surreptitious

surreptitious [sur-uhp-tish-uhs] adjective
obtained, done, made, etc., by stealth; secret or unauthorized; clandestine: a surreptitious glance.

Occasionally one hears talk of revisionist history. In other words, trying to change the truth about what really happened. It happens a lot in politics, even here in Falmouth. For example, last year a member of the Board said the tourism industry in Falmouth was dead. When it came time to approve the minutes, this selectman tried to change their statement. Fortunately, the rest of the Board refused to allow such revisionist history.

It doesn't always work that way, which is the reason for this particular post.

Recently, there's been a suggestion that the Committee Appointment Policy which the Board updated on May 16 was an 11th-hour job, done surreptitiously. Unfortunately for those who want us to believe this version of events, the record is quite different.

What follows are emails, sent on March 6, March 13, May 1 and May 10. As noted in the emails, the first three included attachments - copies of the policies which were to be discussed.

===== ===== ===== =====

From: Brent Putnam brent@falmouthlocal.com
Reply-to: brent@falmouthlocal.com
To: Board of Selectmen selectmen@falmouthmass.us
Subject: Draft policies for review
Date: 03/06/2011 10:41:42 PM

All,

I've attached some draft policies for your review. So that we adhere to the Open Meeting Law, please refrain from any discussion via email. We will be devoting some time on an agenda later this month to another policy discussion, so there will be ample time for discussion and debate then.

If any of you have a new or updated policy, please feel free to share it and I'll make sure it's also included in the agenda.

===== ===== ===== =====

From: Brent Putnam brent@falmouthlocal.com
Reply-to: brent@falmouthlocal.com
To: Board of Selectmen selectmen@falmouthmass.us
Subject: Policy
Date: 03/13/2011 09:24:51 PM

A reminder that we'll be discussing policy tomorrow evening. See attached, and bring any drafts/ideas/comments you may have.

===== ===== ===== =====

From: brent@falmouthlocal.com brent@falmouthlocal.com
To: Board of Selectmen selectmen@falmouthmass.us
Subject: Policies for May 2
Date: 05/01/2011 08:01:26 PM

All,

I've attached the policies & calendar we'll be discussing tomorrow evening. I know there may be revised versions of the policy, or revisions that need to be made, but I'm having trouble finding them right now. The online posting policy comes to mind.

If you have them, or can point me to them, let me know.

If necessary, we can begin discussing these tomorrow and finalize them on May 16.

Also attached is the calendar Diane has put together, and the liaison assignments list. Both will need to be reviewed and updated in preparation for the Board's reorganization on May 23. Again, we can review tomorrow and then finalize on May 16.

===== ===== ===== =====

From: brent@falmouthlocal.com brent@falmouthlocal.com
To: Board of Selectmen selectmen@falmouthmass.us
Subject: Policies
Date: 05/10/2011 10:10:46 PM

All,

A reminder that we'll be discussing policies on Monday. Please review the Liaison Policy, Appointment Policy and Online Posting Policy and be ready to vote these up or down.

You should all have copies of these policies; if you need a fresh one, let me know.

If there are changes you'd like to suggest, please send them to me ASAP and I will compile them into a final draft.

===== ===== ===== =====

Not only are these emails part of the public record, but because they were all sent to the selectmen@falmouthmass.us address, anyone can go to town hall and get copies of them.

The new policy is included here in this post. The old policy is still online, so you can see the changes. The biggest difference was a spin-off of the liaison part into a separate policy. Several members of the Board expressed concerns about the new Liaison Policy even before the meeting on May 16, so it was tabled.

However, even though the Board had received no less than three copies of the updated Committee Appointment Policy between March 6 and May 1, no one expressed any concerns about it until the meeting on May 16.

The last word here belongs to the official record, the minutes of May 2...

Policy Discussion: On-Line Posting Policy, Liaison Policy, Appointment Policy, Review Committee Handbook Policy and Review Calendar

Brent Putnam asked the Board members to take this home as homework. Look these over, including the Speakers Policy, and bring them back in two weeks, and we will vote them up or down, he said. Bring additions or subtractions. It was noted that there was no liaison for Coastal Ponds and no liaison between the Board and constables. The new Board will address this.

...and the minutes of May 16...

Policy Discussion: On-Line Posting Policy, Liaison Policy, Appointment Policy, Review Calendar and Liaison Assignments List.

