An Apparently False Start

Well if you can figure out what is going on with the TA appointment, you are one step ahead of me. I don't have a clue as to what advice the BOS is receiving as to the procedure in this matter, nor do I particularly care who is giving it. 

If for no other reason than perception, the advice is wrong.  

Quite frankly, I think there are more reasons to support that proposition that there is more than simply perception wrong here, but perception will do.

But what do I know?  More important than what do I know, is the question of just how much do I really care.

I know that I am absolutely tired of everyone expecting everyone else to do stuff for them. whatever the advice is and the procedural issues, in the end the three involved will face that music, or not. Ranting about it will at best simply cause more delay and isn't going to change the outcome.

I also know that my actual care level is near nonexistence at this particular moment other than from the fodder that town government and politics provide for this blog. There is nothing and no one appearing in my cracked crystal ball that is going to make an difference in the picture.

But .. with a bit of ranting the only available outlet ...

Heck, you want to feel more comfortable and let the public to see the on T.V. the interviews, knock yourself out.  In fact, I can imagine the need in an instance or two for some to want to see what direction the public wind will blow on the issue. Why go against SOP?

There is perhaps only one question/answer in the three interviews that could possibly merit more research.  Well at least research other than that which should have all ready been conducted.

Now The Fairhaven Neighborhood News does in fact provide an insight into why there might be the delay.  Can't see where that is justification.  Vote. Offer. If accepted great, if not move on. Anyway ...

Wasted question of the opportunity to interview: Our meetings last a long time, is that a problem?

Now perhaps somewhere, somehow the finalists have avoided working someplace where late meetings did not occur with any frequency.  Perhaps.  And perhaps the real concern was the issue of the distance which someone lives from the town in which they may work. But if that was the concern, throwing up a softball question and hoping to get any answer other than essentially "not a problem" is realistic in what way?

In any way you look at it, a wasted question.

Here is a suggestion though: Why not ask a modified version of that question to appointments to committees. "Hey, this committee is actually going to meet.  Think you will be able to be there more often than not?"

Anyone who misses at least 4 out of 7 meetings hopefully did not vote on the final choices.

And if your even tempted to comment about why that might be a reason for remote participation, don't. That concept is suppose to be used sparingly, not to justify a committee members otherwise more important regular life.

Moving on ... because if I stay on this topic much longer I am going to lose my well known patience.

Remote participation. Now you can comment if you want. Seems another one of those issues where we may very well end up catering to officials rather than the public. It simply does not make any sense to me when the reasoning is to make it simply convenient.  Not with the requirement of a physical quorum under the law.

Talk with a few boards and committees which have actually utilized the process.  I know one particular regional board which did it to accommodate a committee member's snow birding schedule. Didn't last too long.

Better yet, put it into practice than make sure all the proper procedures are followed and then let the people who actually show up and aren't sitting somewhere warm and cozy have to go through roll call votes on every single matter.

Not so elected or appoint members can have a perfect attendance record.

Hell why not set it up so the officials can attend the candidates nights remotely too. "Here I am in sunny Florida, asking for your vote."

Anyway, we all seemingly have differences of opinion on why the ability to attend regularly scheduled meetings is important. or even meetings being regularly scheduled.

Was a time when boards met on specific days of the week.  Was a time there was a reason for that. The convenience of the public, in knowing exactly when. But heck, we seem to be a society hell bent on bending over backwards to accommodate everyone and everything, so why not our officials.  Can you envision the need for a special meeting on a special day. Absolutely.  When changing the dates becomes SOP though at least have the courtesy to change the listing on the webpage as to "when you regularly meet".  

Might I suggest "Alternating Mondays, when convenient".

If you are sensing some frustration here, well you are not off the mark.

The most frustrating thing. I don't see any alternatives on the horizon that while significantly change that.  Well perhaps there is one.  Bring on the experienced TA to show you how government, at least procedural aspect, should be run.

I say this because as each day passes, it become clear that the right decision is to bring in an outsider to point out certain, shall we say, boo boos.

Let's hope the public meeting scheduled for Monday afternoon when the public is going to be otherwise occupied will not be another false start.

Until next time.