Facts don't back more gun control

Not long after the Loganville, Georgia mother had grabbed her children and her husband’s gun, the stranger forced his way through the front door. He rummaged around the house, finding his way to the closet where they were hidden. Police were on the way, but she and her children were cornered. Five of her six shots hit him, but he got out and drove away.[1]

One hundred years ago, “Big Tim” Sullivan took advantage of community outrage after the Gramercy Park murder-suicide. A corrupt New York state politician of Tammany Hall fame, Sullivan was more interested in protecting his thugs than the public. His new law, the Sullivan Act, required a permit to carry a concealed weapon, but it allowed local authorities to reject an application, giving Tammany Hall the ability to decide who would be armed. A year after it became law, robberies had climbed by 40 percent and murders by 18 percent.[2]

Cries for more gun control are rarely grounded in fact. Recent letters have called for banning automatic weapons and 600-rounds-per-minute AK-47s, yet federal laws passed in 1934, 1968 and 1986 made these guns illegal decades ago.[3]

The “assault weapons” many talk of banning are just rifles with one or more “military characteristics” like barrel shrouds. They look like military weapons, but function like the rifles and shotguns used by hunters, firing only one bullet when the trigger is pulled. Barrel shrouds protect your hands from getting burned; putting one on a rifle doesn’t make it any more dangerous than putting pinstripes on my Prius will make it go faster.[4]

Our police do a fine job. In recent years, they’ve had to deal with shrinking public budgets, pay cuts and mandatory overtime, but they still serve and protect. However, they cannot be in all places at all times. Across the country, the average police response time varies between five and ten minutes.[5][6] Sheriffs from South Carolina to Wisconsin acknowledge this, recommending that the public learn how to defend themselves – with guns.[7][8]

With few exceptions, most states have relaxed their gun control regulations over the past few decades. Gun control activists want us to believe that every shooting on the evening news is a result of this. Yet, as gun ownership has risen, crime has fallen.

Economist John Lott studied every county in the US and found that when more law abiding citizens are armed, violent crime falls.[9][10] Some question Lott's conclusions, but it's been verified again and again. In Virginia, the Richmond Times-Dispatch found that a 63 percent increase gun ownership was accompanied by a 27 percent decrease in violent crime.[11] CBS News reported that gun sales in California rose by 36 percent, yet gun injuries fell by 28 percent, and gun deaths fell by 15 percent.[12]

One of those exceptions, Massachusetts, implemented some of the strictest gun laws in the nation in 1998.[13] The new laws are so onerous that legal gun ownership plummeted by 84 percent. As New York learned in 1911, criminals prefer disarmed victims. Before 1998, violent crime in Massachusetts had been falling. Since 1998, gun-related assaults have increased 59 percent; gun murders have risen 79 percent.[14][15][16][17][18]

New York state recently limited firearms to seven rounds. Governor Patrick wants to follow their lead, but the facts don't support this additional infringement on our constitutional right to self-defense.[19] When you need six shots to stop one assailant, seven won’t be much good if there are two of them. The governor’s bodyguards will be exempt. The rest of us will be hiding in our closets, hoping the police arrive in less time than the national average.

(This also appeared as an op-ed in the Monday, February 11, 2013 edition of the Cape Cod Times)

For those interested, these links provide references for the facts provided:

[1]Cops: Mother of two surprises intruder with five gunshots

[2]Kachalsky v. Cacace

[3]National Firearms Act (NFA) - History of the National Firearms Act

[4]The Truth About Assault Weapons

[5]Criminal Victimization in the United States Tables: Table 107

[6]Response times- city to city

[7]Sheriff tells women to get guns to ward off attacks

[8]Sheriff David Clarke's radio ad says 911 not best option, urges residents to take firearms classes

[9]An interview with John R. Lott, Jr. author of More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws

[10]John Lott: More Guns, Still Less Crime

[11]Gun-related violent crimes drop as sales soar in Va.

[12]As Calif. gun sales go up, number of gun-casualties goes down

[13]Welcome to Massachusetts! A Practical Guide to Living in the State

[14]Violent Death Reporting

[15]Injury Fatalities to Massachusetts Residents 1998

[16]MAVDRS Violent Death Report 4-19-12

[17]Weapon Related Injury Surveillance System (WRISS)

[18]WRISS Data Overview: Gunshot and Sharp Instrument Wounds, 1994-2009

[19]An Act To Strengthen and Enhance Firearms Laws in the Commonwealth

Playing by the rules

It's no secret - the Falmouth Enterprise and I just don't get along.

They do, however, deserve credit for publishing my rebuttal to their latest attacks on me.

What follows also appeared in the Friday, August 12, 2011 edition under the title, "Calls Enterprise To Task".

It's been called one of the most embarrassing moments in baseball history. In the eighth inning with one out, the batter grounds the ball back to the pitcher. Bronson Arroyo fields the ball and runs to the baseline to tag Alex Rodriguez. What happened next is as unforgettable as the ball passing between Bill Buckner's legs.

In case you're not a baseball fan, Rodriguez slapped at Arroyo's arm, the ball went loose, and Rodriguez made it to second base. Arroyo was initially charged with an error, but the umpires conferred and agreed – Rodriguez had violated the rules.

In the sport of politics, the press is supposed to be the umpire. The First Amendment of our Constitution specifically protects the freedom of the press so there is a watchdog to keep our politicians honest. Watergate comes to mind.

But what happens when this umpire doesn't do its job?

Every fall, the Board of Selectmen sets fees and fines for the coming year. It's a well advertised process, timed so that the public will have ample notice of any increase, and the anticipated revenue can be included in the budget for the coming year.

However, in June the Board departed from this well established process, changing the fines for expired parking meters three months after the budget had been approved by town meeting. When someone spoke out against this, the Falmouth Enterprise didn't join the chorus against this unprecedented change, it attacked the messenger.

