Here is the latest Email being circulated by Kevin Lee, the town Youth Advocate.
You might wonder when he finds time to, you know, like, actually do work for the town?
Dear neighbors and friends,More after the break, click below
Even though most of us didn't expect the three SB members to change their vote on Monday night, it was difficult not to feel deflated at the end of the meeting. What struck me in particular though was how embedded the three were in their positions even at the end of the night. Mr. Michaud, as you know, delivered to us all his lengthily pre-written sermon from the mount, clearly designed to put us all in our places. What insulted me mostly though was the unwillingness for them to even entertain a motion to reconsider their previous vote….. meaning that they were not even willing to put the issue on the table fair and square….even though they knEw that they had the votes to re-vote the way they did on Nov. 13th.
IMPORTANT NEWS: Many have talked about a recall, and it has already begun. Yesterday afternoon Bob Carney began distributing three formal recall petitions for Michaud, Trimble and Gilbert.
A forth petition is also being circulated, alongside the three recall petitions, to seek a special Town Meeting who's only agenda would be "To see if the Town, in light of the actions of Joseph Michaud, Diane Gilbert and William Trimble, will vote that it is the conscience of the Town that Michael Gagne shall be retained as the Executive Administrator, and that the Select Board negotiate and execute a new contract to insure that Mr. Gagne continues to serve the Town of Dartmouth as he has faithfully and competently done for the past twenty-two years, or to take any other action relative thereto."
These petitions must be returned to the Town Clerk's Office within 18 days.
I have four clipboards with petitions on each ready to go. Is there someone who is willing to take these and start collecting signatures of registered voters ASAP? If you can do this, please call my cell at 508-287-9056 and I will arrange to get them to you. There are instruction sheets attached as well with the petitions.
My limitations: I support whatever recall and drive to get a Special Town Meeting scheduled. However, as a town employee, and as an employee whose agency, the Dartmouth Youth Commission, answers directly to the Select Board, I have decided that it would be unwise for me to be a front person in a campaign designed to oust the majority of my appointing authority…. the Select Board! I trust that you all will understand. I will work diligently behind the scenes, but cannot be the lead person speaking with the press, or physically hauling petitions around town.
Other concerns: These are just my thoughts and concerns, but I would welcome the wisdom of others on this: I'm not so sure that trying to oust all three SB members is the right way to go. As one former Town official said to me, "We only need to replace one of them." If I had to choose one to go after, it would be Mr. Michaud, because he is clearly the principal architect of the drive to dump Mike Gagne. I also feel that many residents are very much insulted by what they feel is Mr. Michaud's arrogant, surly, and "I know what's right for Dartmouth" attitude. And many residents, myself included, voted for Michaud the first time around….which I would never do again. I think that there are many people who voted for Michaud who are now very dissatisfied with his performance.
But if you go after Trimble and Gilbert (and she may not be running anyway) we run the risk of energizing the Barry Walker group, who will surely put up their own candidate in a special election as well. And any three-way race may well mean a win for the incumbent that we are trying to recall!
Another concern I have is making sure that these four petitions have, or will be able to, pass legal muster. While I think that it's important that we be ready to capitalize on the anger and dissatisfaction that's out there in the community, I feel we need to be equally sure that the steps we're taking are legally sound, in both procedure and statute. I emphasized this point with Mr. Carney yesterday morning, but I still have some concerns….
Again, that's what I'm feeling…. but please share your thoughts on this as well.
Finally, we need to meet. Where would be a good location? We can meet in Town Hall as a community action committee, but I have been told that we have to post our meeting… which requires a 48 notice. But if someone has a big living room, church basement, warm barn…. Let's hear from you!
Kevin Lee
I'll comment about the email later, I had a long day at work. One thing that Bob and Kevin and crowd should know is that I have no ego at all tied into my position as Select Board member. Trying to have me removed, matters to me not a whit. I have no agenda except to advocate for the taxpayers and promote good government.
Posts
91 comments:
I just think it is a shame that some people of the town take time out of their lives to speak out on important issues. Although this type of pulic protest may or may not reflect the opinion of the majority of the town, this is the current forum to be heard.
The members of the board don't even consider what is said. This is apparent by the actions and words of the members. But this is not a new practice. This is how it has been since I have been watching the meetings for the past few years.
I may not be a huge fan of Gagne for personal reasons but I thought it was impressive; the number of previous selectboard members that spoke in favor for Gagne. The prior selectboard members all worked with Gagne during their terms. They have insight to the town's business and what it takes to succeed. (yes, it is a form of business, there is revenue involved, Nat).
In regards to the act of the recall process...the only select board member i feel that should be a part of the recall process is Michaud. Ever since Michaud got in the position of chair, it's like he's a little king. I don't like what I have heard in recent months about what direction he wants to go in with the town.
Trimble is new to the board and I think he is truely trying to carry out his campaign intent.
Gilbert is strong, intelligent, well-spoken woman. Although she is not well-liked, people have to give her the credit she deserves. I feel she has been an overall asset to the town.
