Final Report on the Amherst Indy Survey on Town Manager Performance in 2024

Last month, the town council completed its annual review of  Town Manager Paul Bockelman’s  performance for 2024.  A summary of that evaluation can be read here and the full report here. The Town Manager’s self-evaluation for 2024 can be found here.

Since October,  The Indy has been conducting an independent survey of Amherst residents, seeking their feedback on the Town Manager’s performance in 2024. The Indy sponsored this survey because the Town Manager is not accountable to the electoral process but is appointed by the Town Council and answers exclusively to them.  Public perceptions of his performance have been absent from his annual evaluation by the Town Council. While the Town Council’s annual evaluation invites input from Amherst residents, town employees, and members of town boards, commissions, and committees, their final evaluation appears to be based exclusively on the input of Amherst’s 13 town councilors.  

Input for the Town Council evaluation closed on October 31.  Input for the Indy survey closed on December 31. In extending its deadline for completing the survey, Indy Managing Editor Art Keene noted: “the year is not yet over and a lot of consequential business remains to be concluded including setting budget priorities. We wanted to give our readers a chance to weigh in on the manager’s complete performance for 2024, so we’ll continue to accept survey responses until the end of the year.”

The Town Council asked for feedback on 2024 Town Manager performance based on annual goals that the council had established. The Indy invited the public to weigh in on their perception of the Town Manager’s performance in the six categories of policy performance and seven categories of management performance that the council used for structuring their own evaluation process. 

The Indy’s survey adopted the same quantitative evaluation scale used by the Town Council and the same numbering system for the 13 areas of evaluation.  Survey respondents were asked to evaluate the town manager for each policy and management performance category using the following scale.

1. Commendable = Performance surpassing reasonable expectations
2. Satisfactory = Performance meeting reasonable expectations
3. Needs improvement = Performance below reasonable expectations; improvement likely
4. Unsatisfactory = Performance below reasonable expectations; improvement unlikely
5. Unable to judge = Insufficient information available for evaluation 

The Indy also invited subjective comments, asking readers to qualify their evaluations and to elaborate on areas where they felt the Town Manager’s performance had been commendable or lacking. We reproduce most of those comments below. A handful of comments were redacted because they would have revealed the writer’s identity and hence their publication would violate our guarantee of anonymity to all respondents. 

The Indy solicited responses via multiple postings in the Indy (see e.g. here) and by word of mouth among Indy readers. The survey was posted on Google Forms. Respondents’ identities as Amherst residents were verified and results were then fully anonymized.  Respondents were advised to only address the categories of evaluation with which they were familiar and no-response across the categories ranged from 10% to 38%.

The Indy received  21 responses. Eleven residents responded to the Town Council’s  survey and it appears that the council also included in their tally the 12 responses that the Indy had received by October 31 and shared with the council, bringing their total public response to 23. The town has not posted the feedback that they have received from town residents.

While the Indy’s sample is small and might not be representative, it should be regarded as exemplary, that is ,the responses offer examples of how some residents of Amherst view the Town Manager’s performance.  Most respondents to the Indy’s survey offered subjective commentary that provides a more fine-grained view of residents’ concerns and interests than a simple numerical scale and there are some striking contrasts between the council’s narrative evaluation and the comments of Amherst residents. Because the annual council review tends to be filled with high praise, the concerns and critiques coming from the residents offer an important alternative perspective that ought to be considered.  

Results Summary
The public response was more critical of the Town Manager’s performance than the Town Council’s evaluation.  In the Indy survey, the  Town Manager’s performance was deemed to be lacking in 10 of 13 categories in which more than 55% of respondents rated his performance as needing improvement or unsatisfactory and where he failed to muster over 28% approval (that is, ratings of commendable or satisfactory). Among these categories, the Town Manager received the lowest marks in Public Health and Safety and Infrastructure Management, Maintenance, and Land Stewardship where only 19% of respondents awarded him positive marks.  The Town Manager received both high and low marks for Major Capital Projects where 33% viewed his work positively (commendable or satisfactory) but 48% rated his performance as unsatisfactory. Here, the Town Manager was commended for the delivery of a new net-zero elementary school, while concerns about mismanagement and soaring costs of the Jones Library expansion project dominated critical comments.  The Town Manager also received high marks in the categories of Racial Equity and Justice and Relations with UMass, Amherst College, and Hampshire College  where 38% rated his performance as commendable or satisfactory. However, the subjective commentary for Racial Equity and Justice was some of the harshest that respondents offered, with much of it referring to an indifference to the needs of Amherst’s BIPOC communities and a failure to support CRESS,  the town’s civilian responder department.

The quantitative ratings are a blunt instrument.  The qualitative comments give a much more precise indication of where respondents are pleased with the manager’s performance and why, and where and they are disappointed and why.