The appointment of town committees is also a very well established process. The appointment policy makes it clear that the selectmen are to interview every incumbent when there's a challenger. However, in an unprecedented departure from the rules, the Board reappointed incumbents first and without interviews, excluding many new applicants. Again, someone spoke out against this. Again, the Enterprise criticized the messenger.

Unfortunately, this habit of shooting the messenger instead of looking out for the people is nothing new. In 2008, the people of Falmouth and town meeting made it clear that an investigation or inquiry into the high school renovation project was a priority. The Enterprise attacked the messenger, and told the public to move on.

Two years ago, the town manager traveled to a conference without prior approval of the Board, or naming an acting town manager in his absence. When someone brought attention to these violations of contract and town charter, the Enterprise didn't chastise anyone for failing to follow the rules. Instead, the paper admitted to having no idea what the contract said, and then chastised the messenger.

In each of these examples, I was the messenger.

Mr. Clarkson suggests that I should "play nice", but how about playing by the rules? For more than three years now, I've fought for the people of Falmouth, asking that our government follow the rules, and when the rules are not followed, that people are held accountable.

Unfortunately, the umpire in this game – the Falmouth Enterprise – has abdicated its responsibility. I find myself standing on the field like Arroyo, wondering why I'm getting charged with the error when it's the other guy who didn't follow the rules.

After the umpires sent Rodriguez packing, a hostile New York crowd resorted to throwing trash on the field. In spite of this, the Sox won the game, and became the first and only team to come back from a 0-3 deficit to win the championship.

Like every good Red Sox fan, I have faith – faith that no matter how much trash is thrown, and no matter what the odds, the good guy can indeed win in the end.

Putnam has boosted integrity of Falmouth board

It seems somewhat disingenuous that a now former Falmouth selectman would suggest that an addition by subtraction is needed in Tuesday's Falmouth town election (Letters, May 10).

It was almost one year ago when Falmouth voters took advantage of an addition-by-subtraction opportunity and changed the composition of the board of selectmen. That change brought a number of very positive improvements to the board of Falmouth's town government, including more civility, integrity, transparency and accountability.

I urge all Falmouth citizens to exercise the precious right to vote in next week's election and to choose to re-elect Brent Putnam for another term. He has demonstrated that he is a hardworking, thoughtful and skilled leader for our community. Let's vote to continue his work of making Falmouth government better. I will vote to continue Mr. Putnam's good work to get the job done!

Margaret Finnell
North Falmouth

(this letter was published in the Saturday, May 14, 2011 edition of the Cape Cod Times)

Town Report, 2010

For those of you who haven't seen it, what follows is the report of the Board of Selectmen from the 2010 town report. In prior years, I've not posted this on my blog. However, in prior years, I didn't write the report.

BOARD OF SELECTMEN

Early in fiscal year 2010 the town was faced with the need to hold a special town meeting to balance a $3 million deficit, the result of an unanticipated drop in both state aid and local receipts. Although technically the end of the national recession, it was the beginning of a challenging financial year for Falmouth, which would include still more cuts at the spring town meeting.

As the town moved through the process of developing the FY2011 budget, we received a wake-up call from our outside auditor. Just five years ago, Falmouth had more free cash than almost every other Massachusetts municipality, but now we had next to nothing. One of the town's bond ratings slipped a bit, a reflection of those dwindling financial reserves.

There are controversial issues every year, and this year was no exception. The paving of the Falmouth Heights beach parking lot divided residents in the neighborhood and across town as finances, hours of operation, erosion and other issues were debated.

Plans were approved to build a new sidewalk in front of the Mullen Hall School on Katherine Lee Bates Road. With the renovation of the library and the school, the already heavy pedestrian traffic between the two became an evengreater concern. However, as FY2010 drew to a close, the issue was revisited because of an outcry over the loss of trees and playground space at the school, and the project's future was placed in doubt.

As in other towns, street light reduction was contemplated as a means of helping to close the budget gap. A series of meetings between selectmen, town engineers, police and others outlined a plan to “red cap”, or temporarily turn-off, many lights. The plan was ultimately shelved due to strong public opposition, and the availability of funds generated by the new wind turbine.

The riprap encroachment on the sliver of beach at the end of Maravista Avenue was given a license by the Board, putting to bed one of the town's long unresolved issues. Although many were unhappy with the decision, the alternative – to require the removal of the riprap – had the potential of pitting the town against itself, as the conservation commission had originally permitted the project.

Water pressure – or the lack thereof – in the Ballymeade neighborhood again came to a boil as residents sought elief for the decade-old problem. Unfortunately, progress continued to be slow, and the issue remained unresolved as FY2011 began.

FY2010 also brought significant accomplishments. Due to the diligent efforts of the Falmouth Chamber of Commerce, the Planning Department and the Historical Commission, the town earned the Preserve America designation – the only one thus far on Cape Cod.

The Housing Production Plan – Falmouth's blueprint for achieving the state-mandated 10 percent inventory of affordable housing stock – was approved. The first steps taken under this plan included the identification of town-owned land on Glenwood Avenue and Teaticket Highway for new affordable housing.

After many years of delays and court cases, the New Silver Beach sewer plant was finally completed – on time and on budget. This brought to a close one of Falmouth's longer, more controversial issues.

Falmouth's tradition of preserving land was continued as the 300 Committee helped the town acquire the Bartolomei parcel in the Coonamessett River watershed, and the Pacheco property on Little Pond in Teaticket with a combination of donations, state grants and Community Preservation Act funds. Better known to many as the Little Pond Landing 40B project, the latter acquisition brought a favorable end to yet another of the town's long-standing controversies.

Seeds of transformation began to sprout. The Board began working on policy more frequently, and discussions about delegating routine agenda items began.

The annual town election in May brought more change as 3-term selectman Carey Murphy lost his re-election bid to a challenger, life-long resident and Falmouth police officer David Braga, in an election year dominated by change at all levels of government.