Just for the sake of discussion, what has Carney or Dias done for the town during their terms???
While I don't agree with this idea, Mr. Lee is of course entitled to spend his own time in any manner he wishes. More power to him.
to duval, Regarding previous SB members who spoke out on Monday night. John George and Bob Miller 'hand pick' Mr. Gagne even though the search committee said he was not even in the top 20 people who wer qualified for the position. I've been in town for over 40 years and I saw Mr. Miller pick a young Gagne so he could lead him around and he certainly did! For 20 plus years Mr. Miller was king and had too much control in Dartmouth. Town voters finally voted him out! Although I don't always agree with Ms. Gilbert, she speaks her mind and I like that! As far Joe and Bill, I think they are trying to look at the big picture without getting emotional about not renewing Gagne's contract. I do not think we put people in for life. The voter spoke overwhelmingly in April, and they will again!
The recall will easily work. Think about it. It will have the support of the John George, Bob Miller and Bill Mosher political machines. Any one of those guys can muster enough support to oust these three stooges. When you consider the combined forces who will work to recall Michaud, Trimble and Gilbert, the three of them will be shoved out by a landslide.
With any luck, Mosher, Miller and George will place their names on the ballot to be the new Select Board members. What a great Select Board it would be if we could get those three to join with Carney and Dias.
I would much prefer seeing Gilbert recalled rather than letting her serve out her term. Personally, I'd like to see John George be the one who takes her out. No one in Dartmouth has deeper roots, is a harder worker or has enjoys more respect than John George, Jr.
When this is over, the voters will not have just "spoken" their disdain for Michaud, Trimble and Gilbert. They will have YELLED it! Even better, the Hathaway Road Gang will have been beaten into retreat and surrender.
Thank you, Kevin Lee. You're doing a huge service for the Town. I have a simple slogan for your bumpersticker: RECALL Gilbert, Michaud & Trimble.
Similarly to how nations ally with each other to defeat an aggressor, the recall will serve as a unifying act for Dartmouith's residents. That will be a nice side benefit from all of this. Dartmouth needs to come together again.
Perhaps Lee and Carney should have checked on the legality of this issue before putting there email out there.
In any case, time will tell whether Dartmouth wants to go back in time or look to the future. John George, Bob Miller, and Mosher?? Are you kidding?
Over the past several years, the town has demonstrated by way of their voting that they want the town to go in a new direction.
I guess it's okay with Lee & Carney to have George, Miller & Carney as a 'gang of three'. How ironic! and self-serving!
Capitalize on the anger and dissatisfaction that's out there in the community? Mr. Lee I question your motives and your ability to council our youth. This letter does not sound like a concerned citizen seeking to right a perceived wrong but rather like someone who is trying to incite and manipulate the public while playing backroom politics.
Looks like Kevin Lee et al. have the Hathaway Road Gang on the run.
Kevin Lee and Bob Carney should really look before they leap. Hathaway Road Gang on the run? That is something you will never see. There is no need to run when you arm yourself with facts and you operate by means of rational thought, logic and the simple desire to do what is best for the town without political or self-serving motives.
This gets more absurd each day. Kevin Lee should quit his job, he is not acting stable.
Who/what is the "Hathaway Road Gang?"
I don't find any humour in your blogging. In fact Mr. Trimble I find it sad that you continue to make fun of two gentleman who are serving our town just as you are. As an elected official please show them more respect, beacuse if you can't do it then what good example will others have to follow?.
You may not like what they say about you but you and only you have the power to be above it. Don't use this blog to add to the "drama".
It is a little bit like the disrespect Michaud showed constantly joking during Monday's meeting. I agree, the tone for these types of thing should be kept serious as they do reflect very serious issues. Other threads may lend themselves to more humorous diversions but stuff like this should be straight.
Respect has to be earned. When Mr. Carney can refrain from attacking his fellow board members, when he can stop the innuendos and false accusations, when he can show that he is doing the job he was elected to do and represent Dartmouth's citizens instead of special interest groups, then Mr. Carney will deserve respect.
Mr. Lee's letter causes me great concern. It not only sounds manipulative but vicious in its strategies. Are you saying Bill should not have posted this letter? I think the public should know what its youth advocate thinks, how he conducts himself in all areas and what his true character really is. After all, because of his position with the town, he does have influence on impressionable children.
Lisa, I never suggested the letter not be put up and no one here has that I can see. What has been asked for is a level of seriousness thatthis type of issues deserves. When people continue to mis represent what has been printed in black and white to be read and re-read I wonder why bother responding or posting at all? There will never be compromise if people can't even step back and say 'you know, you're right this issue is a serious one and should not be the subject of joking, I will refrain from making it one'. Seems simple enough of a concept to me.
You want some real info, here you go. According to the town charter you cannot recall a select board member in Dartmouth or re-instate Gagne by way of town meeting.
