There has been a discussion in comments to this post about whether or not Dartmouth should change from the Town Meeting form of government to some other form. I thought I would bring it out to the post level so perhaps more people will participate. Start by reading the comments or reading this post and this post.
I have linked ...
... to some additional resources about town charter revisions at the Massachusetts Municipal Association.
You can find a list of Massachusetts municipalities and their form of government at this link.
This link provides an overview of Charter Commission procedures and Decision points
A summary of the procedures for forming a charter commission and revising the charter can be found at this link.
So what do you think? Do we need to change from our present form, can we get the 3,000 plus signatures to do it, and what form should we adopt?
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Should Dartmouth change its form of government?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
38 comments:
Hell no.
Certainly worth a look.... at least then the special interests won't run the town meeting
What "special interests" run Town Meeting? Certainly not the schools. Certainly not the DPW or police. Certainly not the libraries. All have taken huge cuts. Please name names.
That "special interests" thing was a cheap shot.
Please read Bill's list of 373 town meeting members and give us all the list of "special interests". I see lots of friends and neighbors and lots of names I never even heard of.
Thirty seven percent of town meeting members either work for the town or are directly related to an employee. Since these people have a vested interest in showing up it can be reasonably assumed that the typical 30% who do not show up are not from this group. This leaves town employees and their direct relatives with a slight majority. They can only accomplish so much in their own best interest because the budget is pretty much set for them. In the past there have been very few motions from the floor. Probably because many of them are just not savvy enough.
And recent efforts "from the floor" have all been unsuccessful. Every one.
We must also consider the fact that just because a majority are town employees or family, doesn't mean they are united. Some are school employees and some are town side employees. The dynamics are not that cut and dried.
You will see a change in those dynamics since more and more parents are becoming town meeting members.
Not all "parents" vote the same way.
Thanks for bringing this up Bill. Our present form of government is cumbersome with town meeting. It is hard to make decisions based on some of the limited information provided. Some people cannot be town meeting members due their work schedules. Our town is too large for this form of government.
I certainly won't support the youth advocate from the floor.
Or the schools since their info is vague at best.
Or raises or more police money.
I won't support a dime more than the Finance Committee recommemnds.
You must really like the work of the finance committee....maybe your one of them!!!
Probably not though... You must think alot like them though....too bad its a minority of the town
We are very lucky to have the Fin Com. These volunteers spend a lot of time pouring over the town's finances. They are the only ones who really know what's going on with Dartmouth's taxes, spending, etc.
I think Dartmouth's problem for many years was that people at town meeting voted opposite from the recommendations of the fin com. I made that mistake as well. I won't do that again!
As far as a new form of government. I think Dartmouth might benefit from a different form of government. The charter com. should be formed to look into this.
Let me repeat a few points from the other thread in hopes of getting this conversation going.
I have two main complaints about Town Meeting. One, it does not create adequate representation. Residents don't even know who represents them let alone how they vote at TM. Two, it does not create adequate deliberation. It's too big, and considers too large of an agenda in a single day, to really allow debate or meaningful exchanges of information from different viewpoints.
I agree with Doug Roscoe. Dartmouth has outgrown town meeting. It was good when the town population was smaller and everyone knew everyone in town. It no longer represents the residents the way it should. Time to look at other ways to govern.
Doug you hit the nail on the head, it is hurry up and finalize without much thought. we can't determine millions in funding this way.
Yes, one councilor from each precinct would give us ten and that would be much easier for people to keep track of.
Popcorn--even 9 or 10 from each precinct would be an improvement. That would put it at 90 or 100. That size would make it big enough to form specialized committees, so TM could move away from a single work committee, the FinCom.
What you're proposing is New Bedford's form of government. It doesn't work at all. It's just 11 council members and a mayor, politicking around the clock, year in, year out. Spare us!
Mr. Roscoe, what kind of committees are you suggesting? I don't see a need to move away from FinCom. It serves a very important function and is crucial to the town. With all due respect, from your posts it sounds like you just don't agree with FinCom's recommendations and would like to circumvent it.
I agree. The FinCom does a good job.
Why replace the Finance Committee or water down its function?
I disagree with the comment that Dartmouth has "outgrown" Town Meeting? What support can anyone give for this statement? I've lived here a very long time and town meeting continues to work well, thank you. Maybe some people don't like it because they don't get what they want: more spending. They think some new form of government would be easier to control. That is not a good reason to change our form of government.
Doug, Please consider posting on momof3npt. I recently have found this blog to offer a better exchange of ideas without the nastiness found here. Your input is valued and sparks discussion.
All I know is that Doug still thinks "the big one" was an excellent, well planned idea. This alone makes me suspicious of anything he recommends. We certainly don't all get to be paid handsomely to make town politics our life.
Word of caution about Momofthree blog. When this blog first started, you had to identify yourself to post which I thought was a good idea. The very first post by Momofthree stated that she wanted things to be civil. I posted an opinion on the blog that was respectful and reasoned. The response from Momofthree who apparently was the only one who remained anonymous was not respectful towards me and that was the end of my posting there.
A few corrections. I allow anonymous postings. I prefer to remain anonymous for the protection of my family. If I was uncivil in my response, I apologize. You are welcome anytime to post through my approval.
I think Fin Com does a fine job; I have no intention of circumventing them. But, they consider an extremely broad range of topics and policy areas. I think some of these might fruitfully be farmed out to other committees that could develop their own specialized expertise.
Either way, I think the members of any TM committee, including Fin Com, should be approved by the full TM. Let the Moderator nominate and the TM confirm.
I believe that any one person who has the sole authority to appoint individuals to committees or posts has too much authority. Having others involved in a screening or interviewing process or other procedure necessary for the appointed position weigh in and make their recommendations before the appointment is made provides a type of checks and balances of sorts, and discourages any potential bias that one person alone may bring to the appointment.
That said, I think our current FinCom is a good blend of members.
I have never witnessed momof3 being uncivil. Only two posters on her blog being unhappy that she moderated her posts and called her names because of it. I myself have posted there anonymously several times.
I agree that the moderator has too much power in selecting FinCom members. I do not object to the moderator accepting applications/resumes but I don't think he should have the final say nor do I think he should be personally seeking people out. Public announcments for the position should be made and those interested parties should notify the appropriate person/office.
Doug I don't see why you would want Town Meeting to vote on FinCom members when you don't believe it is representative of the town and you have stated that most members don't have enough information to vote anyway.
Now is the time to begin to think about running for moderator, town clerk, etc., when their terms are up in three years. It's never too early to start giving it some serious thought and preparing, even lining up support for a run at the position. These positions and others that have had no opposition now need to have others challenging them. It is when individuals in any walk of life get too complacent in their sphere of authority that problems may arise that the public may be unaware of, and perhaps even the individuals themselves are unaware of, as well.
There is no good reason to change Dartmouth's form of government. There are plenty of bad ones.
Post a Comment