Efforts were made to resolve conflicts within the Board itself. Chairman Mary Pat Flynn recommended that the entire Board attend the Massachusetts Selectmen's Association Leadership Conference, a suggestion that was wholeheartedly embraced by all five selectmen.

Fiscal year 2010 proved to be challenging in many ways. There are still issues to resolve, but there always will be. Progress was made because of the hard work of many individuals who worked together toward the common purpose of serving our community. The Board thanks the many town employees and volunteers – and I thank the past and present members of the Board of Selectmen – for their efforts, and more importantly, the results achieved by those efforts.

Respectfully submitted,
Brent Putnam
Vice-Chairman, FY2010
Chairman, FY2011
Falmouth Board of Selectmen

Giving the People a Voice

Critics of what happened at Monday's Board of Selectmen meeting are saying that chaos now rules. By allowing an unruly crowd to force the selectmen into an impromptu discussion, the Board has effectively tossed the Open Meeting Law, and given its agenda over to whatever vocal group might show up on any given Monday.

Not really.

The Open Meeting Law is flexible. Agendas must include those topics that the Board reasonably expects to discuss. In this case, the Board was notified that some Wind I neighbors would be attending and petitioning the Board to speak. However, that notice arrived on Monday - too late for this item to be added to the agenda when that was posted last Thursday.

Furthermore, given the distress exhibited by the neighbors of Wind I, it could be argued that the action taken by the Board - to shut down Wind I in high winds - constituted an emergency. Again, the Open Meeting Law allows for this.

The critics reply, "Even if the Board's actions can be justified under the Open Meeting Law, there is still the question about who's in charge. What's to stop other angry mobs from doing the same thing? Should the Board have a police presence just in case?"

Take a breath folks.

Who's meeting is it, really? The Board meets to conduct the people's business. We are elected to act in the best interest of the people, but that doesn't mean we have a monopoly on intelligence and common sense. The First Amendment gives the people the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances, and that is exactly what happened on Monday night.

However, a case can be made that a precedent has been set. Rather than fight it, I say we should embrace it.

Many of the commonwealth's cities and towns give their citizens the opportunity to publicly address their executive boards. Indeed, I'm told that at one time, Falmouth did too.

Why not now? Are we afraid of being embarrassed by an unexpected revelation, or asked a question for which we have no answer? Hogwash! We serve the public. The gavel is meant to keep order, not silence the very people who elected us.

Frankly, I've been mulling over some sort of "open mic night" for some time now, but was never quite sure of the value, or how to make it work. As we saw on Monday, there is value.

This is how it will work:

1) At the first meeting of every month, the Board will set aside time on its agenda to allow for public comment.
2) This agenda item, PUBLIC FEEDBACK AND COMMENT, will always be at 8:30pm.
3) All speakers will have no more than 5 minutes.
4) Civility matters. Rude, inappropriate or slanderous comments will not be tolerated, and the chair will enforce the provisions of M.G.L. Ch. 30A, Sec 20(f).
5) The Board will have no discussions, and make no decisions, other than to make sure that issues are appropriately delegated, and/or to schedule a properly advertised public discussion for a date certain.

As I have done throughout my tenure as chair, I will be proposing that the Board adopt this regular agenda item. For me to impose this upon the Board - without their buy-in - would only resurrect the rancor and divisiveness that we left behind last year. It is my hope that the Board will agree to this - that we will turn lemons into lemonade, and give our citizens a voice where they may not have had one before.

(This editorial was also published in the Friday, March 4, 2011 edition of the Falmouth Enterprise under the title, "Selectmen Will Give Citizens Forum For Expressing Concerns")

Ways To Save Town Money

The following also appeared as a letter in the Friday, January 22, 2010 edition of the Falmouth Enterprise.

The January 15, 2010 edition of the Falmouth Enterprise defends the 2011 budget, asserting that, "The easier solutions have been exhausted and now the only way to balance the budget is to make hard choices." I disagree. There are no hard choices in this budget.

The consolidation of the collector and treasurer is, in fact, a very easy decision. The treasurer is retiring, so no one needs to be laid off. The two roles were once one position, separated many years ago. The logic behind this plan appears to be, "It was done before, so it can be done again, and we save an easy $130,000."

The paper goes on to suggest that I, "would better serve the town by considering how best to measure the town manager’s performance."

I already have.

There is no unified purchasing system in town. Orders for things as basic as cleaning supplies are done on a department by department level, with some departments using entirely different products than others. Even within departments, purchasing is often fragmented. The high school uses different toilet paper dispensers - and therefore, toilet paper - than the other schools. Common sense tells us that if we have to buy two different kinds of toilet paper, then we are losing out on a larger, bulk purchase that could save us money.

Moreover, without a purchasing system, there is no way to track what we have purchased. There are no inventory controls to protect the town against loss, or prevent duplicate purchases. A perfect example of the latter is town hall, where almost every department has its own refridgerator.

Indeed, with all the talk of regionalization, one has to wonder...Why has Falmouth not taken the lead and reached out to our neighbors to develop an upper Cape purchasing block?

Combining the collector and treasurer is not, as the paper suggests, a "hard choice," but rather is an easy step to take; "low hanging fruit" is a term often used. Anyone can reach for the low fruit, but most of it - like a purchasing system - is out of reach, higher up in the tree. Getting there requires focus, forethought, preparation, planning - it requires leadership.

Rather than emphasize the low hanging fruit, a good manager will have ladders ready so his team can also pick from those higher branches. Perhaps it is just me, but I haven't seen any ladders.

Consolidation plan not well thought-out

The following also appeared in the Thursday, January 21, 2010 edition of the Falmouth Bulletin.

The January 14, 2010 edition of the Falmouth Bulletin incorrectly states that I do not support the merger of the collector's and treasurer's postitions. I support any and all efforts to reduce the cost of local government, as long as they do not adversely affect the services provided to our residents.

This plan is apparently being put forth based on the coming retirement of our current treasurer. As far as I know, there has been no study to determine if consolidation will be cost effective. The treasurer's and collector's roles were once one position, separated many years ago. Why do we believe that they can be recombined? What has changed?