Section3-2 (d) THE SELECT BOARD SHALL APPOINT AN EXECUTIVE ADMINISTRATOR.....
Section 2-13 General Powers EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY LAW OR THIS CHARTER, all powers of the town shall be vested in the town meeting.
Section3-1 (a) The town offices to be filled BY THE VOTERS shall be a board of selectpersons.....
Section 1-7 (r) Voters- the word "voters" shall MEAN REGISTERED VOTERS of the town of Dartmouth.
According to the charter, town meeting does not have the authority to recall a select board member or reinstate Michael Gagne.
Seriously, anonymous, are you trying to be ironic by saying I lack respect for Carney and Lee given what they say in the email? I hope so. Otherwise you are deeply unserious and should be ignored. If you were trying for irony, keep your day job, you're not ready to write for the the Onion yet :^)
Yes anonymous 3:04 that is exactly what I was trying to say. Lisa, enough tit for tat, it's time to act like adults and stop contributing to the bad behavior. When my 8 year old says that she did something because my 5yr old did it I don't excuse it. I tell her that she knew it was wrong and that she needs to set a better example for her younger sister.
This is what good leaders do they set a good example for others to follow. Just like I tell my daughter, no excuses just because others may say things doesn’t make them right, time to put on your big boy pants Mr. Trimble!
I didn't say that Mr. Lee and Mr. Carney have respected you for if they had a blog I would say the same to them. But the fact of the matter is they don't have a blog and you do. Can I make this any clearer? As a leader you must set an example that you treat one another with respect and the title of this blog is not appropriate.
If you want to complain some more that they haven't respected you please just stop as I can just turn around from my computer and hear that exchange between my children. Enough said!
Actually Bill, I was not trying for irony.
Yes, we should all act like adults and accept majority votes. That is what a democracy is all about. Every time a vote is taken in this town that is not to the liking of certain people, it turns into a divisive campaign. I didn't hear any complaints from those who oppose overrides when 3 of the questions passed. Some people can accept when things do not go their way and others cannot. There is more than one way to act like a child.
I see a post here from Barry containing useful information on a very important issue. Anonymous would you like to add anything relevant to this discussion or do you want to continue with YOUR tit for tat.
Thanks for posting the info Barry!
What have I missed? I thought the very idea of these blogs was to elicit comment both pro and con. Those that think Mr Lee is within his rights to do what he is doing should not post? Is that what goes on here or do dissenting opinions deserve consideration as well?
Since you weren't aiming for irony, I have to conclude you are a
CONCERN TROLL--A person who posts on a blog thread, in the guise of "concern," to disrupt dialogue or undermine morale by pointing out that posters and/or the site may be getting themselves in trouble, usually with an authority or power. They point out problems that don't really exist. The intent is to derail, stifle, control, the dialogue. It is viewed as insincere and condescending.
You will be ignored henceforth
Dissenting opinions do deserve consideration so please do not mistake challenging an argument for not welcoming differing opinions. Anyone posting a comment who does not expect to be challenged probably should not post on a blog.
The CFRG forensic data analysis program has returned a 98.75% probability match that the "concern troll" is one Christopher Markey. I don't know if arrogance is one of the match factors but if not that should cover the other 1.25%.
The Hathaway Road Gang
Not a troll either Bill, I posted the 3:04 and 4:06 anonymous postings regarding making light of serious subjects. Simple enough comments or so I thought.
I am not trying to stifle discussion in any way. I welcome people to present their views, agree or disagree with me or those who comment. I think there is no point in responding to those who make no argument but rather scold those who do for being uncivil, unserious, or whatever else they can think of. Concern trolls!
I think Mr. Markey acquited himself very well on Monday night, but of course standing up in public, giving his name, saying his piece and putting Mr Michaud on notice would not put him in good stead here.
The forensics meter is now pinned to a 107% possibility reading. Enough said.
Geez Bill, I guess I just don't know how else to state my view any better. I responded to a comment about using humor at the expense of others and that I thought given the seriousness of the issues in question humor was the wrong way to go. You apparently dont think its a topic worth discussing. So be it. Thats it Bill. I have no position of authority from which to preach, its a bloody blog for crying out loud. So call me whatever you like, but the conversations become 1 dimensional rather quickly unfortunately.
to 'old timer'...thanks for the info regarding how Mr. Gagne became the town executive. I have lived in the town for 30 years but as you can probably tell, i am of the younger generation, recently interested in town politics.
When i talk to older members of my family and older neighbors about town politics and the players, they have little positive to say about how this town has been run over the last 20 or so years, executive secretary and some previous various board members included.
Of course, as a member of the younger crowd, i have probably ignorantly formed an opinion of Mr.Gagne's performance based on my following of town politics over the last few years, not over the last 20+ years like the older generation. thanks!
Christopher Markey is in good company as there are a number of people who support what he said on Monday evening.
Call me whatever you want Mr. Trimble as it only goes further to prove my point that you continue to exhibit characteristics that are not befitting a leader.