Speaking on the calendar and liaison list, Brent Putnam said it is not set in stone; it just gives the Board an idea of the time issues. Additions or deletions should be given to Diane Davidson. Brent Putnam moved to accept the On-Line Posting Policy. Ahmed Mustafa seconded. 5-Yes, 0-No. Melissa Freitag thinks the Liaison Policy and the Committee Appointment Policy need lots of work. Mary Pat Flynn thinks the Liaison Policy should include what liaisons are not supposed to do as well. There was a brief discussion on what the Committee Appointment Policy accomplishes. Heather Harper said this policy will help the staff. Brent Putnam moved to approve the Committee Appointment Policy. Ahmed Mustafa seconded. 5-Yes, 0-No

Nothing surreptitious here.

A government of laws, not of men

I went on a bit of a tirade Monday night, and some who watched it are probably wondering, "What's the big deal?"

Well, let's begin at the beginning.

In 2008, I was elected on a platform of open, accountable and fiscally responsible government. It was no small victory: I unseated an incumbent that no one thought could be unseated. Indeed, one long-time political insider said to me, "I didn't see this coming."

In 2011, I was re-elected on a platform of open, accountable and fiscally responsible government. Again, it was no small victory: Aside from myself, this campaign included a popular former fire chief, a former selectman, and a challenger (running for a third time) who had attracted 10x as many votes in his second run as in his first. Oh, and did I mention the 11th-hour write-in campaign by the same former selectman who I unseated in 2008?

Against this field of candidates, I again managed an impressive victory. The second and third place finishers - separated by just a few votes - had to wait weeks for a recount to decide who would get second place and the second seat. In the meantime, my margin of victory was more than enough to have me declared the first-place winner, so I was sworn-in.

Don't forget...the votes and victories are secondary to my platform...open, accountable and fiscally responsible town government. I won election and re-election because of what I promised - and delivered.

Open, accountable and fiscally responsible...in other words, good government - fair government.

Now, flash forward to the past month and ask that question again: "What's the big deal?"

I don't mind losing a vote.

In fact, I don't mind losing every vote.

But I really hate it when the rules are changed in the middle of the game, and that's exactly what happened with the appointment process over the past month.

That is not fair.

So I complained. Loudly.

"Come on...isn't this just sour grapes over being rejected for chair?"
This might be an good explanation if I hadn't already established a track record of questioning how the Board does business. For example, in 2008 I asked that every incumbent appointee be interviewed, regardless of whether they had a challenger. And in January 2009, I openly complained about the fact that we had just 30 minutes in one meeting allocated to discussing the budget.

"But if you didn't make these appointments, wouldn't that have jeopardized hearings?"
I'm not saying that we shouldn't appoint people, I'm saying that a process was in place, and it was tossed aside.

Just prior to the election, the Board reviewed a calendar that had - among other things - time allocated for interviews and appointments on June 27. However, when June 27 rolled around, we had a hearing for parking fees in Woods Hole, and a presentation about water quality.

The charter requires us to make these appointments. Parking fees and water quality may be important, but those appointments should have taken precedence. We spent two hours on optional topics (some would say political topics) instead of doing our job.

That is wrong.

Perhaps more importantly, for the past two years, if there are challengers to incumbent appointees, the Board has interviewed both the challengers and incumbents. There has been a level playing field and the challengers have a shot at unseating incumbents. This year, by reappointing the incumbents before interviewing the challengers, the Board effectively told the challengers that they were second-class citizens.

How many times have we lamented the lack of volunteers and the many vacancies on our various boards, committees and commissions?

By favoring the incumbents the way the Board did over the past month, we've essentially said, "Volunteers need not apply."

By changing the way we do business - by ignoring the charter and our policies- we have redefined town government to be one of men, not laws.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is wrong, and there is no justification for it.

It's official

In case you haven't heard, there was a brief moment on Thursday when I found out that I might be in limbo for a few weeks.

The town charter - our local "Constitution" - states that selectmen will serve a three year term. That's it - three years. There's no provision in there to serve after an election, even if that election is contested, as it is in this case.

For a few hours this past Thursday, it appeared as though the charter, combined with the recount, would prevent me (and Mr. Murphy) from taking office on Monday. The town would have had three selectmen for the next several weeks while the recount was done.

In the end, it was determined that as the top vote getter with a comfortable margin, my win was not contested. The contested part of the race is between the second and third place finishers.