With the Indy’s survey form, the public had a clear, structured opportunity to comment on the manager’s performance  and on this important annual activity. Considering how we evaluate the Town Manager and what we need to know about his work is especially timely this year when we are also reviewing our Home Rule Charter. 

We have learned from this year’s experience.  The incongruity between the Indy’s results and those of the council suggest that a better evaluation  process is needed. The public needs a longer lead time, more information from leaders in each field about how things are going in each department, criteria for judging, and a simple format for completing the survey while at the same time, an opportunity to offer subjective comments. We feel they also need the opportunity to comment anonymously as staff does.  And we think that the public’s responses to the evaluation ought to be anonymized and posted publicly which is not now the case. The Indy will continue to sponsor an annual review until such time as the Town Council incorporates comprehensive feedback from town residents and town employees into their evaluation and makes those responses visible to the public.

Survey Results
The objectives listed below in each of the evaluation categories are taken from the Town Council’s evaluation protocol. 

1A. CLIMATE ACTION

1B. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s performance on CLIMATE ACTION was seen as commendable:

• Trying to make our town buildings more energy efficient; Valley Green Energy; steady switch to town electric vehicles; charging stations
• He apparently did not interfere with the planning to build a new school that is truly a net zero building.
• The net-zero school at Fort River is exemplary and seems to have received strong support from the Town Manager, even as projected costs escalated. And the manager has supported a transition to electric vehicles for the town – a small but important effort to date that includes an electric ambulance. The facilities review that is underway is important and there will need to be more proactive action to get us to our 2030 and 2-5 CAARP goals.
• Support for the new elementary school
• Launching Valley Green Energy
• Moving the waste hauler proposal forward decisively
• Getting a community dashboard
• Doing an inventory of municipal HVAC systems and a timeline for transitioning them to electric.
• Net zero buildings, or intentions to build only / mostly those supporting the school building committee
• Plowing the streets has been great this year. Do wish that Puffers pond would get some attention, maybe less dog shit would be nice.

1C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s performance on CLIMATE ACTION was seen as needing  improvement.

• Encourage alternatives to driving: more & safer bicycle lanes, sidewalk repair, no more new traffic circles, which are a danger & impediment to pedestrians and bicycles. The proposed traffic circles in front of Fort River School show surprisingly bad judgement in this regard.
• The TM has never taken a proactive approach to municipal level prioritization or actual work on climate action. His budgets, actions, and inactions speak volumes about how he is more interested in greenwashing than real change.
• He needs to be a leader, a climate champion. Instead he slow-walks all climate action.
• The TM and the council seem to cut climate action provisions when there is need to cut costs in a project. I’ve seen it with the schools and the library project.
• Get the trash hauler reform activated.
• The manager needs to move much more aggressively on achieving climate action goals for 2025 and 2030. He has stated that he does not plan to take advantage of state and federal grants. The town needs to take advantage of grant opportunities out there to reduce emissions and make the town more resilient in the long run. It is not acceptable to do less when we have very robust climate action goals. 
• We need to stop foot dragging on accomplishing the goals prioritized in the CAARP. For example, we need to get our fleet inventory. and transition timeline done so that we can be eligible for huge amounts of grant money for DOER climate leader communities. 
• The Manager has not supported having robust waste reduction infrastructure and staffing as we have had in the past – instead he has supported privatizing. 
• I have not seen evidence of a robust climate lens being used in all decision-making across departments. Progress has been hampered by a lack of sufficient staff. The ECAC has urged the town for years now to add additional full time, professional level staff, which would create the capacity to find, apply for, and implement more grants with more consistency and knowledge of the town’s current situation This would also save money by negating the need to continually hire consultants. 
• The manager has not provided sufficient transparency around how the capital funds that have been earmarked for sustainability each year have been spent and whether it has been to accomplish our council-adopted goals. Trash and recycling need vast overhauls; water quality issues finally to be improved per recent funding.
• No climate action bylaw. Very slow on working to Waste Hauler by-law. Many of the zero energy plans for the Jones Library renovation have been removed for the new bidding process. The town needs to be exploring adding solar arrays to our existing public buildings and parking lots, especially at the schools.
• It is hard to see how the town will achieve its 2030 and 2050 energy goals when the TM has been so sluggish in addressing these goals. His lengthy response to this in his self- evaluation fails to offer many significant milestones that actually make hitting our 2030 goals feel realistic. The manager falls far short in most of his specific near term targets. Of significant concern is: 1) there is little evidence that the town consistently and rigorously uses a climate lens when making major budget and policy decisions. I can think of few public meetings where decisions were made and climate lens was specifically deliberated. 2) The TM, as a member of the Jones Library Building Committee supported value engineering that eliminated nearly all of the climate friendly features that had been touted in promoting the project. 3) The manager has been a vocal opponent of and has obstructed the progress of hauler reform which could cut the town’s trash stream by 40%, 4) the town has begun to purchase electric school buses (and retire it’s polluting and health damaging diesel fleet) but it lags behind other municipalities in the Commonwealth in transitioning its fleet (I think we might own two such buses now) and the Manager (along with the facilities director at ARPS) have shown at best, a mistrust of electric buses and at worst a hostility toward them. Diesels will eventually be banned and the town should move up from the back of the curve. All told, the TM ought to be more proactive regarding Climate Action.
• Continuing to support the library plan when most of the climate saving aspects have been removed. 
• No solar on any public building
• More active stand to preserve forests in the solar debate
• Supporting the library project in spite of the change in its climate features
• Possibly spending less time influencing the public to be afraid, very afraid of “Republicans” or “white peoples” might help everyone enjoy the climate.

