(3/8/07) I think my Select Board recaps are useful. But honestly, I don't know if my blood pressure can take too many more of those meetings.
The discussions around the override have been stultifying. The blatant doubt and suspicion with which the Select Board members regard the Finance Committee's recommendation is trumped in absurdity only by their repeated displays of not understanding either the override proposal or the tax levy. They are trying to stonewall, second-guess and “improve upon” the Finance Committee's recommendation at the same time they are demonstrating that they have little idea what they're talking about.
It is a complex subject, to be sure. But to try to learn about it and impose your will on it at the same time is folly. To plunge headlong into it without considering that you might not understand it is a dangerous combination of ignorance and arrogance.
My observation is that among the Board, some either think or have been recently disabused of the notions:
• That a 3-year, $2.5 million override means raising the levy by $2.5 million this year, plus $2.5 million next year, plus $2.5 million more the following year.
• That a 1-year, $1.5 million dollar override means raising the levy by $1.5 million this year, and then lowering it back to its pre-override amount next year.
• That factoring new growth into the levy increases people's taxes.
• That a multi-year projection is the same as a multi-year plan.
• That the levy is an unknowable bunch of mumbo-jumbo.
• That under Democratic administrations, money might well rain down from the sky.
• That the spending limits in the Finance Committee's 3-year plan are wildly extravagant, plucked out of thin-air, nefarious attempts to deceive, or some combination thereof.
Did I forget any?
So imagine a bunch of people with these misunderstandings taking the attitude that they “know best,” and that it is their responsibility “to lead.” Imagine that their exercise of leadership is to be skeptical and to second-guess. Imagine them being self-indulgent with the power of the office and the microphone. Imagine them being able to spout errors and nonsense without challenge.
Yep, that was Monday night (March 5th) at Town Hall. And some previous Monday nights as well.
Lots of weird and frustrating stuff happens at Select Board meetings. But I have not previously been so chagrined by the conduct of my elected Town officials as I was this time. I was offended on behalf of the Finance Director and the Finance Committee that their hard work and expertise were being treated with such disrespect. I was offended on behalf of the Town Manager that the budget he and Town staff had labored over was being treated as something to pick apart by a bunch of Monday evening quarterbacks. I was offended on behalf of the Finance Director that his projection “scenarios” were being treated with skepticism and distrust at the same time more – still more! – scenarios were being requested to satisfy the personal vanities of the members.
Why weren't the Finance Committee's and Town Manager's endorsements of the three-year, $2.5 million override recommendation given more deference? Is the Select Board trying to guard against some kind of perceived “agenda” on the part of the Finance Committee? Do they think the committee is crooked? Incompetent? Misinformed? Does the Select Board think that its wisdom and judgment is superior to that of all the staff and committees representing the Town, the schools and the libraries that have already collaborated on and supported this proposal? If the answer to all of those questions is “No,” then what are they doing and why?
Maybe I just have a very different view of the role and responsibility of the Select Board and its members. Maybe that role is ambiguous enough to be open to many interpretations. Or maybe this really was rock bottom, which would be a good thing, 'cuz then there's no place to go but up.
-- Stephanie O'Keeffe
Comments
Damn...good job!
I no longer consider you a rookie. (welcome to the club)
Posted by: Larry Kelley | March 8, 2007 09:26 PM
At the Budget Coordinating Group meeting on Wednesday (March 7) Robie Hubley was there. When discussing the Finance Committee override plan, he said he “still had questions”. When I asked what those questions were, he said I was “badgering him”. He got pretty upset and had to leave the room to get some water because “the adrenaline was making his mouth dry”.
He kept saying that “he didn’t know what the other Selectboard members would decide”, but wouldn’t comment on how he would vote, except to say that he was in favor of a $1.5M override.
It’s fine when somebody thinks one plan is better than another, but when they can’t articulate why their plan is better, and can’t say what questions they have about the recommended plan, then they are not leaders, they are just do nothing stallers.
We need a Selectboard that makes decisions – not avoids them.
Posted by: Rick Hood | March 9, 2007 06:36 PM
welcome to Amherst, the real Amherst
Posted by: paul bobrowski | March 9, 2007 06:37 PM
Stephanie, I was as depressed by that meeting as you. My only correction to your comments is that the library trustees have not yet endorsed the Finance Committee's plan, so far as I know.
Eva
Posted by: Eva Schiffer | March 9, 2007 07:32 PM
When Mr. Bobrowski says "welcome to Amherst, the real Amherst", he is talking about the disconnect between talk and action here.
So much of Amherst politics and government is "inside baseball". Those of us who are life-long baseball fans know that baseball continues to reward further study of the nuances and subtleties of the game. So too with Amherst politics. And there is so much "stuff" there to examine that you are always vulnerable to being accused of being mistaken and uninformed, especially by those members of the Aristocracy of Time in town who have unlimited hours to spend at meeting after meeting.
Because most residents in Amherst reasonably feel hopelessly uninformed about what's going on in their own governmment, it's easy to blow smoke around and have them accept it. The rhetorical decoying is astounding to witness.
The other night I was watching a replay of Game 4 of the 1975 World Series between the Red Sox and the Reds from Riverfront Stadium, now lovingly restored in real time on DVD with the original play-by-play. There's a wonderful moment early in the game with Pete Rose standing as a baserunner on first base. Tiant pitches and either Ken Griffey, Sr. or Joe Morgan lofts a long fly ball to right toward Dwight Evans in right field. Evans stands there passively looking up as if the ball is going out of the park, but he's actually decoying the runner to think that. He puts his glove up at the very last moment to catch the ball.
Rose watching carefully isn't fooled and stays put at first base. The camera quickly catches Rose smiling and laughing and pointing out at Evans to say "I wasn't fooled." I feel like Pete Rose when I hear Mr. Hubley and Mr. Weiss talking about their records as Select Board members over the past three years. I'm not fooled.
There's a difference between what's actually happening and what these Select Board members say is happening. But you have to watch carefully to pick it up. That's what Mr. Bobrowski means when he talks about "the real Amherst".
Posted by: Richard Morse | March 10, 2007 10:39 AM
This takes guts, Stephanie!
Posted by: mary carey | March 11, 2007 08:38 PM
Personal vanity and chagrin hits the nail on the head. Your report voices the concerns of many who keep track of our local government.
My concern at the moment is the attack on the Finance committee. Some people do not know that this ia an arm of Town Meeting and their Job is to be able to advise Town Meeting on all matters with financial implications for the town.
In pursuit of this charge they spend a lot of time getting the facts and deliberating the pros and cons.
The Selectboard, especialy this one, in no way can spend the time to make reccommendations except based on their own political responses.
The Finance Committee's only concern is for the financial well being of our town. The Selectboard in this case is over doing their uneducated perception of facts due to personal vanity and politics as they see it.
Posted by: Barbara Ford | March 13, 2007 09:39 AM