10-Town Comparison

Very often we hear reference to the 10-Town comparison, which is a list of 10 towns that Sturbridge utilizes for comparison with respect to organization, finance, administration, and human resources. It was compiled years ago - well before my tenure - and has been the go-to reference for all things financial or otherwise. 

As I have spent some time reviewing and proposing the need for a Government Services Study Committee (GSSC), I though it prudent to take a look at how Sturbridge compares to the 10 towns we "model" ourselves to with respect to the revenue/expenditure per capita ratios. Selecting specific information from the "cities and towns" section of the MA Department of Revenue (DOR) website, which included population, total tax levy (all revenues gained from taxes), total revenues (all tax revenue, fees and other receipts, along with State aid, and miscellaneous other revenue generators) and the difference between total revenue per capita (revenue received per resident - average as listed by DOR) and total expenditures per capita (total expenditures per resident - average as listed by DOR), I was able to develop a table reflecting the rating/scoring of each community among the total 11 towns.

Improving Efficiency and Confidence in Local Government

The following is a "white paper" I have authored with respect to improving efficiency and confidence in local government by way of a Government Services Study Committee, which I proposed to the Board back in March. The proposal for the committee was adopted by way of a 3-2 vote.  The post is lengthy as the issue at hand is daunting; for your convenience, it is available in the right sidebar for download.  I welcome your feedback by way of email to trcreamer@gmail.com.  

Introduction

Section 4-2, paragraph c, “Powers and Duties in General” of the Sturbridge Town Charter states that “The executive powers of the town shall be vested in the Board of Selectmen, and may be exercised by them jointly or through the town agencies and offices under their general supervision and control. The Board of Selectmen shall cause the laws and orders for the government of the town to be enforced, and shall cause a record of all their official acts to be kept...”.

As the Executive Branch exercising “its powers jointly or through the town agencies and offices under its general supervision and control”, the Board of Selectmen have an inherent obligation to ensure that the taxpayers of the Town of Sturbridge are provided with the best services in the most efficient, productive, and professional manner possible. To that end, the Board of Selectmen has a responsibility to ensure a top-down structure of policy development and implementation that provides our various departments and employees with the support, resources (both human and technological), professional development, management, and environment (i.e. working conditions) that contribute to the highest level of professional service and productivity in the most cost-effective manner.  

Online Posting of Collective Bargaining Agreements

Greetings All,

Several days ago I sent a correspondence to residents highlighting my intention - barring any legal impediments - to offer a motion during our upcoming meeting of 25 June, that would, if passed by the Board, establish a policy requiring all future Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA's) to be posted on the town's website and publicly available upon request within four days of approval by the BOS and Collective Bargaining Unit. In light of the number of questions and concerns expressed prior to and during Annual Town Meeting with respect to CBA's, it is my contention that the public posting of these proposed contracts would allow residents ample time to review the them fully prior to your final vote of ratification - or lack thereof - as the Legislative Branch. It is afterall, your sole authority as voters at Town Meeting that provides any and all funding for same.

A few post ATM thoughts

As I look in the rear view mirror and reflect upon our most recent multi-day Annual Town Meeting (ATM), I am left with a few thoughts that best reflect for me what I characterize as "the good, the bad, and the ugly". In no particular order, they are as follows.

Session 1 of ATM was witness to a relatively strong showing in terms of participation (452 at its high point), at least until the first break, where that number dropped by at least 50%. By the end of the evening there were less than 60 voters making decisions for a community of approximately 9,800 residents - 6,500 (approximate) of which are registered voters.

Session 2 of ATM was witness to 149 registered voters at its high point, half of whom left after our break. By the end of the evening, 50 voters (approximate) were making those extremely important decisions that affect every resident of our community.

Unfortunate on a number of levels

The following column is found in today's Telegram and Gazette and was written by Clive McFarlane. It is unfortunate on any number of levels; one of course being that such a story would even have cause to be written, another being the current and historic "open for business" schedule at Town Hall. Mr. McFarlane's column -  "80 percent of success is showing up" - is as follows:

There is something troubling about a town’s CEO being suspended twice in less than a year-and-a-half for tardiness, which has been the fate of Shaun Suhoski, the Sturbridge town administrator.

Hired in February 2010, Mr. Suhoski was suspended for five days with pay in February 2011 because of his alleged tardiness. Earlier this month, he was again suspended for tardiness, this time for three days with pay.

Neither Mr. Suhoski nor the Board of Selectmen would elaborate on the nature of his tardiness. The former did not respond to an email or a voice message request for comment. Mary Blanchard, board chairman, said the issue was a personnel matter.

"...the abandonment of civility"

“At the heart of societal decay aren’t wars, religion, or competing ideologies, it is the abandonment of civility.” Something said to me by a resident today reminded me of the preceding quote and as I reflected upon our discussion this evening, I could not escape its relevance to Monday evening’s Annual Town Meeting.  Without question, few could avoid the inevitable conclusion that there is little to be proud of in terms of the incivility exercised by a small but vocal group of attendees at Town Meeting. In a community that prides itself as being very dignified, educated, and socially advanced, one would be hard-pressed to consider the behavior of this vocal minority as anything short of embarrassing, ignorant, and socially impaired.

As I sat gazing upon the many honorable and respectful residents that had assembled to conduct their affairs as members of the Legislative Branch, I was at various times throughout the evening - astonished, saddened, and embarrassed as I listened to the “cat calls”, snide comments and rude behavior directed at well-intended and concerned residents as they attempted to exercise their Constitutional rights. Sadly, some of this intimidating and humiliating behavior was exhibited by individuals whose income is provided by the taxpayers of this community.

The mere thought that any individual who attempts to participate in a process that impacts their daily life would be exposed to such disrespectful and demeaning behavior is truly disheartening. That any civilized and socially evolved human-being could, or did, take any amount of pleasure in behavior designed to humiliate and intimidate fellow residents, regardless of what side of the issue they were on, is an insult to all of us who truly love and respect what our community represents.

The actions Monday evening of a small but vocal group of individuals lend far too much credence to the belief that“At the heart of societal decay aren’t wars, religion, or competing ideologies..." but rather "...the abandonment of civility”. Let us hope we can reverse the trend.

A few thoughts prior to Annual Town Meeting

With Monday’s Annual Town Meeting fast approaching, I thought I would share a few thoughts outlining my position on a couple of key issues as some of you may not be able to attend, while those who do, may not – due to time limitations on speakers – have the benefit of explanations at Town Meeting. To be clear, these are my individual positions and are not intended to represent those of the Board of Selectmen. Equally, I offer my thoughts not for the purpose of trying to move voters in one direction or the other, but solely rather, for the purpose of providing my rationale for voting the way I will; I believe such is a responsibility of elected officials. In addition, I must point out that my approach here will lack the political correctness some might prefer, for that I do offer my apologies, but there are important issues before us and little time for the subtleness some might deem more prudent. I invite you to take the time to read through this correspondence and if inclined, feel free to share your thoughts with me, supportive and more importantly – otherwise.

Perhaps two of the most discussed items on the ATM warrant are Articles 3 & 4, both of which deal with the budget. Article 3 is specific to the budget recommendations of the Finance Committee and the Board of Selectmen, which amounts to an FY13 budget proposal of $26,750,919. Article 4 is a citizens’ petition for a level-funded budget at FY2012 levels, which amounts to $25,578,124; this budget is $1,172,795 less than that recommended by the Finance Committee and the Board of Selectmen.