Anonymous poster 2:25pm & 4:38
To Duval. Always good to hear from someone new. You have made some good points and I agree with some of what you have said. Since you admit you are somewhat new to town politics may I put forth a different view of what happened at that meeting. That forum was something Mr Gagne had asked for, not something the Select Board was obligated or required to do. That being the case the SB patiently listened to what the public had to say. Unfortunately the only thing they did have to say was basically that Michael is a nice guy who is a pleasure to work with. They didn't say that Michael has not produced a financial plan for the town, something that he is required to do by our town charter. They didn't say that Michael has not made executive session minutes public which is in violation of open meeting laws even though he has been directed by the SB to do so. They didn't say that he does not have a degree in municipal management and is not qualified to handle a multi-million dollar budget.
No one wanted to drag Michael through the mud and it is the executive session process which ensures an employee's right to privacy. The Select Board is being accused of secrecy when in fact they were only following procedure. Michael chose to make it a public affair. What may appear as not listening to the public may in fact be that the SB over the last couple of years (this was not an overnight decision) realized that Michael is not capable of addressing our structural deficit and he is either unwilling or unable to move the town forward with new ideas and new ways of conducting business. Our deficit will continue to grow unless we start making wiser decisions and we have people who are willing to get with the program. The old way of doing things is not working anymore. I don't think the SB heard anything that night to change their view that Michael is not the right guy for the job. So although it may have appeared that they were being close-minded I viewed it as having already made a rational and well thought out decision that public emotion was not going to sway.
You are seeing the real Trimble. Very hot heaed when he can't control the conversation or get his way. I personally experienced his rants at his previous place of employment at the Steel Mill. He was a crazy man. You never knew what Bill Trimble you would get each day. Some days he took his medication and others he did not. He had absolutely had no respect for the Steelworker union, so town workers that are in a Union, beware!
I don't think Bill you should try and discredit Kevin Lee. Making a comment like I wonder when he has time for his job or to that degree does not do anything for your position. Let Kevin fight for what he thinks is right if you have done nothing wrong then you should not have a problem. Also does your employer now that you are posting stuff on your blog during the day? So lets not throw stones.
We have all seen our share of Chris Markey types. Those arrogant ones who move into town and with their condescending attitude think they are going to tell everyone what to do because they know what's best for us. After all we're just a bunch of dumb country bumpkins right? Markey said that he is a New Bedford transplant and he can transplant right back there as far as I'm concerned.
Gee, sounds alot like Joe Michaud.
Nope, its not Joe. In fact, to say that I have had some very spirited debates with Joe in the past would be an understatement. I used to think of Joe as a bit arrogant and egotistical himself at one time but have now developed a good deal of respect for him. I admire and encourage his efforts to implement progressive change. He has shown himself to be a true leader. It may be hard for you to guess who I am without the aid of a forensic data analysis program but try again.
That's rich, so the moral of this story is to stay out of Dartmouth because the brilliant natives there have done such a good job of running the town themselves. Talk about an old boy network.
That's rich, so the moral of this story is to stay out of Dartmouth because the brilliant natives there have done such a good job of running the town themselves. Talk about an old boy network. I thought we wanted new ideas? I could give a rat's rear end who posts here but to say such ignorant things such as 'we don't need 'outsiders' to come here and tell us how to run our town is the height of arrogance.
Unfortunately I don't have the benefit of the CFRG's forensic data analysis program. That must be the same program that listed the CFRG as 'the good guys' on their web site.
Good Morning Dartmouth, According the substandard times, it appears that we have a town counsel who approved and signed off on contract clauses that "were clearly not in the best interest of the town." According to Bob Carney he is the lawyer we should use because he has malpractice insurance. It looks like he is going to need that insurance.
I found Lisa's most recent and informative post most interesting. There was an inference at the public meeting in stating the qualifications desired of the new EA that (s)he have a degree in municipal management that Michael may not have one; however, it was not a statement. As I know of no Select Board person named "Lisa," I wonder where important matters for the town are truly being decided--seems to me like behind the curtain and not as openly and transparently as one would have hoped.
Well todays Standard Times, Mr. Michaus attemtped to have a transfer from the Reserve Acct (which violates the boards own rules) and tried with without the knowledge of others. Thsi alon speaks of his character. sneaky !
I dont like it ! not one bit ! that he doesn show up at the meeting...hmmm..talking to Demello again?
To anonymous 7:45. It doesn't take a secret meeting or conspiracy to know what should be required of a town administrator. In case you have a reading comprehension problem, I did state that it was my view. You are grasping at straws.
Sorry, that post should have read To Disappointed.
My, aren't we testy in the morning
To Anonymous 7:13. I don't know about anyone else but "good guys" sounds a whole lot better to me than "good ole boys".
As I sat at the big meeting the other night I found myself deeply saddened by what has happened to our town. I also found myself contemplating just what are the root causes of our state of affairs. Having watched and lived the destruction of Polaroid because of bad management decisions, I also couldn't help but see some analogies. In addition, I just need to do some venting.