Moreover, we do not know if the current collector is qualified to be the treasurer. If not, additional training will probably be required. What will that cost? How long will it take?

These are the kinds of details that should have been discussed before we developed a budget that leans heavily on the anticipated savings. Unfortunately, this plan was presented as part of the budget, without any forewarning, or opportunity to deliberate the pros and cons.

A supermajority - 4 out of 5 - of selectmen must approve any appointments made by the town manager. This would include the new combined treasurer/collector. If the town manager can show that this consolidation has merit, I will support it. However, as presented, it appears to be one of convenience and opportunity, rather than a well thought-out plan to reduce overhead.

Misinformation

Nothing rankles me more than misinformation. Criticism doesn't bother me; everyone has a right to their opinion. However, when someone takes liberty with the facts, it gets under my skin. An editorial in the Friday, September 18, 2009, Falmouth Enterprise, was one such occasion. The paper was good enough to publish my rebuttal in the Tuesday, September 22, 2009 edition. I've posted it here...

The Enterprise's latest editorial, "No Value To Childish Behavior", was so riddled with inaccuracies that it demands a correction.

The paper begins by stating, "We don’t know how Mr. Whritenour’s contract is worded..." For the record, Section VIII of Mr. Whritenour's contract with the town states, "The Town agrees to pay for...the ICMA Annual Conference...subject to the prior approval of the Board."

The Enterprise continues, "...the provision that requires the selectmen to vote on an acting manager in the town manager’s absence surely refers to an incident in which the town manager is incapacitated..." In fact, there is no such provision in Mr. Whritenour's contract.

However, Article V, Section C5-13.B. of the town charter states, "In the event of a...temporary absence of both the Town Manager and the Assistant Town Manager, the Board of Selectmen shall designate...a town employee or other person to exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Town Manager...at a duly noticed open meeting..." Mr. Whritenour's failure to notify the Board of his absence in a timely fashion put the Board in conflict with - if not in violation of - the charter because we were unable to appoint an acting town manager before Mr. Whritenour's departure.

As for the suggestion that, "Mr. Whritenour could easily have hopped in his car and driven home," remember that Montreal is an eight-hour drive away and any disaster requiring leadership would probably damage our infrastructure. The likelihood of getting back to Falmouth when roads are closed, or contributing anything meaningful via cell phone when phone lines are down and power is out, would be next to zero.

That said; we don't need a disaster to require the services of our town manager. The town meeting warrant needed to be signed this week - a responsibility of the town manager which had to be delegated to the acting town manager.

There is no "sniping and political maneuvering" here, simply a request that we enforce the rules. After all, if we can so callously ignore a legally binding contract and the town's charter, what is next?

Correcting my ConComm record

It seems that some one, at some time, is going to say some thing which needs more detail. Last Friday, a constituent leveled some criticisms against me in one of the local papers. What follows was also published in the Friday, July 3, 2009 edition of the Falmouth Enterprise as a letter titled "Letter Writer 'In Error'".

I would like the opportunity to correct the record. In the Friday, June 26, edition of the Enterprise, Craig A. Martin wrote that I missed “close to half the scheduled meetings” during my tenure on the conservation commission because “it was too time consuming,” and that I resigned well before my term expired. Mr. Martin is in error.

In late 2006, my wife’s grandmother—a woman who was closer to me than my own grandmothers—passed away after a long battle with cancer. Several months later, my mother passed away, also after a long battle with cancer. In-between, I got my first double ear infection in 30 years, which significantly impaired my hearing for several weeks. Altogether, I missed three months of commission meetings because of these events.

My last term on the commission ended June 30, 2007. In May of 2007, I submitted my request to be reappointed to another three year term, but was never notified when this would be considered. By July, I had heard nothing from the selectmen, and finding my schedule to be more demanding than expected, I reconsidered my request. My resignation letter—dated July 12, 2007—apparently did not reach the selectmen before they unanimously voted to reappoint me on July 16.

As for Mr. Martin’s suggestion that the selectmen have “a simpler agenda and the less strenuous thought and research necessary for decisions,” I disagree. Having been there and done that, I can say from experience that being a selectman is more difficult than being a conservation commissioner.

Finally, I agree that Dr. Deegan deserved a more respectful conclusion to her tenure with the commission. The recognition of our volunteers—or lack thereof—is something to which Chairman Mary (Pat) Flynn and I have devoted some effort over the past year. Recent events have highlighted the need to more aggressively address this, and Chairman Flynn and I recently met to do exactly that.

For further clarification, I've attached a couple of letters. The first is my letter of intent, when I requested that the selectmen consider me for a full voting position on the commission. The second is my letter of resignation, referenced above.

The economics of beach parking lots

There was a time when I agreed with those who want to keep our beaches open 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. After all, these are public lands and the public should have access. Right?

That is the theory. However, as we have seen in Falmouth Heights, what sounds good in theory doesn't always work in practice.

In fact, this issue is not about beaches, but rather beach parking lots. The beaches are free, and no one need pay any money to visit them. However, the revenue generated by controlling access to these lots in the summer helps fund town government.

Every businessman knows about diminishing returns. At some point, the cost of paying employees to keep the doors open exceeds the revenue generated by having longer hours. Likewise, the longer we keep the gates of the parking lots open, the more it costs us to maintain those lots. The tripping point - when the number of beachgoers no longer justifies the expense of keeping the parking lots open - comes after dusk.

Keeping parking lots open after dark increases trash, vandalism and other issues. If taxpayers are willing to pay for night attendants, more trash collection and police patrols, we could keep every lot open late. However, with a tight municipal budget that is getting tighter, closing the lots at night during the peak summer season remains the most cost effective way to keep the property clean and the problems at bay.

Why then do we keep the Heights lot open late?