2A. COMMUNITY HEALTH AND SAFETY

2B. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in COMMUNITY HEALTH AND SAFETY were seen as commendable.

• Free ppe and testing as new viruses are monitored
• Great Health Dept! Covid vaccinations publicly provided over the past few years
• Residential by-law in process
• TM seems to have a good working relationship with the health director who seems to be working hard to address many of the concerns raised in the last town health assessment. 
• TM should be commended for his support of affordable housing and for establishing a permanent location to provide shelter for the unhoused – which the town’s health assessment defined as a public health problem.
• Formed CRESS, Health Dept does good work
• I’d say CRESS, except it’s failed so badly
• Curbside recycling
• Fire department is a nice asset, i’m really thankful you haven’t totally gotten rid of the police.

2C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in COMMUNITY HEALTH AND SAFETY were seen as needing improvement.

• CRESS. It is not clear what has and hasn’t been working with CRESS. I would like to see the dispatch fully roll out with the support of the manager so that CRESS can respond to more calls. 
• Resident Oversight Board.  It feels like the planning phase is being intentionally delayed. Rabbi Deb’s work seemed to repeat work previously done and seems like a stalling tactic.
• Review Public Safety Protocols.  We need to see the manager lead on providing a clear budgetary response.
• The LEAP policy recommendations.
• Internal hire of Police Chief when public listening sessions overwhelmingly recommended prioritizing an outside hire.
• CRESS is being gaslit from what the average citizen sees/ hears.
• Make more use of CRESS workers/hire more CRESS workers to minimize police involvement in calls.
• CRESS needs to be more active in problem areas. 
• Underfunding the health department. 
• Not much in the way of youth empowerment programming. 
• Need a Community Center to address the needs of year round residents of a gigantic library.
• TM, as far as I can tell, has not specifically addressed or responded to the comprehensive community. health assessment of 2023 (or maybe 2022?). 
• The TM’s ambivalence about CRESS and his unwillingness to work with the CSSJC in ensuring that CRESS fulfills its original mandate diminishes public safety, especially for People of Color. CRESS has been understaffed for a good year and after four years in existence is still not taking calls from dispatch and is often limited to busy work (like cafeteria duty at ARHS). Clearly they should. be farther along than they are and the TM appears to be dragging his feet and obstructing their moving forward. At the same time he has adopted a hostile posture toward the CSSJC – refusing to engage with them, keeping them without a full complement of appointments for much of the year, and assigning their responsibilities to other town committees and to town hall staff, essentially disempowering them ss and advocate for community safety and social justice in town.
• I find it especially troublesome that the TM has apparently reassigned responsibility for developing a BIPOC youth empowerment center to the Rec Department and has refused to share information about their work with the CSSJC which developed and was overseeing the original mandate. Especially disturbing is that a stated goal of Rec’s efforts is to create more trusting relationships between the Amherst Police and youth when the vision in the original recommendations was that youth of color should have space where they can be free of police surveillance and potential dominance.
• Poor support of CRESS, no obvious change in APD practices (hired chief already in the APD).
• The fire department has very dangerous staffing levels, frequently one firefighter/paramedic shows up on a serious call. Amherst needs daily assistance from other departments to cover calls. Dangerous/antiquated equipment.
• Everyone knows Hickory Ridge is NOT the place for a new fire station, yet it is supported by the town manager. The pay is so poor that most Amherst firefighters have to work significant amounts of overtime to be able to live in the town.
• Cress is sketchy. Cress has been an unwanted, uninvited, uninformed and UNHELPFUL presence in my neighborhood. It’s like DCF but with even less accountability or purpose. Idk what’s happening but the funding needs to be cut from this awful group.
• How can our firefighters and paramedics assist others when they themselves are facing all-time low levels of morale, largely due to the town manager failing to address the needs of the town’s public safety workers.

3A. ECONOMIC VITALITY

3B Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in ECONOMIC VITALITY were seen as commendable.