When I saw Michael tout the 27 ideas, that were bandied about last year, as a plan, it was obvious that something I suggested about 2 years ago was true, he doesn't really grasp what a real plan is. I suppose it can be blamed on lack of training, vision, genes, or whatever, but it is clear that the SB has wanted him to implement something he doesn't grasp. Michael really believes he has done everything asked of him. Meanwhile the SB majority has taken the position that the paid leader of the town should have all the tools necessary to adapt to the changing environment and fix the problems. This is not totally unreasonable given that 5 part-time SB members couldn't possibly do everything necessary, however what we have here is a failure to communicate.
At Polaroid I sat in hundreds of meetings and found that many times everyone left with what they thought was a clear understanding of what the action items were, only to come back to the next meeting and find that what everyone came away with wasn't quite as clear as first thought. People had gone away and done their best at what they thought they were supposed to be doing, working very hard in the process. They then found out that they had spent their time on the wrong things, or not enough time on the right things. Some of these people were persecuted publicly when in fact the problem wasn't entirely theirs.
Lack of real communication is a problem in all organizations. At Polaroid we spent a lot of time taking courses to get better at understanding just how to communicate better with others, some of which were things like Left-brain/Right -brain, Meyers Briggs personality type testing, and Train the Trainer. All of which are geared to understanding the differences in how people learn and perceive things. Hind-site is a wonderful tool, but my suggestion well over a year ago was that it seemed to me that a clear discussion of just what is expected for a complete plan was entirely appropriate. I believe that if this had happened Michael would have done his very best to try and make it happen. If it didn't happen then decisions could have been made on the real facts of the outcome and not on confusion and the perception of what was to be done. I am not blaming anyone specifically because it is natural to think that everyone around you understands what you understand. It takes a while and a certain awareness to learn to be clear in expectations. I found that going the extra mile to ensure clarity at the beginning of a year made for easier discussions at the end of the year during performance rating time, as well as more positive results for the business unit along the way. Everyone involved in this mess thinks they have done things exactly right, which only means that communication was sorely lacking.
It is also apparent to me that there are too many people in this town who don't really want to help, just sit back and bitch about things that people do. When good-intentioned people that we choose for positions step up and actually try to fix what they believe to be a problem, right or wrong, they get persecuted for it. We then wonder why we don't get better choices at election time. No one is as smart as all of us together, so if we dropped the "sides" and the "walls", and participated in a positive way, we could actually fix the things wrong with this town. Many people still don't grasp the extent of the trouble we are in either. If something major doesn't change we are headed right for Receivership. Overrides won't fix the problem, either mathematically or realistically, and there is even someone in the paper today that thinks if our officer hadn't had his unfortunate accident we would have no financial problems. PLEASE, give me a break.
We have people who want to go back to the same people that got us into the problems. How does that help?? The financial problems we have were hidden for years by only looking at the problem of the day. We spent our reserves, borrowed money from places we were told we couldn't borrow from but did it anyway, and in fact made no changes for the future. Finally there is no more money in the "sock draw" so WHAM, we have a much bigger problem that we should have had if some vision had been applied.
And what is it with our lawyer and the contracts? The same contracts that he helped put together are now deemed a problem, and not in the best interests of the town??? Just exactly WHO has been watching the ship over the years? Please, let's not go backwards. We have enough of a mess already!
I know that some people will agree with what I say, and others won't. Frankly, I don't really care. There are too many damn "islands" in this town, and until we all realize we all are on the same island, we will make no lasting progress. I am fed up and thoroughly disgusted with the entire thing, and until the climate changes for the better I can tell you that I will spend no more of my time fighting losing battles by volunteering. This is really a very sad time for the town that I and my family have loved for many years, and the little bit of light that seemed to be at the end of the tunnel certainly seems to now be extinguished.
Join the club FrankG. I gave up before you did. Thank you for your efforts to date.
If we lose FrankG, THAT will be a loss to this town.
I agree with a lot of what you have said here Frank. Last Monday night many people spoke about Mr. Gagne being such a nice guy. I agree with them ,but when my boss gives me an evaluation, he doesn't care whether I'm a nice person or not. It's about getting from point A to point B. I, for one, want to go forward, not back! We need to find new ways to deliver services in our town before we go off a cliff. So many people don't understand the financial side of the town and find it hard to think of anything changing. You're right, we need to work together as a town and move forward.
Here's my .02 ND Mom, I want to move forward too but the problem is bigger than the Gagne issue and until the 'get rid of gagne' people people at least achknowledge the process is flawed and those flaws continue to be compounded we will not move forward. For all the hollaring that the majority rules the fact is many in town feel this process of removing Gagne was not done properly. It is my opinion that any that disagree are seen as 'ol boys, or part of the 'system' and that's simply not true. Many of us are normal, not connected people who simply do not agree and feel our only recourse is to sit down and shut up. Take it for what its worth.