If someone visits any other beach after dark, they will be on the beach. At closing time, it is easy enough to find them and ask them to leave. In the Heights, you have hundreds of people spread amongst several different locations. Inevitably, an owner cannot be found, and a car gets locked behind the gate.

That is where the trouble begins. Just locking the gate is ineffective; at one point, someone apparently drove their car through the fence to get out. Tow the car and you upset visitors and neighbors. Ticketing sounds good, but even Heights residents acknowledge that the police probably have more important things to do at 11pm than ticket cars. It's been suggested that the businesses retain a police detail, but the businesses don't need the parking. Why would they pay for something they don't need?

During two months of the year, Falmouth's population will double, if not triple. This population increase stresses our infrastructure, and we must find efficient ways to manage the associated issues. No one wants to deny public access to our beaches, so accommodations have been made for night owls. The Bristol lot is open until 10pm, and Megansett and Menauhant are open even later. Elsewhere, we can and should close the lots.

In theory, keeping all of the beach parking lots open all the time is a great idea, and for ten months we do. In practice, the expense - in time, money and goodwill - of keeping the Heights lot open late in the summer exceeds the benefits.

(This post was previously published as a guest commentary entitled "The economics of beach parking lots" in the Thursday, June 18, 2009 edition of the Falmouth Bulletin.)

The Riello appointment

I've heard from some folks - directly and indirectly - who questioned my refusal to reappoint Police Chief Riello. Many of you have already seen the following letter, titled "Replies To MacDonald Letter" which was published in the Tuesday, May 12, 2009 edition of the Falmouth Enterprise...


I have consistently argued for ample time to fully vet candidates for appointments. Among other things, I believe that the public should have an opportunity to provide input. When I have voted against a motion to appoint, I have noted that my opposition was due to philosophical reasons; I try to make it clear that I am not voting against the appointment, just the motion to appoint at that time.

In the case of Police Chief Riello's appointment, Town Manager Whritenour sent the selectmen a "heads-up" email on April 21, in which he stated that "a detailed packet of information" of the Chief's work would be given to us. He went on to state his hope that, "the Board can review this next week."

Review is not ratification, but when the agenda for April 27 was posted shortly thereafter, Chief Riello's appointment was there. Instead of reviewing, we were ratifying.

The Board must act on Mr. Whritenour's recommendation within 10 days, or the appointment is automatic. The formal request of ratification which accompanied Mr. Whritenour's packet of information was dated April 21, so even a one week continuance to May 4 was not an option if the board wanted a voice in the Chief's reappointment. The only way to review that material before the reappointment was for Mr. Whritenour to withdraw his request and resubmit it at a later date.

So, I made this request respectfully, with a clear explanation as to why. Because the reappointment did not need to be acted upon until June 30, there would be ample time for us to review the material and for Mr. Whritenour to make the recommendation at a later date. However, the board did not publicly support this.

I like Chief Riello. He and I have met, one-on-one, on several occasions to discuss various issues. I have praised him (among others) on my blog, and I periodically send the Chief emails praising the work of his officers. Mr. MacDonald is absolutely correct when he states that, "The uniform, manners, pride, and concern they [i.e., Falmouth's police officers] show the public does not go unnoticed by us."

That said; the appointments the selectmen make - including ratification of the town manager's appointments - are amongst the most important jobs of the selectmen. Every person I vote to appoint is a reflection on me - as a selectman and representative of the people of Falmouth. It is something I do not take lightly.

I am sorry if I disappointed Mr. MacDonald, but I would be disappointing far more people if I simply rubber-stamped an appointment.


...On Monday night, I let the other selectmen, the town manager, and the public, know that Chief Riello and I had sat down to review the information the town manager had provided to the board. It was a productive two hours, and I learned a lot.

For example, that stack of information actually originated with the Chief, who expressed his hope that the selectmen would review it. During our meeting he expressed pleasure with the fact that I had taken the time to read it.

And although there is a lot of talk about downsizing the town's fleet of vehicles - reducing the numbers, or getting smaller, more fuel efficient cars and trucks to lower our fuel use - there is precious little detail about how that will be done. The Chief's information included a section about replacing cruisers, so I asked about this.

Yes, in fact, the Chief did have plans to downsize some vehicles. It turns out that the cruisers, because of the equipment they must carry, might not be good candidates. However, there are departments using different platforms other than the Ford Crown Victoria - which Ford may be discontinuing anyway. On the other hand, there are vehicles, such as detective's cars, which could be replaced with smaller, more fuel efficient models.

As I noted Monday, I find the Chief to be a very approachable, forward-thinking individual, and I am happy to endorse his reappointment.

More questions than answers

This post also appeared as a letter in the Tuesday, April 21, 2009 edition of the Falmouth Enterprise entitled "Editorial Raises Questions".

I welcome criticism, but I think we can all agree that criticism should be constructive, offering suggestions and ideas for improvement. However, in its editorial last Friday the Enterprise simply found fault, implying that I am a rogue with some sort of hidden agenda, and suggesting only that I should tow the party line.

Indeed, after reading the editorial, I had more questions than answers:

What does the Enterprise think my interests are? What does it think the interests of Falmouth's citizens are? Does the paper think that I am not putting the interests of the people first?

What are the interests of the Board of Selectmen? Do the interests of the board match the interests of the people?

If leadership requires teamwork, is that the most important quality of a leader? Is being a team player really leadership, or is it just following the pack? What qualities should our leaders have?

Does the Enterprise believe that our leaders should always present a united front? Is the majority always right just because they are the majority? Would the Enterprise have written the same editorial if it had disagreed with the majority?

Defending the Affordable Housing Committee

The following post also appeared as a letter titled, "Chides paper on housing issue", in the Friday, January 30, 2009 edition of the Falmouth Enterprise.

Before the Enterprise accuses the Affordable Housing Committee of being obsessed with 419 Woods Hole Road (the dictionary defines “fixation” as “a preoccupation with one subject, issue, etc.; obsession”), it would do well to review the history of this issue.