• The Drake is a good addition to downtown.
• Attempting to revitalize downtown…
• Drake opened. Parking signs downtown
• Improvements in the town common
• Allowing businesses to stay open.

3C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in ECONOMIC VITALITY were seen as needing improvement.

• Prioritize social justice projects.
• The town needs more variety in commercial offerings downtown and in the village centers. Let’s not use the library as an economic driver.
• More encouragement for small businesses, both downtown and in coordination with UMass, more encouragement for BIPOC-owned small businesses. I do not believe hiring an economic development director is a good use of our tax $$.
• Not pursuing PILOT payments in any discernible way.
• Neighborhoods are increasingly becoming student residences with an increase in LLC home ownership. Year round population is decreasing – soon to be overtaken by the student population. Families and elders are leaving town. We are in a pending financial crisis. We need to approach UMass and Amherst College for PILOT money. Now our town is turning into a college campus with dorms downtown rather than on campuses.
• It is hard to fathom the TM’s commitment to the bloated Jones Library project while crying for austerity for all other town departments (except perhaps the police).
• The new business of Amherst is apparently student housing – which may work out great for developers and landlords but doesn’t really create much of a local economy. Shouldn’t the TM be doing more to attract business to Amherst that will grow our tax base? Have there been any substantial initiatives (excluding bringing in ARPA funds) that are building a foundation for growing our local economy? What’s the plan.?
• Still no economic director, no ARPA funds to Black Business Association businesses. Seems that the town is run by developers.
• New Amherst College Dorm downtown.
• Push for more commercial on first floor of mixed use buildings; 1/3 is inadequate
• The TM is complicit in the devastation of the downtown business community by BID and the builder/developer element.
• Allowing non-taxpaying entities to make most of the decisions and benefit from town paid projects more than taxed citizens, overspending on festivals.

4A. HOUSING AFFORDABILITY

4B. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in HOUSING AFFORDABILITY were seen as commendable.

• The long term shelter being built is a good addition. Putting student housing on University Drive INSTEAD of downtown or in our neighborhoods, was a good idea put forward by staff. Better yet would be making sure there is adequate housing on campus.
• TBD if town vs gown battles are unaddressed.
• We are seeing new buildings constructed, now new zoning proposed for University Drive, new alternatives for homeless residents
• Some good efforts, but town needs more affordable options for working families.
• There is a lack of affordable housing in Amherst and that shortage is exacerbated by corporate real estate interests buying up inexpensive family homes to convert into student rentals. While the TM does not appear to have done much to address, he has been supportive of town efforts to expand affordable housing stock with the projects at Ball Lane, East Street School, and Belchertown Road, ready to substantially expand the stock of affordable housing in town.
• More affordable rental units (still not enough), work on year-round shelter continues to be an issue, but he is not an impediment to it

4C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in HOUSING AFFORDABILITY were seen as needing improvement.

• Make actually affordable housing and stop the monopolization of the housing in Amherst.
• Inclusionary zoning provision for downtown buildings needs to be used, to integrate families into the downtown. Zoning needs to be used to prevent LLCs from buying up single family homes in our neighborhoods. Nothing has been done to stop the flow of families from our neighborhoods.
• Tax rate is absolutely usurious.
• Need is much greater than current projects — could more be done?? funding??
• As with climate, the Town Manager is more interested in appearances than genuine change.
• Not keeping developers and big companies and landlords in check
• Housing is in a crisis throughout the country. Amherst is losing its year round population steadily over the past years. Families and elders can no longer afford to live in Amherst. Look at the decreasing public school enrollment.
• Neighborhoods continuing to be overrun with students, No help for low to middle income people to buy homes. Too hard for some to fill affordable units and for people to find them–record keeping is poor, no central registry of affordable units
• Encourage local homebuilders to create projects based on attainable housing; encourage downtown development of non-student housing, so people can move out of their single family housing, move downtown, create a demographic mix downtown, free up houses for new families; more dorms on campus.
• The TM is complicit in the BID/Builder desires to build for transient students rather than low-and middle income families who will be long-term committed Amherst residents.
• Kamins is a scourge on our town and everyone knows it but of course y’all are “in bed” together so i’m sure you’ll never do squat about that. I dont rent from them but it isn’t hard to notice there’s something rotten in the state of Denmark.

5A. MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS

5B. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in THE MAJOR CAPITAL BUILDING PROJECTS are seen as commendable.

• The net Zero School is on track and doing well. The long term housing for unhoused and low income folks downtown has made good progress.
• Breaking ground on a new school? In 2024. Meanwhile the UMA and Amherst college barons follow the money pits.
• It’s my understanding that money is being set aside each year for the purpose, that searches for acceptable locations continue, etc.
• Hope the new school bid is accepted or we may have another delayed mess.
• School is progressing (hopefully). Also the track probably resolved 10 years too late.
• There are more apartments, even if many complain about the aesthetics and cost

5C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in the MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS are seen as needing improvement.

