We wrapped things up last night by 10 p.m., and it was unfortunate it took us that long.
Most of what we had in front of us were routine, annual appropriations articles.
Exceptions to this included two appropriations, one for $20,000 to pay for signs highlighting historic and cultural points of interest in Arlington, and another for $2,000 to pay for a molded metal sign to go in front of the Uncle Sam statue.
Discussion on each of these got ugly.
We witnessed what looked like an Uncle Sam committee that has spiraled into an abyss of dysfunction.
I don't have all the details about everything going on, so won't try to speculate too much on explanations.
Suffice it to say for now that the committee is in need of healthy leadership.
We approved the $2,000 in large part because the Town Manager would be in charge of writing the check, and not the committee.
The discussion on the $20,000 appropriation turned into a witch hunt, with some members using it to try and smear the character of people in our community.
By the time this was through, I would have voted to spend twice that amount on the ugliest, most repulsive signs imaginable, out of disgust.
The "arguments" against the appropriation were specious, largely based on us not having seen these signs yet.
Just because we vote to appropriate money - making it available to spend - does not mean that it gets spent on bad work.
People have to sign off on the final product before anyone gets paid.
Try to imagine Town Meeting discussing whether a majority prefers one font or another, or like the color scheme chosen.
The actual issue in front of us was whether promoting these points of interest is a worthwhile endeavor, and a sound strategy to promote economic development.
Further, you could get into a discussion of how much is an appropriate amount to spend.
One point that opponents have brought up that has sufficient quality to be discussed, is whether we are doing these sorts of things in a strategic, planned manner, or whether we are throwing a bunch of ideas against a wall and seeing what sticks.
But they have been too busy carrying out personal vendettas to waste time fleshing out that argument.
This is the biggest problem facing Town Meeting: a small and vocal number of members who use the institution to wage their own personal campaigns against people they disagree with.
Too many issues get hijacked by these endeavors, with no respect to the actual issues being discussed.
If everyone would approach issues from the perspective of what was right for Arlington, rather than how they might "score points" in petty battles over mole-hills, Town Meeting would better serve its residents.
In the end, despite these problems I believe we did good work this year, respecting a balance between providing services and exercising frugality.
I am up for re-election next year, so whether I return to Town Meeting again will be a decision made by the voters in my precinct.
I hope I have given voters plenty of information to base that decision on.
Of course I hope voters will approach me and give us both the opportunity determine whether we are moving in the right direction.
Thursday, May 9, 2013
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
Night 5, Trees and Fees
Last night we completed debate and passed the Town and the Capital budgets, as well as our annual appropriation to the Minuteman, and the creation of a Special Education Reserve Fund.
As anticipated, the Town and Capital budget passed.
There were two attempts last night to amend these from the floor.
An amendment from Christopher Loreti of Precinct 7 would have changed the Capital budget by directing $30,000 from a parking study to bolster efforts to plant more trees in town.
An amendment from Stephen Harrington of Precinct 13 would have changed the Town budget by appropriating an additional $300,000 to education, and while it is not legally possible for Town Meeting to tell the School Department how to spend it's money, the hope was that this money would be used to reduce fees for extracurricular activities.
You can (might be able to) read up on Mr. Harrington's proposal here:
http://truepersons.com/2013/05/05/town-meeting-2013-night-5-school-budgets/
[Actually, if truepersons has decided for whatever reason to block you from their site, as they have some, you won't be able to read up on this.]
This morning my rationale for supporting or opposing each of these amendments might be due to the merits of the need, or the importance of staying within our plan, or feedback on how important these issues are to my constituents and neighbors.
Last night, my rationale for opposing both of them was simple: I had no advance opportunity to consider these amendments and think seriously about them.
We've had the Finance Committee's report since April 19th, and the Capital Planning Committee's report since April 22nd.
Both amendments were made from the floor, with no copies provided to Town Meeting members.
