Some days it seems there is absolutely nothing to write about, other days you can flip through the papers and find a dozen things that jump out at you.
The Standard Times has an editorial, along with a "Your view" piece, and a letter, and another letter, and an article. The Fairhaven Neighborhood News, well pick a page.
One could also take the agenda for the Selectmen's meeting tonight, tape to a fall take ten paces, put on a blind fold and throw three darts, and come up with at least two things.
Then there is tonight's Town Government Study Committee meeting. The most important thing happening in town at the moment. You might disagree with that, but that's the way I see it. Unfortunately for me, even with the realization of the importance, more immediate matters will cause a dilemma as to what to follow tonight.
Anyway ...
As to the S-T editorial, while they may be some who don't appreciate the spin of the headline, can you really better describe what is going on. Of course if this soap opera actually was being aired, it would be cancelled after a short run. Who would watch such a show and actually find it believable?
But the editorial is very much on target throughout, and takes dead aim in the last 1/3 of the opinion:
The Board of Health's duty is the public health, and that mission would have been served far better had the meeting been announced with 48 hours' notice (instead of under the guise of "emergency" — what emergency?) The board should be expected to run it with discipline and respect (with police assistance, if necessary) and public participation.
The entire history of these turbines has been fraught with accusations of secrecy. Shouldn't the board have given that a bit more weight?
In hindsight, the board should now recognize that a few more minds in the room might have brought them closer to a workable solution.
As it is, Fairhaven Wind has opted for "let 'em spin." How can they be faulted? The Department of Environmental Protection found the violations only when the wind blows from the northwest and northeast and only in winter, never in July or August.
With all due respect to those reporting ill effects from the spinning blades, this is giving us a headache, too.
Several people have left comments here, and as published elsewhere questioning the concept of "compromise". Compromise is a very tricky thing. It has a tendency to chaff ones moral skin when one feels deep down they are ultimately correct.
So be it. If people cannot see any benefit to it, then the game now gets played out by a set of procedures and rules that in the end is going to leave one side very disappointed. Which side? Well, that isn't going to be decided by you and me, and that is the whole point of compromise. It is a whole lot better to be involved in the resolution than being told what the resolution will be.
Reality - the B of H now must make a decision on the mitigation plan submitted by the developers. They have to have a hearing. It has to be a public hearing and it has to be discussed by the board in open session.
The board, its individual members, the developers and the public need to understand their roles and their rights, and more importantly those rights that they simply do not have.
We have seen all too much of the lack of "open and transparent" government. Indeed there is a fair amount of legitimacy, in my opinion, to the claim that the whole turbine process was less than "open and transparent".
Note that I am not saying illegal. Allegations of violations that may have occurred to the open meeting laws recently aside, the process was conducted according to the law. The problem is perhaps certain steps very well should have been taken beyond the simple legal requirements. We can debate that forever, it will not change the fact we are where we are.
But "open and transparent" does not include the concept of anything goes either. We have gone from one extreme to the other.
I see but one cure left to the headache. It is one that involves a course of treatment requiring, decisions to be made, appeals to be taken, and judges to decide.
Compromise is in fact not possible anymore. In this game of chicken, everyone seems determined to drive right over the cliff.
Prior to June 10th, the foundation of this town was cracking. The events of June 10th may have been seen by some as an attempt to repair those cracks, but the perceived remedy has only worsened the damage. what were cracks are now fissures.
Repair isn't possible.
If the B of H in its opinion finds justification for no change in its order after a hearing, so be it. Let the developer sue.
If the B of H finds justification for a modified shut down or reduction, so be it. Let the developer and people unsatisfied sue.
Make a decision, do it right, and let the chips fall where they may.
It is time for everyone to stop with the chest puffing, or the hiding, and make decisions so all the dissatisfied folks can run to the nearest courthouse.
That is exactly what people continually threaten to do unless they get their way on this issue, and it is a given one side isn't going to get their way, so just get it moving.
File the class action lawsuits.
File the appeals to decisions.
There is apparently no other alternative to it. This is exactly what is being said. So let's get the decision made and let the pleadings fly.
You want to play an "all in" game. You have one right now.
When you don"t have proof to justify your complaints they will always go on deaf ears.Open an transparent is always a common theme when someone new comes into power.They soon find out that the systems that run town politics dont allow this an they usually put up a smoke screen to skew their agendas.
ReplyDeleteOn the Selectmen's agenda tonight: Appointment of the Assistant Harbormaster/Shellfish Warden. The person named may not be at all related to the current Shellfish Warden. But I'd like to hear how the selection was made. Was the position posted and candidates interviewed? If he is related, then how will the appointment be explained so as not to be construed as nepotism?
ReplyDeleteNot really sure how this plays into the blog post, but whatever.
ReplyDeleteThe job opportunity is posted online:
http://fairhaven-ma.gov/pages/FairhavenMA_job/I01B302EB
As far as I know, assistant harbormasters and deputy wardens are not paid. They do have to be properly vetted however, as they do have limited law enforcement duties. Assistant harbormasters do patrols and pump outs, and deputy wardens can help with the grunt labor of the Shellfish Department, as well as check for compliance with shellfish regs.
As for your nepotism angle, perhaps you should go to the meeting and ask the selectboard yourself, rather than posing the question on a blog.
I saw it on TV. They said there were several candidates. He was chosen for his qualifications.
DeleteReally quick and simple here.
DeleteFirst, the position is paid.
Next, the comment is an allowable play because the blog does mention the selectmen's agenda. While specifics weren't discussed, the agenda was mentioned. The comment addressed a matter on the agenda.
Third, and let us be clear on this, headlines, titles, etc. are not blog post subjects. "All In" had nothing to do with the comment being posted. the fact someone found a way to state a matter in a legitimate fashion about something raised WITHIN the content of the blog, is why it was posted.
It may have been a comment that stretched its reach the the border of one of the "four corners" but it didn't go beyond it.
The blog post subject or today is ALL IN, so give the blogger a break....
ReplyDeleteSorry, but I took the nepotism thing as being unnecessary. I mean, I really don't believe the writer doesn't know the relationship of the candidate. Why beat around the bush? That's my take anyways.
ReplyDeleteIf that's what gets people riled up on that agenda, then I am at a loss. There's far better items to be concerned with. I'm still waiting for the outrage as result of the BOH fiasco. Crickets.
One thing I did learn. The job opportunity doesn't seem to list pay. It only said minimal hours. Are ALL deputies and assistants paid? I was under the assumption that people volunteered.
If the standard for posting comments were to reject comments containing statements, terms or reference that are unnecessary in my opinion, than very few comments would ever get posted.
DeleteI would add that the issue of whether it was nepotism or not must have been a concern to others because based on the proceedings last night an ethics opinion was apparently sought and discussed during the meeting.
Was it the most pressing point on the agenda to be raised no. I quite frankly post numerous comments on a minute points in a blog piece that continue to throw me for a loss.
Whether ALL get paid or not, I don't have a clue. I do know that each year there is a request for deputy/assistants pay and that each year. They are suppose to all be paid.
From other discussions occurring last night there seems to be more than sufficient money to pay deputies, despite the yearly lament we don't have enough money for sufficient staffing.
I would have liked to see the relationship to the shellfish warden been stated. Watching the proceedings at that time, you could sense the awkwardness. Why didn't they just clear the air. How come other times when 'family matters' come up there are huge kum-by-yah moments. Maybe it's not important, but it would have been nice if for once there was a sign of open honesty instead of shifting eyes and round-about talk. Geesh- If the proceedings are legal then be up front.
Delete