• The library addition needs to transition to a repair and retrofit project. The fire station and DPW are seriously behind when they are needed for public safety and health. 
• Roundabouts are prioritized over road repairs. Why is that?
• You tell us what the priorities are. And can’t put in a speedbump at a preschool.
• New fire station & new DPW building have been discussed for at least 20 years, with no results. Not necessarily the Town Manager’s fault, but there are no results to show.
• The Town Manager has utterly failed to prioritize the fire station and DPW (and youth center and maintenance/climate action on existing buildings). Instead, he has pushed forward the library project even though it is obvious that the Trustees and fundraisers will fail to raise funds and the town will pay the price. He has also clearly coordinated with those who are violating historic preservation standards and rules. He has withheld critical information from the Town Council and the Amherst Historic commission on multiple occasions that had an impact on important votes of these bodies.
• The library project.
• Letting the Library delay more urgent major capital projects
• Need to prioritize the DPW and Fire stations over the Jones Library which is an unsustainable and overblown project
• We need a new fire station and public works building, not a mega library for town residents. The university and colleges have their own libraries AND the world is moving digitally.
• The net-zero Fort River elementary school is going to be built, apparently with little delay and without crisis or scandal. The rigor of the ESBC was exemplary and stands in stark contrast to the opaque, dishonest and sloppy work of the Jones Library Building Committee (of which the TM was a compliant member who always deferred to the JL trustees.). TM’s commitment to the Jones Library project, even as costs have spun out of control and as it becomes more apparent that the project is rife with mismanagement, has hurt all other capital projects in town. Firefighters and DPW workers labor in toxic and otherwise unsafe conditions with no apparent plan in sight for addressing their needs. Seniors have embarrassingly dismal facilities while seniors in neighboring towns enjoy palatial centers. Roads have achieved an unthinkable state of degradation – once unimaginable in Amherst but now a sad fact of life. The library project is eating the town and everything else is falling apart around it and the TM will not acknowledge this crisis much less take action to address it.
• The only major capital project has been the boondoggle called the Jones, draining time, his attention and town resources, the Fire Station, DPW, senior center and youth center, all of which seem to be nowhere on the TMs priority, kicked ‘down the road’ year after year after year.
• Library is a disaster–so many missteps. No progress on fire station and DPW. Buildings are poorly maintained.
• Library project is a fiasco that is preventing other urgent projects from proceeding
• We should have a functional fire department and drivable streets before a new library!!
• The TM has supported the unworkable, unaffordable and ugly library expansion/demolition project at the expense of other more compelling and necessary capital projects.

6A. RACIAL EQUITY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE

6B. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in RACIAL EQUITY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE are seen as  commendable.

• Hired DEI director. established CRESS
• Making slow progress.
• CRESS and DEI departments
• The work being done on reparations

6C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in RACIAL EQUITY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE was seen to need improvement.

• Nothing is commendable here.
• Struggling to identify  just one example.
• Adequately fund the DEI and CRESS department.
• The DEI office is severely underfunded to complete all of its tasks. The manager needs to provide more support for the BIPOC community who have continually shared their concerns about the police and other departments in town. The Manager needs to revisit the recommendation from CSWG to redistribute police funds to other programs that offer more proactive support as a major step to repair racial harm. The manager is not using  committees to their greatest advantage, especially those with marginalized community members, when revising policies and regulations, especially the CSSJC. Much more could be done in town if resident volunteers with a variety of skills and interests were allowed to assist.
• The schools are a fiasco and race baiting is common practice.
• Insufficient support given to DEI and especially to CRESS to allow them to succeed. Lack of active communication with CSSJC, the follow-on to CSWG. Most glaring example was telling respected CSSJC co-chair that he would not reappoint her. The typical reaction one sees in many organizations: once DEI Director is hired, management feels they have no further racial equity responsibilities. Town Manager should be giving frequent, public statements of support for CRESS, encouraging their outreach, actively helping work to define their expanded role in response to dispatch calls. BIPOC community members have lost faith in the town’s commitment to equity.
• He has undermined the CRESS proposal and failed to enable it to live up to the vision and potential with which it was created. He has refused to order Dispatch to send all appropriate calls to CRESS. He has hired a director who will follow his watered-down version of what CRESS can be and is ignoring the possibility of building a department that would bring social justice community safety to the BIPOC community. He appears to be afraid of the police department and is selling out the needs of the BIPOC community in order to keep police officers happy.
• In past years the TM supported the creation of CRESS and DEI office but has since been unsupportive of the work of both departments which are understaffed and underfunded. The TM left the CSSJC, one of only two majority minority committees in town, with insufficient appointees to field a quorum. He has been uncommunicative with this committee. It is hard to see where the TM is supportive of the needs and concerns of residents of color. While he has not been openly hostile, he has certainly not been supportive. He could do more.
• No Resident Oversight Board, BIPOC led youth center, or multicultural center. It seems that the recreation dept has taken over youth programs with little input from youth of color.
• More listening to BIPOC communities needs; more practical encouragement of CRESS or some alternative
• The TM has been slow to make appointments to committees in this area and has not committed to CRESS as a vital and significant part of town government.
• Well, hating people for the color of their skin needs to stop altogether- it isn’t “better” to hate lighter skin people and make it sense like darker skin people should be afraid of light skins- it’s wildly not ok; especially for mixed race people!

