
There were two reasons for this.
First, and perhaps foremost, was that I was finally
going to be able to say something positive about our town’s Economic
Development and Planning Department. Followers of The O’Zone know that I have
been a relentless critic of this office and its Director. But, really, they
make it so easy to be hard. Most recently
I pointed out their failure to have the Southbridge Technology and
Environment Park mentioned in a web-site devoted to promoting business-ready
sites in Massachusetts.
The reason for such anticipated praise was the
presentation by Ted Carman of Concord Square Development on a
final report on “Sparking Private Investment in Downtown Southbridge”.
Listening to Mr. Carman’s presentation, and viewing
it through the lens of my own experience as a consultant, I was impressed with
both the scope and complexity it appeared to entail. I was especially impressed
by his invocation of “the big idea”.
This latter concept involved no small amount of
courage. Consultants generally travel a well-trodden path avoiding the
controversial and difficult. As a
consequence I felt that this was a presentation, and report, that merited more
than the usual yawn accorded such grant-funded studies.
I decided, however, that prior to writing about the report I would review its contents. After all, Director Acly guaranteed that it would be available on the town’s web-site the next day.
On a number of occasions on Tuesday I returned to
the Town of Southbridge web-site looking for the report.
I repeated the effort on Wednesday morning. No luck.
Finally I called the office of the Department of
Economic Planning and Development. Perhaps, I thought, given the abominable nature of the web-site, I wasn’t looking in the right place.
After being put on hold (I suspect because whoever
answered didn’t know what I was talking about) I was told that the report wasn’t
on the site yet. Another request would be made to the company hosting the
web-site - I was told.
Well, it’s Friday. Even the Southbridge News got
around to reporting on the presentation today. But, despite my best efforts, I
still can’t find the report on the town’s web-site.
They make it so easy to be hard on them.
All of this brings me around to the second reason
why I was looking forward to reporting on this.
Those who have bothered to watch the above video
probably recall Mr. Carman’s references to the success of a similar project in
Greenfield. I made reference to this fact when Concord Square Development first
presented its planned efforts to Southbridge’s Economic Development Commission
two years ago.
The second reason why I looked forward to
emphasizing this report has to do with the current debate swirling around the structure
of Southbridge government.
For fifteen years I have been putting forward the
idea that Southbridge
needs to adopt a mayor/council form of government if it is going to break
the downward spiral in which it is caught. Recent developments have potentially
obviated
the complications that I previously foresaw to undertaking such a change.
This is relevant in the context of the report by Mr.
Carman because his chief example of success, Greenfield, is the most recent
community in the commonwealth to adopt a mayor/council form of government.
The kind of complex, integrated agenda necessary to
successfully undertake such a project cannot be run by a committee. It does not
serve the personal agenda of an outsider serving as town manager or
administrator who views their position as temporary.
This kind of change requires a champion whose
success or failure is cast in terms of local politics. It requires a champion
whose future is based in the community he or she serves. And it requires a
champion whose legitimacy is underscored by the popular vote of the local
citizenry.
Such a champion can only be established in a system
of government that empowers a single, unitary executive – a mayor.
Town meetings, town councils, a board of selectmen
cannot do this. They are, by their very nature, committees. And there was never
any truer analogy than the observation that a camel is a horse designed by a
committee.
All of those camels are spitting (as camels are wont to do) on the plans being
advanced by those who think that a return to a town meeting is going to provide Southbridge with salvation. It will only perpetuate stagnation!
As regards the current system, it can’t even get
this report on the town’s web-site almost a week after it was promised.
The sponsors of the current petition are
masquerading their regressive agenda under the logo “We The People”.
They are not offering a choice. They are exploiting
a bad situation to validate one person’s vision that will give rise to a worse
situation.
If you are sincere about making things better, give
people a real choice.
Have your petition offer the three basic
alternatives:
·
Board of Selectmen/Administrator
·
Council/Manager
·
Council/Mayor
I have provided a
model for option three, so there is no reason to say that it is undefined.
Of course I don’t expect the missionaries currently proselytizing
the public to turn back the clock to a town meeting form of government to give
any other option a fair chance.
But, assuming the petition survives the Star Chamber
proceedings that will evaluate the legitimacy of its signatures, I hope that
the town council will amend it or offer the alternative options on the ballot.
Then, We The
People, can have a debate that may even border on the intelligent.
The title of this post is very misleading. I thought that it would be a cheap and easy alternative to Viagra. Screw You O'Brien.
ReplyDeleteSorry Joe.
DeleteCOST ?
ReplyDeleteYou are being too kind
But when I read the part
That explains greenfield
Got a mayor and was
Accountable and why
I understood your points
And agree
Thanks for the info!