In September of 2007, the selectmen challenged opponents of the proposed affordable housing development at 419 Woods Hole Road to develop an alternative. By the time the spring 2008 town meeting rolled around, no alternative had been presented, and so a private resident, Marc Finneran, put petitioner's articles on the warrant.

Town meeting was told to wait – that an alternative was being developed and all the details would be available by the fall town meeting. However, as the deadline for the fall warrant approached, the Committee was given no direction by the selectmen. Rather than wait another six months, they took the initiative and put a petitioner's article on the warrant.

At town meeting, we learned that the alternative – to redevelop the bankrupt Oshman Way property – included so many dependencies and contingencies that it might never get done. Indeed, one such contingency includes the development of a new dormitory for the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Does WHOI have that dorm yet?

That article garnered support from a majority of town meeting representatives, but was shy of the 2/3rds required for passage. Afterwards, the Affordable Housing Committee again requested direction, and again heard only crickets chirping. Until Monday, the selectmen had never voted to either support or drop the proposal to build affordable housing at 419 Woods Hole Road.

Now, one year after Mr. Finneran put his article on the warrant and we were told to wait until the fall, it's deja vu all over again. Mr. Finneran again has an article on the warrant, we've been told to wait yet another six months, and the Committee is asking for direction.

As for the Enterprise's assertion that “the Affordable Housing Committee cannot be entrusted with spending CPA funds”, no one ever said that. The suggestion for a new committee was born from the realization that the Affordable Housing Production Plan was a joint effort by the Board of Selectmen and Planning Board, but the Affordable Housing Committee is appointed by, and reports to, the selectmen alone.

Nature abhors a vacuum, and without clear direction from the selectmen, the Affordable Housing Committee took the initiative – first with an article, and then a request for funding. The Enterprise's “out of reach” attitude is out of step with the “can do” spirit of Falmouth, which is exemplified by the Affordable Housing Committee.

Putnam Pressed On

The following post also appeared as a letter in the Thursday, October 16, 2008 edition of the Falmouth Bulletin.

In the quickly blossoming debate over building affordable housing at 419 Woods Hole Road versus Oshman Way, columnist Troy Clarkson noted that "the Selectmen agreed, for at least a couple of minutes" that both options could be pursued.

I contest Mr. Clarkson's rendition of events, because alone amongst the selectmen, I held my ground.

It is apparently a custom for the Falmouth Board of Selectmen to not support petitioner's articles, such as that presented by the members of the Affordable Housing Committee which recommends building housing at 419 Woods Hole Road. However, when my peers bowed to the pressure and withdrew their support, I pressed on, suggesting that the Board call a Special Town Meeting and sponsor a similar article.

When the Board voted a recommendation of indefinite postponement, I was the lone dissenting voice.

Earlier in the evening, I had suggested that perhaps both developments could be done. Indeed, while there are concerns about cutting down trees in Webster Woods, there are in fact dueling conservation issues here because of the wetlands at Oshman Way.

So, in addition to the questions asked by Mr. Clarkson, I would add a few of my own:

Which is more important, trees or wetlands?

Do trees take precedence over people?

The answer to the former is a value judgement which will undoubtedly be part of the debate at town meeting. The latter should be a no-brainer.

Brent Putnam
Selectman

Corrects Reporting Error

The following also appeared as a letter in the Tuesday, October 14, 2008 edition of the Falmouth Enterprise.

I would appreciate the opportunity to correct some reporting errors in the Tuesday, October 7, 2008 edition of the Falmouth Enterprise.

In the article, "Late-Night Vote On Webster Woods," the paper writes that I "suggested selectmen place an article on a Special Town Meeting warrant that would combine the Oshman Way development and the Webster Woods development, scaling back both proposals."

In fact, I did no such thing.

The paper is correct in that I did suggest that both options be considered, albeit scaled back. However, it was later, after Selectman Carey Murphy withdrew his motion to support the petitioner's article, when I suggested that the Board call for a Special Town Meeting.

Three of the five selectmen did not support indefinite postponement for the petitioner's article to build affordable housing at 419 Woods Hole Road. Because of custom, the Board of Selectmen does not support petitioner's articles, so when there was some contention over supporting this article, I suggested that we call a Special Town Meeting and sponsor our own, similar article.

Unfortunately, the Board did not support that.

At no point did I suggest a combined article - but it isn't a bad idea.

Brent V W Putnam
Selectman

League of Women Voters Q & A

Published in today's Falmouth Enterprise were the questions posed to the candidates for various elected offices, and their respective answers.

I didn't write as much this year, but I still gave good, detailed answers. Feel free to contact me if you want me to elaborate more.

League of Women Voters of Falmouth
QUESTIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR FALMOUTH SELECTMAN

NAME: Brent Putnam

ADDRESS: John Parker Road

OCCUPATION: For the past eight years, I have worked for Novell, Inc., a network and infrastructure software company, as a field support engineer. My responsibilities include problem solving, training, troubleshooting, and creating documentation. Because our products are mission-critical to our clients, I often have to work with difficult people in high stress situations that have tight deadlines.

Prior to this, I was employed by the “Big Four” accounting firm, Ernst & Young, LLP as their New England area Network Manager. My responsibilities there included planning, budgeting, and project management. With regard to the latter, I was part of project teams that built new offices in Newton and Hartford, and renovated the Boston office.

I have a consistent record of advancement and achievement with each of my employers. I have been promoted to roles of greater responsibility, and have been repeatedly recognized for my work ethic. In fact, I have received peer recognition awards on four different occasions over the past three years.


Your participation in Falmouth civic activities, including but not limited to participation in town government and town cultural, social, educational, political, business, religious and philanthropic organizations:

In 2006, the residents of Precinct 9 elected me to be one of their Town Meeting Representatives. That fall, my peers elected me Deputy Captain, and last year I was elected Precinct Captain.

I was appointed to the Falmouth Conservation Commission three times; once as an alternate member, and twice as a full voting member. I served for four years, choosing to step down because of other responsibilities.