7A. ADMINISTRATION AND LEADERSHIP

7B. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishment in ADMINISTRATION AND LEADERSHIP were seen as commendable.

• Town is functioning, many different things to manage, balance every day.
• Most of town staff seem very capable
• Perseverance in a job that is thankless
• The Town Manager’s regular report is extremely helpful, though it would be nice if it were organized according to his goals

7C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in ADMINISTRATION AND LEADERSHIP were seen as needing improvement.

• Make transparent decisions
• The Manager shows deep bias in appointments to town committees and is not transparent in how many or who has applied. He has been heavy handed in putting forward his own policies not adopted by the Council, such as dissolving our waste reduction staff and infrastructure, privatizing hauling services, not applying for available grants in areas of policy priorities. 
• Difficulty with female department heads.
• Mass Muni Assoc credentials are fairly archaic. Think bigger, smarter and stop pandering to the elite.
• Appointments to Town committees are slow & sometimes arbitrary. More active recruitment of residents for boards & committees needed. Public communication is not too good. See my answers to #8,9,11,12
• Not advocating for PILOT for our town. Not standing up to landlords and developers who are making real estate in this town so expensive.
• More meaningful engagement wwith public input
• The way in which the Historical Commission has been left with unfilled seats is deplorable in a town with many building related projects. The town website for commission members is not accurate.
• Much frustration here. Whatever public input is provided on the budget – not much of that input seems to be taken into consideration in the TM’s writing of the draft budget. In the last year he seems to have taken an adversarial attitude toward the public schools blaming them for not planning well for the current fiscal cliff, but not taking into consideration the larger context that has created a crisis in public education across the nation, and not recognizing that for many (most?) Amherst residents, the schools are a top priority. The Town Manager routinely pleads that he does not have sufficient staff to do the work that needs to get done and certainly not to undertake new initiatives. But he never advocates – even in his own budget drafts, for expanding Town Hall staff to give him the personnel that he needs. And the high turnover at Town Hall, especially among department heads is often attributed to Amherst not paying competitive salaries. It’s hard to understand why the TM does not advocate for paying his own people salaries that are likely to result in longer retention. There’s work that needs to get done and the town suffers when it doesn’t
• Too much staff turnover, Committee appointment process is opaque and the same people get appointed while others cannot and are passed over for college students and newcomers to town–presumably to not question the town manager and council.
• Improve morale that seems to be inspiring an exodus of town employees; inform the town council how they can think independently, plus see the unintended consequences of not stopping bad ideas (library and other)
• My responses to earlier areas should be incorporated as answers to this area as well.

8A. PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

8B. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT were seen as commendable.

• Keeps our Town humming along with limited budget; hires high quality people

8C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT were seen as needing improvement.

• Give further direction to staff and make staff aware of decisions.
• Creating policy that keeps our per capita staffing at a level that is half of the state average, stretching staff to the limit by adding multiple “hats” rather than hiring new staff, not delegating authority, providing little decision-making ability to department heads and sub heads, providing little incentive for professional staff to stay on. To a fault, the Manager tries to hire from within rather than looking for the best candidate, values loyalty over skill or passion, offers low salaries, overworks staff, allows long term department heads free rein to indulge their interests,
• Looks like it’s hard to keep good staff. Why?
• Heavy staff workloads; lack of support, in terms of personal encouragement, balancing workloads, seeking creative ways to help manage tasks. I see examples where staff don’t seem to be prioritizing their tasks appropriately and examples where senior staff are swallowed up by what should be tasks for lower-level assistants.
• See above–too much turnover
• Improve morale that seems to be inspiring an exodus of town employees
• Seems rude a lot of the time.

9A. FINANCE

9B.Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in FINANCE are seen as commendable.

• Getting rid of the former finance director.
• Ensuring Amherst has strong financial stability; presenting budgets on time to Council
• Budget is balanced, credit rating is pretty good
• I assume that, leaving aside all the other areas in this evaluation, town finances are honestly and competently managed and directed.

9C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in FINANCE are seen as needing improvement.

