|
Town Meeting change proposed
By R. J. GRUBB
STAFF WRITER
On this year's Town Meeting
warrant, residents are being asked if it's time to change how the
town governs itself.
Faced with population growth and an ever-increasing town
budget, it's been argued that Wilmington should change from an open
Town Meeting to a representative Town Meeting (RTM) to meet the
challenges ahead.
As such, on this year's Warrant, Article 38 asks residents if
the town should amend and revise the town charter to a
representative meeting to be elected by the voters.
It proposes that the decision of whether or not to change to
a representative meeting be placed as a ballot question for the Nov.
7 national election.
The article was sponsored by the Wilmington Ballot Committee,
of which selectmen candidate Mark Nelson is a member.
Still, to Town Manager Michael Caira, the question poised by
Article 38 is really a simple matter.
"If it isn't broken," he said. "don't fix it."
"People who are interested will go to Town Meeting," he
continued. "It's an open forum and it seems to be working. If we go
to representative it would essentially unseat those folks who want
to take part. [Given our apparent success], I think the burden
should be on the [Article] advocates to tell us why and how this
change will be better."
As an advocate, Nelson avoided a discussion of the proposed
benefits of Article 38. Instead in a written letter, he suggested
that he sees Article 38 as part of a larger picture.
"I have submitted Articles 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 and 42 to the
warrant as well," Nelson explained via e-mail. "It is my intention
to treat all six articles together and with equal importance and not
pay any one article special attention as it may dilute [the ballot
committee's] intention and hinder the ultimate objective. The
objective is to provide the voters and residents in the Town of
Wilmington with an opportunity to help decide this town's future
growth with smart planning as we develop.
"The current arrangement allows for a limited few to make
every major decision that affects the direction of our entire
community," he wrote.
Article 37, proposes to create an elected Charter Commission and
Planning Board to be elected by the voters.
Article 39 proposes to create an elected Charter Commission and
Finance Commission.
Article 40 proposes to asks to adopt residency requirements on
all town boards and commissions with chairman term limits not to
exceed two consecutive terms.
Article 41 asks whether or not the town should fluoridate the
water supply.
Article 42 seeks to establish a disabled veterans tax work-off
program which would raise and appropriate sum of $10,000 for the
purpose of providing disabled veterans work opportunities.
Selectmen candidate Daryn Marsh offers a different opinion.
"[Being open] really encourages residents to take part. To go
the other way may cause people to develop some apathy as to what's
going on in the town. From living here all my life, it makes a big
difference when people are encouraged to speak what's on their
minds. Sometimes it's that one or two voices that really make a
difference."
Selectmen Chairman Robert Cain also disagrees with Article
38. He commented that "More people are changing to our form of
government. Not the other way around," he said.
Working within a representative meeting, Reading's Town
Manager Peter Hechenbleiker suggested that a "representative Town
Meeting works well for Reading, but that doesn't mean it works well
for every town."
"One of the advantages is you have a more predictable body of
people to work with and people can focus on all the information."
Reading currently has a population of 23,000 people and their
warrant is 250 pages.
Wilmington currently has a population of roughly 20,000
people, but its warrant comes in at 15 pages.
"We want everyone in the town to understand what's happening
in the town," he said. "But that's a lot of information."
Stoneham's Selectmen Chairman Al Conti, who works within an
open town meeting like Wilmington, said that "There's something to
be said for both of them. There's no clear-cut answer."
Recently, Stoneham faced this same question of whether or not
to change to a representative meeting. "But it was shot down," he
said.
In Conti's opinion, he noticed that "Once you vote for a
representative town government, you might not get involved in the
process."
"I wouldn't favor it," he said. "It doesn't allow everybody
to express themselves."
"But the downfall for open town governments," he
acknowledged, "is that you don't get enough people to come to Town
Meeting. The biggest problem is participation. It's very low and
continues to be low. So if you have a representative town government
and you're talking about a $40 million budget, chances are that the
representatives know all about it and they will ask more in-depth
questions."
"[On the other hand] the downfall for a representative town
government is that special interests can get involved. For example,
when fractions vote representatives in. Then town's people are left
in the cold."
Still the bottom line for Conti is that "If you get enough
people, [open] is the best."
|