So, for the next few weeks, Falmouth will have four selectmen.

Budget Workshop preparation

What follows is an email sent to the selectmen on Sunday, July 25 @ 9:51pm:

Shortly after my election as chair, Gary Anderson extended an offer to meet, asking that we build on the relationship between the selectmen and FinComm. As Pat was former chair, I asked that she attend in order to maintain the continuity of the relationship.

He, Pat and I did so this past Tuesday, and we discussed a great many items. From that meeting, I developed this list (below) as a guide for our budget workshop on August 3.

Please, scan the list and let me know 1) which items you wish to address first, and 2) any items you think should be added. I will compile the responses and provide them later this week as a guide for our agenda.

Please, reply only to me - do not reply to all - so that we avoid getting tangled in any open meeting law issues.

FY10 close-out
FY11 balance/$400k state cut/5-day furlough details
FY12 planning & budget policy statement
Combining Treasurer/Collector positions/departments
Finance Director
Outside auditor to document Treasurer's role, responsibilities, etc.
Bond rating
Budget policies
Costing services, i.e., What does it cost to run town government?
Program budgeting
Performance management & measurement
Fees - Water/sewer, Enterprise funding
Grants - grant writer for town?
Grants - analysis of long term cost, i.e., Are grants a foot-in-the-door proposition?
Department consolidation - school & town have building maintenance, janitorial services, HR, Finance; town & county have Weights & Measures, Human Resources
Strategic Plan needs to tie-in with Local Comprehensive Plan and budget
Combine capital & operating budgets (interest for the capital budget is already included in the operating budget)
New finance software
Debt exclusions - combinations vs. separate, prioritization
Regionalization - Weights & Measures, Collector

Also, as a primer, you may want to visit http://www.seagov.org This website is a compilation of financial reports & efficiency efforts of a number of towns.

A done deal?

Some folks seem to think that the decision to put Mr. Morse on Monday's agenda was a railroad job, intended to just slide him in without a proper interview. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth, but I'll let you decide.

What follows is an email - which speaks for itself - that I sent to the Board on Thursday, June 24 at 10:22pm.

All,

There have been a few questions about Monday's agenda; this email is intended to clarify those.

Bob contacted me on Wednesday with a request that we remove Ballymeade due to the recent boil water order. He felt that with the recent events, the Water Department wouldn't be ready. Because of this, I had to fill the time slot at the last minute. I operated under the assumption - and I hope you all agree - that it would be better to have consistent 2-3 hour meetings than to have a 1 hour meeting this week, and a 4 hour meeting next.

As to the specific questions:

CONTINUED INTERVIEW & VOTE FOR CONSTABLE

Yes, this is for George Morse. I received a letter from Mr. Morse requesting that the Board, "take a vote in regards to my constable status..." I want to avoid any discussion or deliberation via email, so I'll say only that nothing is cast in stone and we can discuss how to proceed with this on Monday.

POLICY REVIEW & DISCUSSION

Yes, I've ordered copies of the policy binder (at my expense); they should be ready and in your boxes (in town hall) early Friday evening. If you'd prefer, I can deliver them to you personally some time this weekend. Yes, there are a lot of policies, but I don't think any of us expects to get through them all in one night. As to the specifically itemized policies, most are not "new" (some were originally drafted more than a year ago) but are perhaps new to us.

Brent

License enforcement policy

Madam Chair, and members of the Board;

On Monday evening, Mr. Murphy suggested a policy with teeth to deal with the recent (and sometimes repeated) late payments by license holders; I present the following draft for consideration.


Purpose:

To address late payments and renewals by license holders.

Process:

1) a) All license holders wishing to renew their licenses shall submit their applications no later than 60 days before the expiration of said licenses;
b) Failure to submit applications and fees prior to 60 days before expiration shall constitute a de facto lapse of said license, and the license holder shall be required to submit an application for a new license;
c) If the applicant submits an application for a new license, but fails to get the new license prior to the expiration of the old license, all activity related to the license shall cease;

2) If approved, all license payments shall be due and payable to the town within 30 days of the approval;

3) a) If a license fee remains unpaid after 30 days, it shall be automatically suspended;
b) All activity related to the license (e.g., sale of alcohol) shall be suspended and the police shall have the authority to enforce said suspension;
c) If required by law, relevant state agencies shall be notified of the suspension;

4) a) If a license fee remains unpaid after 60 days, it shall be automatically revoked;
b) All activity related to the license (e.g., sale of alcohol) shall cease and the police shall have the authority to enforce said suspension;
c) If required by law, relevant state agencies shall be notified of the revocation;

5) a) If a license is revoked, the applicant may apply to the Board for a new license;
b) License holders who have had a license revoked shall pay a fine of 10% of the cost of the license.