• The Manager has pretty much ignored the annual council goals to form partnerships with UMass and the Colleges and to secure major funding from one or more.
• Get the books together and take a grant writing refresher.
• Prioritizing support for our schools; oversight of the Library Renovation budget & contract — the Library Trustees are acting financially irresponsible and our taxes have to cover their shortfalls, yet our Finance Manager is not analyzing their financial projections; better interaction with Town Council on priorities; negotiating better financial support from UMass and Amherst College
• We need more money! PILOT payments
• Too much staff time and town resources spent on the library project
• If the Jones Library project goes ahead and there are change orders given the need for adaptations based on Section 106 review, the lag in fundraising by the library trustees will mean that expenses for the demolition/addition/expansion will fall on the taxpayers – in a town that is already a very expensive place to live in terms of taxes.
• Disagree with even allocation to all departments, not based on need. Town Manager has been the only one negotiating with UMass and Amherst College and does not represent the needs of the schools. Jones Library should be more self-supporting
• The answer to our revenue problems can’t always be to allow more unpopular development.
• I pay A LOT of taxes and still do not have drivable streets or a functional fire department!
• What’s up with giving the Library billions? maybe not do that.

10A. INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND LAND STEWARDSHIP

10B.  Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND LAND STEWARDSHIP are seen as  commendable.

• Works well with Cowls. N Amherst needs significant attention.
• Seems like things are going along as well as can be expected with tight budgets, for upkeep of town buildings. Maintenance of Schools and Jones Library have been poor, but it’s my understanding neither of these is directly under Town control.
• We seem to have pretty good management of the natural lands and the watershed lands.
• Water Treatment plant
• Some roadwork and sidewalks repaired
• Hickory Ridge (when it’s finished), North Common looks nice
• Despite all the contention about every building decision, we should still ultimately have a new school and library in a couple of years, both of which are long overdue
• Reopening of Centennial water treatment plant.

10C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND LAND STEWARDSHIP were seen as needing  improvement. 

• The town does not seem to have a plan to regularly maintain buildings and roads. The Jones Library has been neglected for years. The town seems to let buildings fall to disrepair as a means of getting public support for spending on capital projects. Building roundabouts everywhere in town is not a policy of the Council and is not a higher priority for use of staff and funds than fulfilling Council goals. If we are thinking of long term resilience of the town, we need to be looking at providing our own electricity in the future so that we can endure power outages and grid failure. The Manager’s desire to privatize everything takes away our self sufficiency and long term resilience.
• More creative use of space? Home for CRESS open after 4 PM? Seems like location of new fire station at Hickory Ridge is a desperation decision — Why not the former school grounds at the South Amherst Common? Future use of Wildwood School?
• Fire Station, DPW, roads, sidewalks all falling apart. Overblown library project getting so much money.
• Roads and sidewalks need more resources and attention
• Many roads are still pot hole messes. Many downtown and downtown neighborhoods have dangerous side walks. Need to move beyond the library and address the fire station, DPW and the Middle School is a mess.
• This is hard to say. The town has suffered from too much deferred maintenance long before Paul Bockelman became TM. How much of this is on him? I don’t know, but it’s pretty clear that the roads and sidewalks have degraded substantially over the last five years.
• Budgetary resources for these critical town areas need to be increased.
• DPW and fire station are a disgrace–and dangerous for those who work there.
• All signs seem to be pointing to a lot of delayed maintenance
• The condition of the town infrastructure is poor and the streets are even worse!
• Like other drivers I am appalled at the condition of the town’s roads and the inadequacy of attempts to address them.

11A. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

11B. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT were seen as commendable.

• Often invites buddies for coffee.
• Town website contain much valuable information; monthly Cuppa Joe; written reports to Town Council
• He seems to have regular sessions for the public to meet with him.
• Attends lots of events. Is present and friendly to residents
• Very easy to talk to. Monthly Cuppa Joe is nice
• Inviting participation in the Dodson and fFinker project
• I love that meetings can be watched by the public commoners
• Cuppa Joe

11C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT were seen as  needing  improvement.