Either of these amendments could have been distributed in advance, giving me and others a chance to study them correctly, and weigh them on their merits.
They were not, and predictably both were defeated by large margins.
We have about one more night's worth of work to do, and we'll wrap up the 2013 Annual Town Meeting.
As anticipated, the Town and Capital budget passed.
There were two attempts last night to amend these from the floor.
An amendment from Christopher Loreti of Precinct 7 would have changed the Capital budget by directing $30,000 from a parking study to bolster efforts to plant more trees in town.
An amendment from Stephen Harrington of Precinct 13 would have changed the Town budget by appropriating an additional $300,000 to education, and while it is not legally possible for Town Meeting to tell the School Department how to spend it's money, the hope was that this money would be used to reduce fees for extracurricular activities.
You can (might be able to) read up on Mr. Harrington's proposal here:
http://truepersons.com/2013/05/05/town-meeting-2013-night-5-school-budgets/
[Actually, if truepersons has decided for whatever reason to block you from their site, as they have some, you won't be able to read up on this.]
This morning my rationale for supporting or opposing each of these amendments might be due to the merits of the need, or the importance of staying within our plan, or feedback on how important these issues are to my constituents and neighbors.
Last night, my rationale for opposing both of them was simple: I had no advance opportunity to consider these amendments and think seriously about them.
We've had the Finance Committee's report since April 19th, and the Capital Planning Committee's report since April 22nd.
Both amendments were made from the floor, with no copies provided to Town Meeting members.
Either of these amendments could have been distributed in advance, giving me and others a chance to study them correctly, and weigh them on their merits.
They were not, and predictably both were defeated by large margins.
We have about one more night's worth of work to do, and we'll wrap up the 2013 Annual Town Meeting.
Thursday, May 2, 2013
The Airing of Grievances, aka Debating the Town Budget
Yesterday, in describing this phenomenon in Town Meeting where we'll debate small amounts of money at length, and then pass an appropriation of millions at the drop of a hat, I failed to describe certain time honored traditions the body also engages in whenever the budget comes up.
It is time for the Announcing of Gratitude, the Airing of Grievances, and the Grinding of Axes.
I've adopted the shorthand term of GAG for all of this.
Last night was GAG Night.
GAG Night serves a purpose in Arlington.
It is about the only time people have an opportunity to talk formerly about any number of topics, both good and bad.
It can be incredibly frustrating from a procedural point of view, as these discussions are almost always not within the scope of the action in front of us.
No amendments or substitute motions have been submitted, so the only discussion that is technically allowable would be whether or not to pass the article.
As I mentioned yesterday, we will definitely be passing the budget.
An extra dose of frustration is experienced when some members fail to act in the spirit of the ceremony, and ask questions that really aren't of a public nature, that really don't fall within the categories of gratitude, grievance, or ax grinding.
This is not the time to inform the Department of Public Works about some pothole in front of your house.
The exceptions to this would be if DPW has been notified repeatedly and has failed to respond, if DPW has come out to repair said pothole numerous times and their methods are not getting the job done, if DPW created the damage in the first place, if in the process of repairing the pothole DPW backed a truck into your shrubbery, or if DPW has shown exemplary service in responding to concerns about potholes in your neighborhood.
Otherwise, give them a call, write an email, or grab the director during the break. Don't waste all of our time with it.
It is also frustrating when some members appear to have much more to grieve about than others.
When the same individuals have a bone to pick with each and every department in town, I start to wonder if they might be convinced to start a blog, where they can preach these topics to a more voluntary audience.
But again, GAG Night serves a purpose.
Like the annual holiday family gathering there are moments you dread, things you know are going to happen each and every year, and plenty of reasons to crave a stiff drink.
Yet each year you go back and willingly do it again.
It is time for the Announcing of Gratitude, the Airing of Grievances, and the Grinding of Axes.
I've adopted the shorthand term of GAG for all of this.
Last night was GAG Night.
