Opinion: Another Question for Town Council Candidates

I found the statements and answers of Town Council candidates in the Indy to be really helpful.  They had enough space to give thoughtful answers, and the Indy questions were direct and specific.  At first there seems to be a lot of overlap among the candidates, but a careful reading reveals marked differences among their priorities, and it may be priorities rather than values that come into play in difficult times.

But one important question was not asked of the candidates. 2024 is the first year our Home Rule Charter can be amended, according to Section 9.6 of the Charter.  The next opportunity will be 2034 (although, like so much in the Charter this is made ambiguous by reference to Section 9.1 which allows the Charter to be amended or even repealed by any method allowable under the Massachusetts General Laws).

This newly seated council will appoint a committee of voters to make recommendations to the council for amendments and changes to the Charter.  Such recommendations will be voted on by the council, not the voters.

So the question to the candidates is:  what amendments to the Charter would you like to see?

For example would you like to see a more flexible approach to amending the Charter?  We have certainly seen that the virtual impossibility of amending the US Constitution under current conditions is a dangerous straightjacket on dealing with threats to our democratic institutions. 

Would you like to see more checks and balances in our town government?  This is the chance to add them.

The Town Charter doesn’t take into consideration the existence – and somewhat underground existence – of Political Action Committees (PACS) in town.  Similarly, the US Constitution doesn’t acknowledge the existence of political parties.  In both instances, this makes calls for transparency ludicrous and weak since basic decisions are made, not by our representatives in public, but by unelected residents out of the public eye.  Should the Charter recognize the place of PACS in our town governance?

Should the Finance Committee be independent of the Town Council?

Should the Planning Board be appointed by the Town Manager?

Should the standing committees of Town Council be abolished and turned into ad hoc committees when needed?

My own answers to these questions is “yes,” but I am sure others may have other answers, as well as other questions.

In their Indy statements, many candidates did discuss changes to the voter veto provision, and that was a welcome specificity.

But I would welcome other ideas for amending our charter, perhaps in the comments below, from candidates for Town Council who will have the ultimate responsibility for voting on them.

Michael Greenebaum was Principal of Mark’s Meadow School from 1970 to 1991, and from 1974 taught Organization Studies in the Higher Education Center at the UMass School of Education.  He served in Town Meeting from 1992, was on the first Charter Commission in 1993, and served on several town committees including the Town Commercial Relations Committee and the Long Range Planning Committee.