• Adequately fund cultural events.
• The manager needs to welcome comments from all residents, to respond to all residents, to include a variety of voices on his committees and to be respectful of those voicing different opinions. He needs to be transparent and to finally support opening up who and how many have applied for committee positions so that the council and the public can see the full pool of applicants.
• Zero cheerleading skills.
• Communication is almost entirely top-down; Town staff are uniformly resistant to any suggestions from residents, missing many valuable opportunities for improvement; resistance to change; resistance to additional forms of communication, since not all residents regularly check the website. There is very little public communication.
• The Town Manager only takes in opinions that conform to his own biases. He chronically refuses to appoint people to committees and boards who have dissented from his views and wishes.
• Does not respond to emails.
• A sense that the town manager is not engaging alternative views
• I can’t help but feel that town government is less accessible to the residents and less transparent than it was when we had a Town Meeting form of government. The loss of accessibility and transparency may be more on the Council than the TM, but the TM has not been very open about his appointment process for town committees, and the Residents Advisory Committee and the Community Participation Officers (especially since Jennifer Moyston left) don’t seem particularly engaged with the public or accessible.
• The town manager needs to communicate directly to residents. Monthly updates and coffee hours are inadequate. Nor is his minor role in the annual ‘State of the Town,’ given that it is largely controlled and presented by the Town Council President. Residents should have the opportunity to hear directly from him and I’d suggest the use of emails that go directly to our inboxes so that we do not have to rely on any of the above or have to locate it on the town website.
• Opaqueness of committee appointments with disproportionate number of those appointed being either insiders or newcomers and students with little perspective on issues in town
• The Town Council’s majority is opposed to much listening to the public or even fair debate amongst each other – stop using the cheap tactic of ending discussion!!
• The town is more fractionalized than ever before; the TM is in a position to bring factions together and effect compromises and agreements but he has not done so as far as I know.,
• Listen to the commoners more

12A. RELATIONSHIP WITH THE TOWN COUNCIL

12B. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in his RELATIONSHIP WITH THE TOWN COUNCIL were seen as commendable.

• The Manager’s regular report to the Council is excellent though it should be organized according to the Council goals.
• Attends Town Council meeting, presents written/oral report at each meeting, presents timely budget
• Too good of a relationship, especially with council president
• Town Manager’s report is excellent and a good way to keep up with all of the things happening around Town Hall

12C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in his RELATIONSHIP WITH THE TOWN COUNCIL are seen as needing improvement.

• In practical terms, Town Council has very little authority over the Town Manager’s decisions. TC gives general guidelines and goals, but the Town Manager makes all the administrative decisions. This is mainly a result of the way our form of govt. is set up. Since the TM is not elected, he does not have any accountability to the community.
• The Town Manager chronically manipulates the Town Council and instructs them that they have no power to challenge his actions. He is subordinate to the Council but acts very much as an unelected authoritarian figure.
• We need an elected mayor not a town manager!
• TM seems to have an especially good relationship with Councilors Griesemer and Steinberg and together they seem to coordinate the business of the town. It’s hard to discern what the TM’s relationship is with the rest of the council. The council rarely challenges the TM and always gives him a stellar annual evaluation. It remains to be seen whether this is evidence of a productive collaboration or an absence of checks and balances.

13A. RELATIONSHIP WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS, AMHERST COLLEGE, AND HAMPSHIRE COLLEGE

13B. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in his RELATIONSHIP WITH UMASS, AMHERST COLLEGE AND HAMPSHIRE COLLEGE were seen as commendable.

• These institutions do not give one crap about the town unless it benefits them. Need constant reminders to demand compensation and tax relief for their succubus – like reach.
• Don’t know enough about specific mutually beneficial interactions.
• Negotiated increased payments from UMass
• We have buses.

13C. Here are some areas where the Town Manager’s accomplishments in his RELATIONSHIP WITH UMASS, AMHERST COLLEGE AND HAMPSHIRE COLLEGE were seen as needing  improvement.

• The town doesn’t have a transparent relationship with UMass and the Colleges. And hasn’t succeeded in getting major funding from 1 or more of them.
• I’m sure the foundations throw self-congratulatory events and our appointeds are too happy to be sycophants.
• Seems like much more cooperation could be developed.
• The Town Manager has failed miserably in compelling Amherst College to contribute to the town’s needs EXCEPT for getting funding for the overblown vanity library project. There has been no progress in having Amherst College contribute significantly in advancing climate action, an area that should be mutually beneficial and relatively easy to accomplish. His relationship with UMass is to facilitate unfettered expansion of student housing at the detriment to year round neighborhoods (livability, affordability, etc) and increasing burden on the town for the increased services (water, sewer, etc)
• PILOT payments, and siting solar development on those lands
• Need strategic partnership agreements with the university and colleges to financially benefit the town. Amherst College has a gigantic endowment. UMass needs to build affordable housing for graduate and undergraduate students.
• Relationship seems to be cooperative and amicable though maybe a tad too deferential on the TM’s part. Amherst does very poorly in establishing PILOT payments from the colleges – especially compared with other college towns that host elite and wealthy institutions. It would seem that he could do more.
• Need more contribution to the town from the colleges, especially to schools
• Many conflicts of interest from higher ed decision makers also being town decision makers
• Local colleges should pay more for their drag on services.
• You let them run things but they give absolutely nothing back. like a loud, drunk, jaywalking, entitled vampire.
• Seems like there could be more opportunity for strategic partnerships to help fund our public safety departments that are affected by the university and college populations.