Payoff:

Timely submission of license renewals by license holders;
Timely payments by license holders;
Continuous, legal operation by license holders.



Madam Chair, Please consider putting this item on our agenda for discussion by the Board.

A letter to the President (of the Massachusetts Senate)

97 John Parker Road
East Falmouth, MA 02536
February 28, 2010


The Honorable Therese Murray
Office of the President
Massachusetts Senate
State House
Boston, MA 02133-1007


Dear President Murray;

A belated thank you for your letter dated January 21, 2010 inviting me, as a member of the Falmouth Board of Selectmen, to attend the Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Forum in Hyannis. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the February 12 meeting.

According to the invitation, the goals were to answer any budget related questions, to review the budgetary process and discuss funding requests. However, with the Commonwealth's ongoing budget issues, I hope that some time was given to discuss ways of addressing the shortfall, especially as it relates to the municipalities.

Therein is the purpose of this letter.

I was heartened to read your recent editorial in the Cape Cod Times. Your statement, "...we have to make a better effort to encourage business development in Massachusetts," hit the nail on the head.

Business passes its costs onto the customer, with a margin - profit - attached to reward the entrepreneur for their risk. The unspoken truth is that the cost of business is always paid by the individual. When government increases the cost of doing business, it increases the cost paid by the customer. When that cost exceeds the reward, business will cease to exist; entrepreneurs will not work for nothing. As you noted, the average size of businesses in Massachusetts has been steadily decreasing, and jobs have been lost. This trend is reflected in the exodus of Massachusetts residents who have sought work and lower costs of living elsewhere.

Taxes are not the only cost. Complying with rules and regulations - i.e., "red tape" - levies an indirect cost. For example, here in the town of Falmouth, businesses which apply for a sign must appear before a committee in order to get a permit. Defenders of this practice note that the committee has helped businesses navigate the town's regulations.

However, it would be better to simplify those regulations so that there is no need to navigate anything. Entrepreneurs who work 60, 80 – and more – hours a week cannot afford to spend yet more time before a committee defending a sign application. Indeed, one applicant told me that the committee questioned the color of a sign - something the town does not regulate, and over which the committee has no jurisdiction.

There are similar barriers at the state level which hamper businesses; you have identified several and I applaud you for it. Please follow through, cut the red tape, and make it easier and less expensive to do business in Massachusetts. Doing so will put more people to work. As you know, when more people are working, more taxes get collected.

At the local level, municipalities need more control over their own destiny. With every cut in local aid or the Payments In Lieu Of Taxes (PILOT), cities and towns struggle to balance their budgets.

Ironically, you describe tourism as "one of our top industries in this state," yet the only mechanism the Commonwealth has given municipalities to compensate for these cuts is the ability to increase local options taxes. Communities such as Falmouth are caught between a rock and a hard place. Increasing the rooms and meals taxes might help us balance our budget in the short term, but in the long run we are hurting the competitiveness of one of our top industries.

A better option would be to plug loopholes, such as the boat excise tax. As you may know, the excise tax on boats is not based on value - as it is with autos - but rather on age. There are 50-year old boats in pristine condition that are taxed at a rate lower than 10-year old boats that have been neglected and abandoned. The boat owners benefit, but the Commonwealth, and the common wealth, suffer.

Increasing costs - be they direct taxes, or indirect regulation - only makes it more difficult for individuals and businesses to survive here. The citizens of the United States have choices, and Massachusetts residents have voted overwhelmingly - with their feet - to find work and a lower cost of living in other states. Your mantra of "reform before revenue" is the key to solving the Commonwealth's current budget woes and improving its fiscal health.

As a footnote, please note that I offer these comments as an individual; they do not represent the collective opinion of the Falmouth Board of Selectmen.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Respectfully,




Brent Putnam
Vice-Chairman
Falmouth Board of Selectmen




cc: Representative Matt Patrick
Representative Tim Madden
Falmouth Board of Selectmen

Proposed policies for the execution of our agendas

Madam Chair, and members of the Board;

I propose the following, interrelated policies related to the execution of our agendas.