Those other responsibilities include being President of the East Falmouth Village Association, and of the Old Barnstable/John Parker Neighborhood Association. I have been the webmaster for the Friends of Falmouth Farms for several years now; last year I was also elected Vice President.

I am a member of the Falmouth Amateur Radio Association, and we have family memberships with The 300 Committee and FCTV-13. We attend St. Anthony's Parish in East Falmouth and contribute to the Falmouth Service Center.

I am an Eagle Scout, a graduate of Falmouth High School (Class of '89; Member of the National Honor Society) and Cape Cod Community College (Associate in Science – Computer Information Systems; cum laude); I have been nominated for 2008 Alumni of the Year.

As a family, we are regular volunteers for the Falmouth Cranberry Harvest & Farm Festival. Our children are and have been in the Falmouth Public Schools and Falmouth Youth Hockey. My wife owns her own real estate brokerage here in town and is a member of the Falmouth Chamber of Commerce.


QUESTION A:
“On capitol projects with multi-million dollar budgets, what is the Selectmens' role in assuring that the town avoid significant cost overruns?”

The people of Falmouth look to the Board of Selectmen to be a bulwark of fiduciary responsibility. As the highest elected office in the town, there is an expectation that this body will be a watchdog so that there is never a need to ask taxpayers for more money. Indeed, this responsibility is outlined in various parts of the town code.

For example, the selectmen, “shall maintain liaison with all boards, commissions and committees” (Section C3-7D). The importance of this role cannot be understated, as this is how the selectmen stay on top of town government. If the liaisons are doing their jobs, personality conflicts, budget overruns and other issues would never become front page news.

Because the Board serves “as the chief executive...policy-making board of the town” (Section C3-3A), they can implement proactive policies to protect the taxpayer's dollar. For example, a surety bond could be required for all capital projects. This ensures completion of the project if, for whatever reason, there are issues with contracted parties, be they architects, contractors or otherwise.

Another proactive policy would be to require those who are directly responsible for a project to publicly convey the progress – or lack thereof – via periodic progress reports. Among other things, these reports should include finances, progress toward interim deadlines, and contingency plans for unanticipated problems. A short paragraph in the newspaper would not qualify.

The selectmen exercise control over town affairs by “Recommending major courses of action to the Town Meeting” (Section C3-2B). Therefore, they could recommend that town meeting make these policies a permanent part of the town's bylaws.

Falmouth has no ombudsman. The role “to make investigations and...investigate the affairs of the town and the conduct of any town department, office or agency” (Section C3-5) is granted exclusively to the selectmen.

Audits are one type of investigation. The state requires audits of capital projects when they are completed, but in some cases, years will have passed and tens of millions of dollars will be spent before that happens. For any project that falls behind schedule or over budget, an interim audit should be required. This would help pinpoint how the money was spent to date, help identify how much would be needed to complete the project, and perhaps even find lost money or identify were money could be saved.

A more thorough investigation of the type suggested in the town charter is an excellent way of ensuring accountability when a project has gone completely awry. Good, methodical investigations answer the questions that taxpayers ask: What went wrong? Why? Who is responsible? How can we prevent this from happening again?

Taking these proactive steps can prevent the need for after-the-fact intervention by the town's leaders on future multi-million dollar capital projects.


QUESTION B:
“Which of the nine major elements in Falmouth's Local Comprehensive Plan should be a priority for implementation and how do you suggest that this be accomplished?”

Planning – which falls under Element 1, Land Use & Growth Management – is probably the foundation of the other elements. However, choosing one element as a priority is impossible, as everything is interconnected.

Affordable Housing (Element 5) can bypass local planning via 40B. Economic Development (Element 3) affects affordable housing. If more people make more money, the median income will rise. Because the definition of affordable is based on an income of 80 percent of the median, 40B could become a non-issue. Any development – business, housing or otherwise – will affect water, coastal and wetlands resources (Element 2). Every element dovetails another.

I used to play the trombone, and know from experience that one part in a complex symphony doesn't sound complete by itself. So it is with the Local Comprehensive Plan. This is a comprehensive plan; to prioritize one element over another is like asking a conductor to chose the most important part in the orchestra. This is not a collection of solo performances, but rather a symphony in which each element plays an important part.

Petition to the Selectmen

We wish to explain the request we presented to the Board of Selectmen on Monday, March 31.

We asked the selectmen for an independent audit of Phase I of our – the taxpayer's – high school renovation project, including review and comment by an independent cost estimator. This should be completed prior to the May 20 election to assure Falmouth's taxpayers that all funds spent to date have been spent responsibly. This will also provide the selectmen and building committee with a clear picture of what of the original $67.5 million is available.

We also requested a comprehensive review of the renovation project. This should, at a minimum, include the Phase I interim audit, the state-required audit, all litigation information (obviously this won't be available until all cases are settled), and a cause and effect analysis.

We do not want a witch-hunt, or to stall or prevent completion of our school's renovation. These requests are intended to provide answers about the project's finances, explain how it got out of control, and how the issues have been and will be resolved.

These requests are not unreasonable. During the same meeting, Selectman Mustafa noted that, "People want the facts," and Chairman Murphy said the people need "transparency" from town government.

Taxpayers are being asked for an additional $18.8 million to complete this project. Property tax bills will bear an additional sum for 20 years if the override succeeds. If Falmouth's taxpayers are to approve this request, Falmouth's leaders must first show that our taxes have been spent responsibly, that the questions will be answered, and that the lessons learned will be applied to future public projects.

(This post also appeared as a letter, signed by myself and Precinct 9 representative Carol Murphy, in the Thursday, April 10 edition of the Falmouth Bulletin. It was titled (by them), "The reasoning behind high school audit request")

I was listening, Mrs. Sutherland

While reading Mr. Corgan's latest editorial, "When A Brief Encounter Results In changing Direction," I heard my 9th grade government teacher echoing in my head.

