Town government - so what?

It reads pretty funny - talking about the article in the T&G about the town moderator appointing several members of one family to the Charter review committee.

Town moderator Charles Baker, who appointed the members says "so what, why not?" in response to the question. The committee will recommend changes to the way town government is structured. These recommendations have real impact on how things get done should they get voted on by town meeting to accept them.

To me it says a lot about what's wrong with at least the communication in our town. So what? I think there are a lot of folks who would say "because it smacks of favoritism and nepotism". Lets look at it objectively.

We've got two husband and wife teams that serve on the school committee and boards of selectmen. You've got developers who are related to BOS members serving on the charter review, also serving on planning, zoning and conservation (potential conflict of interest abound). To the distrusting naysayer public in town all of this is a conspiracy. To a reasonable person it at least appears bad. Whether it actually is or not is a fair question.

But I think towns people deserve a better answer than "so what". In fact that's the attitude of smugness and denial that seems to prevail too often among town officials when dealing with legitimate questions that arise like this. The result is one of the most difficult problems to solve in our community - APATHY. People end up thinking "why bother" and give up trying. I think this attitude has done more damage over time than any other to our quality of life via neglect and procrastination. OK, off the soapbox now ....

On the topic of charter change though I think we need to look at it seriously. We run our town like we're still a sleepy bedroom community of 1930. Why do we have a separate parks department vs rec department or highway surveyor vs tree warden (happens to be the same person now but not always), also why is Engineering separate from Highway?

An equally important question is why is the town building maintenance being run separately for each place? If we had a (DPW) department which served the town I think we could run things more effectively, efficiently and probably save a good deal of money long term in budgets across the whole range of town services. Why does the APD have to call a electrician or plumber separately than the fire department? Why don't the schools at all levels use economies of scale when buying building and maintenance supplies rather than just deal on an individual basis as problems arise? It's again a reactionary stance vs planning proactively again (where have I heard this before).

DPW has been shot down several times in the past though and I expect some resistance to this idea again. Wayne Page is one of the opponents who always speaks loudly against it. Come to think of it he speaks pretty loudly all the time (sorry Wayne - gratuitous cheap shot there ;).

Another change that I think would make a big difference is appointment of a town manager. In other towns like Holden and Shrewsbury, the town manager takes direction from the BOS and drives completion of issues amongst the various department and committees to get things addressed in a timely fashion, administer the finances and execute the wishes of the BOS, who are the elected reps of the people. It would cost some money to do this, but I think it enables delivery of town services more efficiently and effectively than what we have now, which at times appears like finger pointing, passing the buck of responsibility and the creation of little kingdoms among the various departments. It would also take the power of the purse away from the department heads and put it in the hands of a hired professional. I think many departments could use the help, coordination, discipline and focus a town manager could bring.

Here's a link to the existing Auburn charter.