GAG Night serves a purpose in Arlington.
It is about the only time people have an opportunity to talk formerly about any number of topics, both good and bad.
It can be incredibly frustrating from a procedural point of view, as these discussions are almost always not within the scope of the action in front of us.
No amendments or substitute motions have been submitted, so the only discussion that is technically allowable would be whether or not to pass the article.
As I mentioned yesterday, we will definitely be passing the budget.
An extra dose of frustration is experienced when some members fail to act in the spirit of the ceremony, and ask questions that really aren't of a public nature, that really don't fall within the categories of gratitude, grievance, or ax grinding.
This is not the time to inform the Department of Public Works about some pothole in front of your house.
The exceptions to this would be if DPW has been notified repeatedly and has failed to respond, if DPW has come out to repair said pothole numerous times and their methods are not getting the job done, if DPW created the damage in the first place, if in the process of repairing the pothole DPW backed a truck into your shrubbery, or if DPW has shown exemplary service in responding to concerns about potholes in your neighborhood.
Otherwise, give them a call, write an email, or grab the director during the break. Don't waste all of our time with it.
It is also frustrating when some members appear to have much more to grieve about than others.
When the same individuals have a bone to pick with each and every department in town, I start to wonder if they might be convinced to start a blog, where they can preach these topics to a more voluntary audience.
But again, GAG Night serves a purpose.
Like the annual holiday family gathering there are moments you dread, things you know are going to happen each and every year, and plenty of reasons to crave a stiff drink.
Yet each year you go back and willingly do it again.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Preview of the remainder of Town Meeting - Budget Time
Now that we have dealt with the important issues of gas stations, leaf blowers, water bottles and others, it's just trivial stuff from here on, like the town budget.
That statement is not meant seriously, but the outcome of most of our remaining votes are essentially foregone conclusions.
There is an interesting phenomenon that takes place, in that the lower the dollar amount on any article, the more vigorous the debate.
While this can seem silly, there is good reason for it.
The large ticket items cover established services.
We will be making payroll, for example.
Police and fire services will continue to be available, schools will remain open.
A comparatively small expenditure for a new sign somewhere? Do we need it? Why?
We will question new expenses, that may or may not be necessary, or justified.
Are we being penny wise and pound foolish?
One could argue that this risk exists, and there are almost definitely opportunities to save the taxpayers more money.
However an even more foolish venture would be to entrust a 252 member body with the minutiae of the town budget.
We have a Finance Committee, a Town Manager overseeing numerous departments, a Board of Selectmen, a School Committee and a Superintendent that do this work.
Town Meeting reviews the budgets carefully, even if we don't debate each detail, to see whether things continue to move in the right direction.
We have the ability to vote down the budget.
It would be something of a cataclysm if this ever occurred; but the power is there for good reason, as another check and balance in our system.
That statement is not meant seriously, but the outcome of most of our remaining votes are essentially foregone conclusions.
There is an interesting phenomenon that takes place, in that the lower the dollar amount on any article, the more vigorous the debate.
While this can seem silly, there is good reason for it.
The large ticket items cover established services.
We will be making payroll, for example.
Police and fire services will continue to be available, schools will remain open.
A comparatively small expenditure for a new sign somewhere? Do we need it? Why?
We will question new expenses, that may or may not be necessary, or justified.
Are we being penny wise and pound foolish?
One could argue that this risk exists, and there are almost definitely opportunities to save the taxpayers more money.
However an even more foolish venture would be to entrust a 252 member body with the minutiae of the town budget.
We have a Finance Committee, a Town Manager overseeing numerous departments, a Board of Selectmen, a School Committee and a Superintendent that do this work.
Town Meeting reviews the budgets carefully, even if we don't debate each detail, to see whether things continue to move in the right direction.
We have the ability to vote down the budget.
It would be something of a cataclysm if this ever occurred; but the power is there for good reason, as another check and balance in our system.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)