...in regard to the writer in today's S-T that mentioned officer Dave's unfortunate accident, that Frank G referred to, the writer of that piece, asks the question "... is Micheal responsible for his accident too?"
No... the town and Micheal are not responsible, but Micheal and Icapone are responsible for the lack of castophic insurance coverage that if had not been cancelled by them, would have covered Dave's medical expenses.
With the growth in the town's populations, the growth in the local crime rate and the increasing need for police officers, a castophic event was bound to happen. They (Icapone & Gagne) decided to lower the town's coverage to save a few bucks.
So, no... the town's officials are not responsible for his accident but they are responsilbe for the unexpected cost for medical exspenses.
To anonymous 5:35. I'm sorry some people feel the process was not done properly but that doesn't change the fact that it was. We have had the same executive administrator for over 20 yrs. so there really isn't a frame of reference for the public to go by. Do they know what the proper procedure is or do they just feel that it was not done? Please read the town charter.
Frank,
I agree with just about everything you wrote except when you say that Mr. Gagne was not told how the plan should be done. I sat in on several fincom meetings this year and a proper plan was described pretty thoroughly. I myself gave a short description of it at the spring town meeting. The unfortunate fact of the matter is that Mike is either incapable or unwilling to do it. The select board made a very difficult decision and they will take some heat for it, but it was in the best interest of the town. Sure there are some people that are upset right now but it was painfully obvious after monday night that few of them really understand the fiscal challenges that lay ahead. Look at Buddy Baker-Smith, chair of CPC. A fine gentleman but he also let $1.8mil in requests go through his committee and on to town meeting when CPA revenues will be about half that. Unlike you and I, very few people understand that overrides won't solve the problem, and depending on the proposal, can even make it worse.
Barry;
I guess you need to go back and get a lesson on CPC funds from your master on Hathaway Road before spouting off.
Ater all, you do need to convince the voters that you are capable of being on the Select Board when you run this coming year.
You do realize that CPC funds are self sufficient and have no impact on the regular Town budget?
Duval, surely you must know by now the story on the lack of catastrophic insurance coverage. No town in the Commonwealth had it. The cost for such coverage is prohibitively expensive and even now the catastrophic coverage in place will only cover $1,000,000 an amount that would get used up in 1 1/4 years if, Gid forbid, something like this happens again. Trotting out old, misinformation does not move the discussion forward no matter your feelings about Gagne or Iacaponi.
After reading the article in the S-Times this morning, I am even more convinced that we need to move on! Talk about REAL backroom deals. Those contracts are disgusting.
What exactly do you feel was improperly done and what do you want done now that would make you comfortable? Your comment is very vague
I think it's too late to go back and do things 'right'. Hind sight being what it is what I think should have been done was to have one SB meeting devoted to what the SB felt was the 'acceptable' plan since that seems to be the one item in question vis a vis Gagne's overall performance (or lack thereof depending on how you look at this)The understanding of this 'Plan' between all parties would get hammered out at this meeting and the public would also be given a chance to weigh in. A follow up meeting would then be held where the goals of the plan and a timeline along with an identification of responsible parties agreed to and an opportunity given to those parties to sign on. When the timeline had expired to produce the 'Plan' it would be presented, once again at a public SB meeting. If those repsonsible for formulating this plan did not perform as expected we would all have reason to expect some type of recourse (replacement for just cause likely given the apparent importance of this 'Plan')
If the 'Plan' was presented and accepted by the SB one would assume then that another series of milestones and dates would be agreed upon for implementation of various aspects of the 'Plan'. Failure to properly implement these milestones would then also constitute 'just casue' for dismaissal. Conversely proper implementation of the parts of the plan would affirm the person's suitability for the job.
Obviously it's too late for this and what's done can't be undone - lawsuits or not - but I think the lack of something resembling the above process gives cause to many's feelings of anger and frustration. The recent stumble at the FinCom meeting continues the mis-steps in my opinion and further fans the flame of distrust.
So what do we do?
GOing forward I would only ask that all the SB members work that much harder to be open and up front with the community and seek input as best they can, they also need to work better and more cooperatively with each other for anything to get done. I think we all want to succeed here, the alternatives are too grim and are compounded by the economic problems around the country. That's my additional .02
It sounds like Barry has a very clear grasp of how CPA funds work if you read his post. He even posted what the revenue and expenses were of this seperate part of the budget. If he really is running, he'll have my vote. Goodbye old boy network.
to Barry, can you provide contact information for the group you lead, for those that are interested in the cause?...
barry - As I was getting ready to answer you I noticed that Anon @ 9:54 articulated much of what I wanted to say very well. There are a few things I would add.
I respect and support the people we have elected to run our town, and through my dealings on several committees I even like about 99.9% of those I have come in contact with. What I am speaking about is the process of dealing with contracts, especially those that have an odorous clause in them. If you want to withhold money from someone or even terminate them you need to have all your ducks in a row. I have had many different types of people work for me, good and bad, and have been involved in too many end-of-year discussions about "you didn't tell me that", "that isn't what I thought you meant", or "I did exactly what we discussed". To avoid all that you need to document things and get signatures. Without documentation the employee wins every time.