The term Mr. Corgan should have used was not "oligarchy," which is rule by the few, but aristocracy or plutocracy, which is rule by an elite or wealthy class, respectively. In fact, the "establishment" that Mr. Corgan speaks of - presumably the two-party system of Democrats and Republicans - is, in fact, an oligarchy.

There is a barrier to entry in politics. While anyone can run for office, to do so successfully usually requires either political connections, money or both. Knowing this, it is easy to understand why individuals such as Al Gore (whose father was also a U.S. Senator), our own Senator Kennedy, or George W. Bush were able to rise to the top.

It is possible to overcome that barrier, and for every Franklin D. Roosevelt, there is, to use Mr. Corgan's example, a Tip O'Neill. However, to succeed, the individual usually has to join one of the two major parties (Bill Clinton comes to mind), and so, in the end, even they become part of the oligarchy.

All that said; there are occasions, such as with former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura, when someone rises to the top without support of the oligarchy.

(This post also appeared as a letter in the Friday, April 4, 2008 edition of the Falmouth Enterprise entitled, "Corrects use of oligarchy."

Although I graduated from Falmouth High School, my freshman and sophomore years were spent at Brunswick (ME) High School.

I'd always done well in history, so my 8th grade history teacher recommended me for the advanced government class in the 9th grade. Rather than rehash American history, our teacher, Mrs. Sutherland, taught us just about everything about government - ours and all the others. Those lessons were not forgotten.)

A less expensive alternative to sewering?

I recently received a four-page newsletter entitled, "Comprehensive Wastewater Management Planning Project," outlining the issues and process behind the effort to address the nitrogen loading in our salt ponds and estuaries. Kudos to the Nutrient Management Planning Committee for taking this long overdue step.

Next time around, I'd suggest making space for the address and postage on the newsletter itself. Not only is it more likely to be read (easier to open), it will save the cost of envelopes – and stuffing them.

That said; I was disappointed to learn that the Nitrex system was not amongst the potential alternatives being studied. Rather than install pipes and pumps and build sewage treatment plants, Nitrex simply retrofits existing septic systems, intercepting and removing nitrogen from the effluent. During my tenure on the conservation commission, we approved two test installations in the Waquoit Bay watershed.

Recent estimates for sewering Mashpee – which also faces nitrogen loading issues – hover around $500 million. This is roughly the same amount that has been suggested for Falmouth. However, while that estimate was downplayed here, in Mashpee they are taking it seriously and giving serious consideration to the Nitrex system as a less expensive alternative.

Falmouth should follow Masphee's lead and explore alternatives to traditional sewers. As an acquaintance of mine – a civil engineer – observed during last year's New Silver Beach debate, it seems as though our local leaders "would rather throw money and 1960’s technology at a 2007 problem."


This post was also published in the Friday, March 28, 2008 Falmouth Enterprise as a letter entitled, "Explore Wastewater Solutions."

My english teachers always taught me to capitalize formal names, and I submitted my letter with "Nutrient Management Planning Committee" capitalized, but the Enterprise removed the capitalization. Go figure.

A la carte cable

Falmouth's negotiations with cable provider Comcast offer an example of how local leaders can have a positive effect on our cost of living.

Many Cape Cod towns have relatively low tax rates as compared to other communities in Massachusetts.

However, this is offset by the expense of living here.

Everything, it seems, is more expensive; gasoline comes to mind. The cost of cable television is no exception, and nationally it has risen at about three times the rate of inflation. While we can blame the cost of gas on a variety of things, the cost of cable is based on bundling.

Truth be told, many cable channels are rarely watched.

For example, given our local demographics, I'm sure few would miss Telefutura. However, by bundling more channels together, cable providers can charge more under the guise of “choice.” Of course, if you can't understand it, or it's of no interest to you, it's not much of a choice.

The alternative, “a la carte” programming, where we pick and chose what we buy and watch, has been resisted by cable companies for years because it would undermine this revenue model. Washington D.C. is deadlocked over whether to require a la carte, but our local leaders could step up.

Comcast wants to continue its monopoly in Falmouth.

By demanding a la carte pricing as part of the bargain, Falmouth selectmen could accomplish what Washington has failed to do – control, if not reduce, the cost of cable.

Cable companies and other detractors claim that a la carte will cost consumers more. For example, last year the New York Times suggested that ESPN, which charges cable companies $3 per subscriber per month, would have to charge $12 to break even under a la carte. However, this is not about how much money ESPN makes; it's about how much the consumer pays and the economics of supply and demand. Were ESPN to charge $12 today, Comcast would simply pass the increase onto its customers and bundle in a few cheap, obscure channels to justify it. Under a la carte, there would be no middle man to shield ESPN. They would have to price their product to attract subscribers, not drive them away.

One need only look to Apple's iTunes service, which has redefined the way music is packaged and sold, to see what would probably happen in cable TV. Music companies want us to believe that their declining revenues are due entirely to piracy. However, Nine Inch Nails' recent album Ghosts I-IV grossed more than $1.6 million in its first week - in spite of the fact that it can be downloaded freely.

The reality is that until recently, music industry profits were based on the concept of promoting a single hit song to sell a CD full of mediocre music.

iTunes is the epitome of a la carte; instead of spending $18 for a CD full of songs you don't want, you spend $1 on the one song you do want.

We could expect a similar shake-out in cable television with a la carte.

Falmouth selectmen will probably ask for concessions like new cameras in town hall, but they need to take a more aggressive leadership role. Other towns are also in negotiations with Comcast; we need to reach out to these communities and work with them to pressure the cable provider for something of greater benefit to local residents. Something like a la carte programming.

This also appeared as an op-ed entitled Few still hungry for cable's prix fixe (I don't get to name it...the paper does that) in the Friday, March 28, 2008 Cape Cod Times.

I sent a similarly worded letter directly to the Falmouth Board of Selectmen.

By the way...for those unfamiliar with the term, 'prix fixe' is the oppposite of a la carte. It basically translates into 'fixed price.'