Mid-week musings

Has it been a week?  How time flies when you are having fun, right?

Actually, I have a couple of posts in the can. The same will probably end up in the trashcan.

Ranting an raving about what was doesn't do anything much for what should be.  Yet, the past can't be totally avoided because what was in this town will certainly have an influence over what may be.

Personally, I find it refreshing to see the quote in The Standard Times  that the TA "hopes to work with town departments to build a 'more cohesive' structure, rather than having individual departments serve as 'silos.'"

Now the silo thingy comes from the job description, but it is apt. Cohesive would be an entirely new concept. Oh sure, we have heard the talk over the years about needing to work together, pulling together as a town, 

However most of the departments have learned over the years the concept of having to give  and be taken from, rather than a town wide administrative truly give and take policy. The catalyst for the bond one needs for cohesion has never been applied.

Truth be told, under our old system the lack of cohesion was the direct result of the lack of a divide and conquer mentality. The pitting of the schools vs. the police vs. the fire vs. BPW vs. everyone else.

Believe me when I say, this system did not develop overnight nor in a vacuum. 

While the TA system should go a long way to solving the problem, the first "repairs" to the system have actually occurred in the last four years. The insistence and ability to force the DOR report. While the push came from Selectman Espindola, the votes needed were obtained, at least according to my sources, as a result of some let's say internal difficulties.  

Nonetheless, someone had to push for it. 

The DOR report contained a whole bunch of recommendations, some very good ones.  But as noted in the report the same were recommendations and needed to be weighed by the town as to whether it wished to proceed with the same

Where we got lost following that path was the report became a gospel to some. That in and of itself would not have been a bad thing, it that particular gospel had been literally followed.  Like most text however it was often interpreted based on convenience.  Picking and choosing the parts people wanted not the methods of implementation.

I could spend days on this.  I know I have spent hours in the past with past posts. 

Literally speaking though, the only matter detailed in that report of any real significance which has not been dealt with is the BPW issue.  Most everything else is operational and did not and should not have concerned anyone else but administration.  

The Fin Com thingy, well have hashed that one out more than once here.  Truth be told, you keep an active capital planning committee, coupled with the budget falling essentially under the authority of the TA, smaller or larger, appointed by who you want in any manner you want, mercifully the Fin Com role and function will diminish.

Fin Com was what it was, based on a structure existing for decades upon decades, where there was no "central" budget request submitted.  

Mercifully again, at least in the last three years, the members of the BOS started working with rather Fin Com rather than trying to keep it in the dark.

The fact our new TA has to submit a recommended budget further resolves the whole twisted process.  It resolves much of the conflict, and it will get rid of the behind the scenes games often played to delay release of figures until the last possible minute.

Whatever method there may be to the madness that developed, the concept of open and transparent financially can do much more to create a winning hand than playing poker.  

That game should be over.

Anyway ...

Not much after a week's absence, but better than a sharp stick in the eye ... hopefully.

Until next time.