I have found that you also want to give the employee the benefit of the doubt where possible. We all know that Michael did a large percentage of the job very well, my estimate would be about 90%, but the last 10% is the most important for these troubling times. That clause in the contract requires proof of "just cause", so let's assume 2 scenarios. The first is that you want him to succeed, so you do all the things Anon mentioned, including having measurable benchmarks of progress and firm timelines, in addition to just what the plan consists of. The second scenario is that you are convinced he can never do it and has to go. I offer that you still do the exact same things. At the end of the time period you either have success or you have firm documented grounds for dismissal, "just cause".
As you know I have also sat in many meetings, and while I agree the plan was discussed, even in some detail, I am not aware of any documentation of it, or what is expected of the employee in specific terms. You and I both knew what a plan was going in, but you can't assume that it is clear to everyone. We even had someone at the meeting speak of how the Master Growth Plan was the plan that everyone wanted. Let me again say that it is not unreasonable to expect the leader of the town to understand what is needed, but we are dealing with clause B here. You can't fight a black and white clause with "impressions", "I think", or "I really believe", which is what I heard on Monday. It requires proof. Once again we have 2 possible scenarios. If all this was done I didn't hear evidence of it on Monday night, which certainly would have made things easier. If it wasn't done then that is going to be a problem. In either case there was a lack of communication, either with us or the employee.
Whether Michael should go or not is immaterial to this discussion, this is strictly about process and repercussions of actions or inactions. Since we have a conflict with what the Charter says and the contract(s), if Michael fights this, and I see no reason why he wouldn't, then a court decision will be required to invalidate clause B. This will be hard to do since it came after the Charter, and everyone knew or should have known what the Charter said. The contract was also drafted with the help of our lawyer, who admits it will be a problem, and designed it that way at the request of those in power at the time. This mess will get messier, and all could have been avoided with either clear documentation or a 1 year contract without clause B. What they want to do is clearly allowed by the Charter, but not clause B.
my last .02 - FrankG has it right and unfortunately the town, we, us are in for a messy time that will likely be a large distraction from the very real issues the town faces. In an ideal world we could all sit back talk this thru and turn the clock back. Short of that we've got to figure a way to be able to construct an open dialogue without the bitterness and enmity that now exists throughout town. How to do that? Is it too late to step back from the brink?
Maybe it's not time to throw in the towel just yet FrankG?
Time for Dartmouth to move on. The SB voted not to renew Gagne's three year contract. Why wait...so Miller or George can run in April to keep Gagne? I will not vote to go back to those days! The 3-2 vote won't be a big deal then, right?
This town has been trying to make changes at the voting booth for many years now. We did. Let's move on. The vote has been taken!
Well Anon 2 cents, let me tell you my frustration. I have felt that I can help this town move forward, still do, which is why I have given my time on several committees, but I have come away from those experiences feeling helpless and frustrated. I know that my energy has been spent on behalf of many good people, and they appreciate it because they tell me all the time, everywhere I go, but there are also a bunch of naysayers who won't have a reasonable respectful discussion about what they disagree with. They would rather post nasty things on some blog where there is no accountability.
I have to admit that I decided that I had to do 1 of 2 things. Either I had to back away and spend my time playing with my power tools in my garage, or I would run for the Select Board and try to be able to have more influence in moving us forward. Some of the other training I have had is in things like "managing the business", "managing diversity", "dispute resolution", and "team building". I figure that a lot of this stuff could help.
Then, just as I start to feel that I am doing something positive to help save OUR town, I get a lot of crap from people who have no clue as to the trouble we are in, accused of wanting to ruin the town, kill the library, and of having crazy ideas. In the ideal situation you previously described I would love to be part of it, and help fix this town, but I have to ask is it worth the grief.
I then reflect on my BRTF days and still remained stunned that we try and run a $70M venture without spreadsheets or graphs. We couldn't get projections a quarter or 2 out in time let alone years. This town needs more help than most people even know.
I also see 3 members of the SB trying to do their best to fix something they think is a problem, and get insulted for it, not only from a colleague, but from supposedly respected members of the community. Even the local paper seems intent on stirring things up, as if we don't have enough problems. Who needs that grief??
Does anyone think that they made that decision easily or without angst? How about sleeping well before or after that decision? I thought they handled themselves very admirably when confronted with what was mostly an angry mob. And let's not forget that we are talking about an unpaid job with limited control, that deserves much more respect than it gets.
Many people don't want ANYTHING to change, but it MUST!!! Things cannot stay the same or living in this town will get much worse. I guess that is what all the second-guessers who don't raise a hand to help really want. Then they can have many more things to bitch about.
At this point I feel I am better off trying to keep all my fingers while cutting something with a saw than subjecting myself to the crap. I wouldn't say I have thrown in the towel, more like taking a sabbatical and watching. People get what they deserve, and deserve what they get.