Purpose:

To make better use of the Board's time during our weekly meetings, and to ensure that all of the Board's business is finished.

Process:

1) The Board of Selectmen, and every town board, committee and commission which falls under the jurisdiction of the Board's policy making authority, shall utilize Robert's Rules of Order as the final governing authority for all public meetings.

2) There shall be on the agenda at every regularly scheduled selectmen's meeting an opportunity for the Board to review, discuss and plan upcoming agendas.

3) The Town Manager shall submit to the Board every Friday, in writing, a weekly report of his/her activities. The Town Manager shall be prepared to address any questions from the Board during the selectmen's meeting, but shall not read his/her report unless specifically requested by the Board.

Payoff:

To prevent and avoid confusion and/or conflict over the rules;
To provide town committees and the general public with a clear understanding of how public meetings will be run;
To better prepare the Board for upcoming meetings and agendas;
To better manage and complete the Board's unfinished business;
To make more efficient use of the Board's time during meetings.


Madam Chair, Please consider putting this on our agenda for discussion by the Board.

Committee reports

Madam Chair, members of the Board;

Please note the email attached below.

Every year, the Board has required from its appointed committees an oral report. However, according to this email, "This year you will only need to submit a written report of your committee’s activities and attendance..."

The Board has never had any discussion or any vote to change this practice. Moreover, because these committees are appointees of the Board, no town employee has the authority to change this practice.

Who issued this directive, and on what authority?

Brent


================ begin email ================

From: "Diane Davidson"
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:31:31 -0500
To: Edward Schmuhl; Sheryl Kozens; Don Hoffer; Edward Gross; Kevin Lynch; Ernest Mayberry; John Magnani; Carey Murphy; Megan Amsler; Carey Murphy; Sheryl Kozens; Karen Cardeira; Leslie Morrissey; Edmund Nolan; Helen Kennedy; Ruth Brazier; Kate McHugh; Nancy Quigg; Jay Hill; Michael Kinney; Gregg Fraser
Subject: Committee Reports to Board of Selectmen

To: Committee Chairs and Administrators

Attached is the list of committee reports to be submitted to the Board of Selectmen for 2010. This year you will only need to submit a written report of your committee’s activities and attendance to the Board of Selectmen, due on March 31, 2010.

Thank you,

Diane Davidson
Administrative Assistant
Town Manager and Selectmen's Office
Town of Falmouth
59 Town Hall Square
Falmouth, MA 02540
(508) 495-7321
(508) 457-2573 FAX

================ end email ================

Request to revisit unfinished policies

This particular post has been edited; it should've been given more explanation when originally posted.

There is a lot that happens behind the scenes in government. Before you get the wrong idea, I'm not saying that behind the scene stuff is purposely hidden, or that open meeting laws are being disobeyed. What follows is an example of this - a memo that I sent to the Board. It is simply a request. There is no discussion amongst the board members, so it is not something that falls under the open meeting laws.

There are limits to what can and cannot be shared, and what is and is not worthy of sharing. The minutes of executive sessions won't be posted. Nor should you expect to see emails from other selectmen notifying the rest of the Board that they will be away on such-and-such a day.

However, the public doesn't always see everything that I'm trying to accomplish as a selectman.
That is something I need to work on.


Madam Chair;

The Board has some unfinished policies which need to be discussed and voted.

1) The Memorial Naming Policy, drafted almost a year ago in response to a request from a constituent, remains in draft form.

2) The On-Line Posting Policy, drafted last year at the request of a constituent, also remains in draft form. As per our last discussion, it was to be presented to several committees - the Conservation Commission, the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Historic Districts Commission - for preliminary review and comment. However, my understanding is that this has yet to be done.

In conjunction with this policy, the Board was to receive an opinion from town counsel regarding the extent of the Board's policy making authority. Specifically...Does this authority extend to all town boards and departments, or is it limited to only those direct and indirect appointees (committees and employees) of the Board?

We have not yet received that decision.

3) Finally, last Fall the Board was presented a revised Whistleblower policy; discussion was shelved pending an opinion from town counsel regarding any potential overlap between the policy and state and federal laws.

Again, we do not yet have that opinion.

Please consider this request to get these items back on our agenda as soon as possible.