Countdown to Town Meeting: Articles In-Depth

The first Article I’d like to tackle is Article Six. I’ve invited fellow Selectman Tom Boussy to join me in authoring this post.

Both of us are baffled by Article Six which proposes Stoneham replace traditional Town Meeting with a Two Session Town Meeting, also known as Senate Bill 2 or SB2. This would entail holding Town Meeting on one night, then giving voters an opportunity to vote via ballot one week later. This process promotes voting by those who were never even present for deliberations. An entire week can pass with citizens being told ‘this’ or ‘that’ and then casting an uninformed vote.

This form of government is not even sanctioned in MA. (And for good reason- this is one of the cons listed on the SB2 page: Special interest groups can overwhelm town budgets to get their way: Towns need to budget for websites, newsletters and other media in order to get information out to the public prior to the voting session. On some issues special interest groups will spend the most money to get resident votes.) Should it pass at Stoneham Town Meeting we would have to petition our legislators to authorize this new form of government.

Currently MA allows two forms of meetings: Town Meeting or Representative Town Meeting. Two Session Town Meeting is semi-accepted in NH. Many communities there are petitioning to overturn it. Two Session Town Meeting is counter productive to a sense of community. We discourage our children from isolating themselves using electronic devices, watching and not participating, and relying solely on social media without the benefit of active participation. This article actually promotes the isolation of citizens, discourages open dialog, and prevents the needed collaboration in a quest to craft policy that benefits the entire community. This forum disenfranchises the voters and leaves decision making of vital issues with the very few.

Ironically, the author of Article Six is actually trying to make the argument that, as our Town Meeting structure stands now, issues are voted upon by ‘special interest’ groups. Respectfully, I disagree. (See point referenced above) Voters come out to vote on issues that are important to them. This should be respected regardless of the side of the argument on which one sits. If an issue does not grab one enough to make the trip to participate in town government, the matter is left up to those voted onto the Board of Selectmen.

If said issue is of importance, citizen(s) will make the trip to have their voice heard or to make their presence known. This is termed ‘Special Interest’ by some, by others it is called the democratic process.

The author of this article sat on the BOS for several years and never felt the need to make such significant changes in process during his tenure. One must ponder why, after two unsuccessful runs to regain a seat on the BOS, he feels such a change is warranted now. One of the biggest disadvantages of Two Session Town Meeting is that if the proposed budget can’t be agreed upon, a default budget presides. One can only imagine the strategic maneuvers this can inspire.

Interesting that the author of this article also has an article that, if approved, would also decimate the Finance Board yet again (See Article Seven). This is a board that was literally wiped out several years ago and is only now beginning to realize a solid foundation. At a time that our tax money is being scrutinized more closely, and there is a bid for transparency, this author is striving to remove such information from the taxpayer. Stoneham deserves better!