I think not having a financial plan that is required by the charter and not making public executive session minutes also required by open meeting laws is pretty good documentation. The SB has directed him to do so and he has not. I think they call that insubordination at the very least. Let's just say he doesn't understand what the plan is supposed to be. I'll state the obvious first. Is that who we want for a town administrator? The DOR's website has a sample plan for municipalities and other resources available for anyone who needs information and help in the process. Has he tapped into those resources? Has he taken any steps in the last 2 yrs. to further his education so that he can be qualified for the job? And why not release the minutes? Does he not understand what those are either? The last couple of years have shed a lot of light on town affairs. It would seem to me that if Michael really wanted to move forward and do what is required of him, he would have shown some indication of that by now. He seems to only play around the edges while conducting business as usual. Can we afford another year of it?
Nice. Trash a guy who already lost his job. Real classy. I hope it helps you make some point you feel needs to be made on a public forum after he's been voted out.
It only took a couple posts after yours FrankG to be reminded what you/we are up against. Stay safe with the saw, I'll do the same on my own projects. .02.
That is exactly what you have been asking for! The SB has been pretty restrained up to now. But you idiots, who claim to be all for Michael Gagne, cry and moan that no cause has been given. Then when the evidence is given for what he hasn't done or isn't doing, you cry foul. Which do you want? Either you want to have the guy hung out to dry so you can have your reasons or you don't want that and had better just shut up about the reasons.
More brilliant commentary from a brain trust member-so much for dialouge.
Answer his question. Which do you want? Reasons for non-renewal or not.
Mack the Knife may be less diplomatic than I but he hit the nail on the head this time.
How about after 20+ years of service the guy is given goals to meet BEFORE he's cut loose after one 15 minute executive session. Is that such a difficult concept? I know, I'm a 'Concern Troll' according to the blog's author so you can dismiss this issue out of hand as usual.
To anon 1:57, hey, if the guy doesn't know what his goals are after 20 plus years, it's time to move on.
This town has been moving for change by way of or SB elections for 10 plus years. I'm an old timer in town and have heard the frustration with MG for a very long time. Many of us remember the crooked process when he was hired in the first place. People think we will forget, but we don't. The new people in town don't know the history that goes along with this. Just my opinion-this is long overdue.
I have a hard time understanding how looking back 22 years to how the guy was hired will move us forward, but hey I'm a newbie having only lived here 32 years.
Mack the knife - whatever happened to the ability to 'disagree without being disagreeable'? :)
to anon 4:37
I said, it's time to move on. We need to look forward now and think about our future.
I was talking about what my opinion was based on.
Let's move on.
to Concern troll, Mr Markey, you must be a lawyer because you didn't answer Mack's question. Which do you want, reasons for non-renewal or not. It seems that you are only here to give Bill and his followers a hard time. No matter what they do, you criticize. Please answer the question do you want the reasons or don't you.
I answered the question in my response of 1:57. I would have preferred to know what the specific requirements Gagne was being asked to perform BEFORE he was non-renewed. According to several here, there clearly was a lack of communication between ALL parties as to what was expected of Gagne.
And No, this is not Mr. Markey so it must be time to recalibrate the forensic data analysis instrumentation.
Good now we are on the same page. So there will be no more complaining when Gagne is hung out to dry. Personally I would have rather seen him go with a good referral but you and he both don't seem to want it that way. Have a good night Chris.
Good night - but work on that forensic calibrator in the morning will ya, still off a bit.
I copied this from Kurt Brown's blog
The executive administrator has (1)failed to maintain public records as required by Mass General Law, has (2)failed to provide a multi-year forecast and budget message as rerquired by the town charter, and has (3)acted against the interest of the town in providing contracts to himself and others. Other areas we don't know if he has acted or not, but looks like not, include providing adequate supervision by conducting yearly reviews, getting the director of budget and finance to have plans for the future, making sure there was a plan to pick up dead animals, staffing his own office, and maintaining the secrecy of executive sessions. Anyone care to dispute those?
Interesting article in this morning's S-T. The number of signatures they've collected will be telling as a predictor of success for the recall effort. I suspect it will be a large number.
Trimble, et al. could well end up having won the battle, but losing the war.
I say if they want to play that game, we start a petition to recall Bob Carney and Nathalie Dias for signing those contracts that are "clearly not in the town's best interest. It would seem to me that by signing them they were in violation of the town charter.
and if you start a recall petition against Carney and Dias, i'm going to start a preemptive recall vote against Barry Walker. WAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!
What nonsense and good luck with that!
I know MANY people who would sign a recall for Carney and Dias for signing those never ending contract! Carney was probably asleep when they discussed the contracts, but what's Nat's excuse?
Mr. Trimble writes, "Here is the latest Email being circulated by Kevin Lee, the town Youth Advocate.
You might wonder when he finds time to, you know, like, actually do work for the town?". Look at this blog and ask yourself the same question.
Post a Comment