Charlie Murphy, incumbent and chair of the selectboard has also taken out papers.  

From a blogging prospective contested races are always a plus.  Of course until papers are turned in, there is no contest, just the potential.  Not sure if it is because I was outside just a few minutes ago or because of the prospect of the contest, but I seem to be rubbing my hands together over this one.

Anyway, it will be what it will be, and time will tell.

Back to last night, and the meeting.  The Town Government Study Committee met with the BPW.  At some point I need to review the tape.  While I was present, there are certain things said I want to make absolutely certain I have absolutely the correct words/phrasing used.

The biggest hoot of the night, and I do mean hoot, should have been over one of the last bits and pieces of the meeting.  From a member of the BPW came the issue that if you go to a Town Administrator, we are going to have to renegotiate  the union contracts because of all the references to the BPW in the contracts, and the unions are going to want something in return.  

Let us assume for the sake of argument two things are true (only one of which i Personally believe is, by the way).  The first the Town Administrator concept is what is best for the town. the second is the proposition that we would have to renegotiate is true.  

My response is, so what?

Seriously?  That should be a reason not to change the government structure?  Red herring and smoke might be a recipe for an appealing appetizer, but it isn't one for a satisfying or substantial meal. Just because a union asks for something doesn't mean you have to give it.  The word no is a very simply word.  One syllable, two letters.

When you actually have to, you are absolutely entitled to go to the bargaining table with that word firmly implanted in your mind.  You are absolutely entitled to stay steadfast in your opinion that the word should apply.  Good faith bargaining is about the process, not about a required willingness or need to compromise or set aside your own reasonable self-interest for the sake of reaching an agreement. Would there be anything more reasonable to effectuate an approved change in government?

But I digress.

Kind of.  

Other highlights.  The discussion at the end about town meeting membership.  The discussion in the middle about why you are picking on poor us somewhere in the middle (by the way, as far as restructuring other committees and boards, knock your socks off with that one.  Size, methods of appointment or election, from my perspective really does not concern me; and, I will at some point get to the whys asked in relation to that as raised during the meeting.  Want to know though why I shake my head so much.  After twenty years of this stuff, I still am in disbelief as to how often the "why are picking on me, they do it too" argument is always raised as a justification or an excuse).

Oh let's not forget statements about how the sewer budget is going to dwarf the school department in the near future, although I fail to see how infrastructure building and upgrade costs constitute a "budget"  Perhaps that one was just a misstatement as to the cost of a capital improvement though.

The discussion on roadwork.  There was a question or two on that of particular interest, that never were really answered.  On one point though, here is a solution for the BPW and its constant laments about what streets get paved.  

Try and get a bulk funding article passed by Town Meeting.  Go to Town Meeting, tell it you should determine the way its money gets spent and on what roads you decide.  

How hard is that?  

Personally, I will bet my dollar against your dime that such a process wouldn't last more than three years.

I am about out of time.  I am going to finish with this, the strongest arguments as to why we don't need a Board of Public Works actually can be taken from the reasoning given by the Board of Public Works as to why it should continue as is, what it feels should happen.  Watch the meeting.  Try to assess the comments from a "juror's" perspective. 

Enough for today.

Be safe.