Why Did Dan Muscat Resign from the Charter Review Committee?
Photo: Shutterstock AI generated image
In January of 2024, Dan Muscat applied to be one of the nine members of the Amherst Charter Review Committee. He had never served on a town committee and was enthusiastic to find a committee that sounded interesting. His application stated: “I have a deep belief in the need to find common ground with people – that this is not only an emotional necessity, but also a fundamental antidote to the polarization that runs through both our community, and our country” and “If my communication skills and views of society can be of use in [the Charter Review] effort, I will be happy to bring them to this task”.
Dan Muscat resigned from the Amherst Charter Review Committee in January 2025, shortly after the committee’s meeting on January 16, 2025. While he didn’t state the exact reasons for his resignation, there are some indications of potential frustrations he experienced:
- Muscat had expressed concerns about the clarity of the committee’s scope and authority. He questioned whether the committee’s charge was consistent with state law and believed there should be more clarity that a Charter Review Committee’s scope of review is not limited.
- He advocated for being more direct in addressing community divisions regarding Amherst’s form of government, suggesting that being upfront about these issues would encourage people to open up. He understood that several members of the committee were close allies of the Council President and/or the Town Manager and was concerned that they were trying to control the committee.
- Muscat also raised concerns about the clarity of information provided to the public, emphasizing that any information should clearly state that the scope of review of the committee is not limited.
- Muscat found the town’s control over the committee process surprisingly heavy-handed, and not what he had expected.
After Muscat’s resignation, the committee chair, Julian Hynes, urged other committee members to reach out to Muscat to understand his frustration and reasons for resigning.
The Town will be posting a vacancy notice soon for his position on the committee.
Editor’s note: This article was written with the assitance of AI.
This is too bad–losing a sincere community volunteer, especially someone new to town committees and eager to serve. As a member of the Amherst League of Women Voters, I attended the sessions run by their review committee and participated in approving/amending the recommendations they put forward. There is plenty of community input if the committee really wants to hear it and take it on board. Did the Charter Review Committee even need to hire a consultant? Is the whole exercise a show, or are they seriously seeking input from the townspeople? Is there anything we can do at this stage in the process? I would hate to see another decade go by before we can correct course again.
Perhaps someone from the Amherst League of Women Voters review committee, or one of its keen observers, would be willing to serve on the Charter Commission?
Josna, yes, there are actions that any Amherst resident can take, starting with submitting public comments, either online through the feedback form, https://www.amherstma.gov/FormCenter/Town-Council-33/2024-Charter-Review-Committee-Feedback-215, or at any of the Charter Review Committee meetings that are held every other Thursday. See https://www.amherstma.gov/3799/2024-Charter-Review-Committee. We all need to pay attention to what is being done (or not done) and do all that we can to be heard.
Here is the Charter Review Committee’s statement on seeking public input. We should take them at their word.
https://www.amherstma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/76473/Charter-Review-Committee-Press-Release-12-23-24
Thank you, Anita. I will share this and the Amherst LWV recommendations with friends. And yes, Rob Kusner, I have written to the League to ask for what you suggested.
A personal anecdote:
I’ve made my feelings regarding the politics of Amherst’s Town Council and the dominant role of Amherst Forward fairly clear in previous opinion pieces. In short, I’m not a fan.
Last year, in the course of applying for a position on the Charter Committee and being turned down, I read through the town charter, and wrote up four pages of suggestions. At the request of Lynn Griesemer and Julian Hynes, I sent these suggestions to both of them. After soliciting my input, what I heard in response was…. nothing. I didn’t expect much, but a simple acknowledgement that I’d sent suggestions would have been a polite indicator that they were open to ideas not in lockstep with a preconceived agenda.
I am not seeking approbation or an apology, but I believe I understand Mr. Muscat’s frustration and resignation. Amherst traded in its unwieldy log jam town meeting model of governance for what we have now. The Charter was written in a manner that makes meanigful changes difficult. The Charter Commission was designed to address the shortcomings of the Charter’s first iteration. Whether it will be allowed to function as envisioned is now questionable.
I’ve been complaining for several years re the propensity of our local government to stack committees or leave vacancies to ensure the Amherst Forward position prevails. Vacancies make it difficult to achieve a quorum at meetings. Also some members of some committees see their political positions prevailing over the oath they took to enforce the aims and objectives of the committee on which they sit. One committee that I observe is at an impasse.
I am saddened that Dan Muscat left the Charter Review Committee. His perspective provided a great counterpoint to those of the 4 members very closely allied with the Council President and Town Manager:
1) Bernie Kubiak (a Town Manager surrogate, based on the Manager calling on him to do everything from bylaw review to Finance Committee to Transportation Advisory Committee and Charter Review),
2) Andy Churchill, former Chair of the Charter Commission , Amherst Forward PAC supporter, and friend of Council President Lynn Griesemer and her husband, Bryan Harvey, with whom Churchill penned an article for the Current including “what the Charter Review Committee can’t do”,
3) Markus Smith, another Town Manager surrogate and Amherst Forward supporter, and
4) Ken LeBlond, Amherst Forward supporter and colleague of Lynn Griesemer at the Donahue Institute, an arm of the UMass President’s Office. LeBlond did not mention his work at the Donahue Institute in his application to be seated on the Charter Review Committee.
The four have pretty much voted as a block on the committee.
In case you forgot, Council President-since-the-inception-of-the-Council Lynn Griesemer worked as UMass Economic Development Associate Vice President for 25 years and Executive Director of the UMass Donahue Institute for 19 years before she became a councilor. Lynn attends the Town Manager meetings with UMass without reporting on them. And have you noticed a change in UMass student housing downtown since 2018, when she became President of the Council?
I sincerely hope that the Council will replace Dan with someone who continues to provide a counterpoint on the Charter Review Committee. That needed perspective should be added to the Selection Guidance.
Darcy, I assume by “Markus Smith” you mean me? Though I have previously gone by “Marcus Brown”, in this fine publication. If so, please get your facts straight. I know this is an opinion piece and your free speech, but it comes with consequences in a publication that some people see as gospel in this town. It doesn’t take 5 minutes to look at the committee listing and make sure you get the correct person.
To address your allegations, 1. The only time I have ever spoken with the town manager was over 8 years ago, during my TAC interview. 2. I have no skin in the game in your overblown and one sided fight between perceived political factions.
In other articles in here, people bemoan the lack of people willing to take part in town life, yet here we are.