Sometimes you just got to swallow that big pill

Okay, about a month ago I stated it was still too early to get into the local election for April.  Right about now though, people who are serious about running next April, should be getting things into gear.  

That is not to say you can wait and still win.  What it does mean is you should be lining up supporters, because others are doing so right now.  

The wind is going to drive this election, perhaps not as strongly as the last one, but it is going to nonetheless.  Two significant matters will become known within the election cycle.  The noise study should be completed.  The judge's decision should be issued on the "wrong" lot placement.

There is an easy procedural fix to the lot issue.  Easy in the sense of what would need to be done.  Whether it would be easy to do will depend I think on the noise study.  

What is it?  You just go back to town meeting to amend the lease description.  

That assumes a finding by the court that the lease is invalid.  There does seem to be some precedent that would indicate a basis to uphold the lease; and, there is certainly precedent to invalidate it.  I have not done, nor plan to do, sufficient research to really argue one way or the other.  It is in the hands of the court, it will stay there perhaps for years, as I think whichever side loses initially will probably pursue an appeal.  

All that being said, an adverse finding in the study or a decision by the judge invalidating the lease, is going to stir up the issue and people.  It will drive the election and provide motivation.  Whether that will be enough will depend on the noise study findings.

Whatever your position on turbines, rightly or wrongly the finding of the study will be the determining factor for a great many people.  It won't end the debate over the issue, but it will decide the issue. Simply a political observation and opinion for what it is worth.

No matter what happens, I am hoping for a lively election season locally.  Too early to provide a preview because until people at least take out papers, it is very hard to determine who is serious or not.  Although it would seem Selectman Bowcock, and BOH member Peter DeTerra fall into the serious category, given the cocktail party they are holding.

Tell you what, over the past year, a recurring theme in local, state and national elections has included concepts revolving around open and transparent government.  To that end, and to insure that end, involvement has to exist on more than just hot button issues.  Lack of active citizen involvement is what allows the less than open and transparent level of government that gets complained about.  

We are all guilty of letting things slide at times.  We are all guilty of not paying enough attention to the issues, and I include myself in that.  We all can't be everywhere, or somewhere everyday.  I understand that.  Yet we all need to stay involved somehow, and let it be known that we are in fact involved.  We you think about the fact that most elections on the local level are decided by less than 25% of the electorate, it is heart breaking, at least to me.

I absolutely agree with the concept and advocate for the need for more expansive attempts at outreach to the public.  I understand the complaints about lack of transparency and openness to an extent.  I am a firm believer that if it is a good idea, if something is worthwhile, making the effort to provide the information to the public sooner rather than later is only a benefit.

But the bottom line is the primary duty remains upon the individual.  No one of us can escape or excuse that fact away.  Read the papers, watch the meetings, get involved not solely because of a single issue.  If it is that single issue that gets you involved, than hopefully you will see the dangers and drawbacks of not being involved sooner.  

On the Voc Tech addition, my criticisms are not to the merit of the project.  I am a pretty quick study.  I get the idea and concept.  I also get the reasons stated presently, vs. what was out there initially.  My position on the project will be on the merits.  It will not be decided based on what was clearly less than adequate public out reach.  It will not be based upon my distaste for the laws and regulation surrounding and governing regional entities, nor prevailing attitudes or allegiances, or assumptions. 

The fact that it might escape some that perhaps we in Fairhaven expect at least at a minimum the type of public involvement and out reach that occurred for the elementary school only highlights my discontent with the regional structure.  Not knowing the number isn't a reason for not presenting the intended proposal.

Quite frankly, I am inclined as a citizen to support the project, given some real facts and hard realities relative to the facility needs.  I take them at the word that the intent of this project is not to increase enrollment.  This should be a key component to everyone in Fairhaven.  

Being the skeptic that I am, I do not blindly buy the line that present enrollment numbers are not, at least in part, driving this addition.  Being the realist, it is a 40 year +/- facility, in need of some significant upgrades that when analyzing the cost of a MSBA qualifying project vs. one that would not qualify, the opportunity to meet needs in a fiscally responsible manner exist through this project.  

I may not like the taste of the medicine, but I understand the benefits of having to take it.

As a closing note, take a look at this week's Fairhaven Neighborhood News. The biggest news is the fact that we can now watch meetings via the internet.  Look for the we site reference on page 4.  A big plus for those who don't have cable, or even if you do, might not have access when you have time to watch other wise.