Understanding a Political Traffic Jam

As a younger person, over twenty five years ago, I sat on the Board of Selectmen in Stoneham. I wrote town meeting initiative petitions that seeded recycling programs, co-sponsored open space with pedestrian & bicycling paths, and developed the first Massachusetts town master plan that incorporated affordable housing options protecting the town against the abuse of Chapter 40B proposals. These ideas were not solely of my mind set, portions came from my friends, neighbors, and my constituency.

Last evening, I sought to forward a few planning articles to our selectmen at their meeting. These articles would give the town meeting voters the ability to steer their town towards the future, as prescribed by our town charter.  

These three articles would better prepare Stoneham for the future.

The first article seeks to create a study committee to better determine the safety, capacity, and future demands, on our public infrastructure including natural gas, water, solar, and sewer systems.

The second article seeks to prioritize, and protect, the valuable tiny single digit percentage of the town commercial tax base.

The third article seeks to reinforce our basic zoning regulations by providing our neighborhoods with an equal footing of future growth by overlaying a small 100 year old section of town with a residential overlay. Such a measure would posture one of the oldest sections of the town, near the town DPW facilities, to receive a refreshing re-investment opportunity as a potential residential growth targeted area. 

While a majority of experienced selectmen understood the value of what such public discussions mean to the community at large, what I encountered from one member was shocking!

 Selectperson O'Neil, simply refused to sign a petition to bring these matters to the town meeting floor for our townspeople to have an intelligent public exchange. When I explained that, "I only wanted her signature to afford us the right to petition the town members thoughts publicly", she hesitated. I re-stated, "she could preserve her predisposed vote against such proposals, but at minimum allow discussion of such matters", she appeared to not comprehend the basic democratic principals of our town charter pertaining to the 'right of free petition'.

Its time that each newly elected, or appointed, public official receive the benefit a comprehensive orientation of our government. This tool may better equip them with a full understanding of our form of government, and the duties of the office, they serve. To facilitate each officer with the most fundamental, or essential, knowledge of the office may avoid the continuation of potential incompetence within the town decision making. We can no longer risk the option of 'on the job training'.

 Haven't we experienced enough of that ??

Unfortunately, supporting public officials who may not maintain a well rounded knowledge of their public office can be compared to employing a appliance service technician who foolishly attempts to install higher voltage wiring in your home. While this technician may understand the principal of electricity, the lack of specific education in a non-related field can only bring disaster.

We must preserve the rights of taxpayer citizenry to participate in their town government by allowing free speech at our town meetings. We must assist our elected officials in their duties to the town by furthering their education, and understanding of these complicated issues through open meetings where we collectively discuss our future.

Most of all, we should remember, that either we stand united as one community under our town charter, or contemplate, the option to change our  'open town meeting' form of government !! 

PAUL MAISANO