Gadsby Says Town Meeting Is Irrelevant.
By Jim Conley • May 28th, 2007 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
In keeping with his tradition of making life comfortable for those who deserve it the least, Brookline Town Meeting Moderator Sandy Gadsby advises town meeting members to show restraint in discussing the Brawl at Town Hall and the role of town employees played in roughing up a few citizens who were exercising their right to free speech.
Gadsby’s message appears after the jump. And the question I have after reading his missive is this: “If a town meeting member can’t ask (during a budget debate) whether the Town is employing resources that are problematic, when can they?” Maybe there’s not enough money for race sensitivity training, shall a member wait until November to bring it up? They probably will.
This is the farce of representative town meeting. The hacks (Gadbsy included) circle the wagons on the promise that the Selectmen will take the matter up with great seriousness. Nancy Daly? Robert Allen? Jesse Mermell? They’re going get to the bottom of things? They can’t keep their personal narratives straight, never mind unravel an abuse of power.
Maybe Martin Rosenthal and the PAX mob will light up the place. You know, to show the amateurs that you don’t wait until after the hearing to launch the fireworks.
An aside: Is Gadsby saying that criminal charges are being considered? I’ve heard from a lot of people that were in that room and no one has said that there was physical contact.
Text of Gadsby’s e-mail.
Dear TMMs:There have been a couple of suggestions or requests, in this forum by Jonathan Davis, that the incidents that occurred at last week’s ZBA hearing be discussed at Town Meeting when we reach the Police budget under Article 7 tomorrow evening.
As you are aware, I allow a wide range of questions to be addressed to department heads when we consider their budgets, and as a general proposition do not restrict questions or comments to financial matters.
However, I have spoken to the Chair of the BOS and he has assured me that issues relating to the ZBA hearing and its aftermath will be included on the agenda for a forthcoming regular meeting of the Selectmen. Given that the Selectmen appoint the ZBA and act as our Police Commissioners, that meeting would be a far more appropriate forum than Town Meeting for a constructive discussion of the unfortunate events of last week.
I am not saying that I will allow no comments or questions relating to the ZBA incident when we reach the Police budget. But I will need to exercise fairly strict control over what is brought before Town Meeting, based on such considerations as whether any civil, criminal or disciplinary proceedings are pending or contemplated. So I ask those of you who cannot wait for a BOS meeting to raise issues concerning the ZBA matter to exercise judgment and restraint, so that the dignity of our proceedings at Town Meeting can insofar as possible be maintained.
Thanks, Sandy Gadsby
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
The Board of Selectmen (with historically 80% of them having real estate development ‘interests’) have known of the ZBA problems and BYlaw enforcement failings for several years and have been shockingly quiet on the issue. Why would they begin to give this critical matter any proper attention at this time ?
This is like Congress choosing not to discuss the war in Iraq, because the President and his cabinet are planning to deal with it. Well, I guess that did happen, didn’t it?
Is Gadsby saying that no unpleasant topic should ever be broached by Town Meeting, lest the dignity of Town Meeting be compromised? We lose our dignity if we deal with rather than deny our problems? If so, I disagree. I say we deal with the dirt, but out of respect for Moderator Gadsby, we wear white gloves.
Perhaps TMMs could raise the subject indirectly when zoning amendments are considered at Town Meeting by voting against them. There have been too many zoning amendments over the years that have accommodated developers and filled the pockets of their attorneys, permitting the ZBA, Planning and Building Departments to give it all to developers while blaming Town Meeting for passing so many amendments. Just say no, TMMs, or at least one-third of you plus one. This may make Sandy gritty, resulting in a “two-fer.” Alas, Sandy, life can sometimes seem like a beach at Town Meeting.
TMMs might consider the equivalent of “jury nullification” in the form of “Town Meeting nullification” if Sandy applies the Tom DeLay style of hammer to efforts to air the recent ZBA controversy at Town Meeting. Perhaps Sandy, a longtime partner in the law firm of Foley Hoag, is extending professional courtesy to Lawrence Kaplan, a longtime partner in the law firm of Goodwin Proctor, in avoiding the proposed discussion.
I agree with the Moderator. There were lots of witnesses. There should be a Hearing before any action is taken. And to have a full Hearing at Town Meeting seems impractical, possibly outside the scope of the Warrant, and probably futile since the actions availble to Town Meeting are quite limite. Below is an email I sent to the Town Meeting Members Association list.
The Selectmens’ meeting on June 5 will be a much better place to discuss this than Town Meeting. The Selectmen are the Police Commissioners and they appoint the Board of Appeals. The Selectmen can take statements from and ask questions of members of the Board of Appeals and the Officers involved. It simply would not be fair to take any action without hearing first from all participants.
I can’t see a Hearing about all this at Town Meeting. It’s not on the Warrant. I don’t know that TM can require anyone to appear or to speak. And if everyone did appear and speak, what then? What actions could TM take? Cut the Police budget to punish the Department? Increase the Police budget to give Officers more training?
I consider Arthur and Ruthann friends. And I believe them. But I want to hear from the Officers and members of the Board of Appeals involved before I support any action.
I can see no positive result from spending time on this at Town Meeting.
John Bassett
TMM 6
John makes a good point (above) on the difference between a hearing and what I understand people who want to open this up at town meeting have in mind.
I don’t think that the idea is to focus on the events that led to the police being called on Thursday, but to look at a town budget of nearly $200 million and ask is this what we can expect for the money?
A building department that won’t enforce permit violations and the one time they do, they get the rug pulled out from underneath? What do we need them for if the ZBA is always going to rule in favor of developers? That’s a budget issue.
A police force that can send as many as six oficers to Town Hall on a shouting match? Seems excessive to me, given other priorities in enforcement.
I think it’s clear that Gadsby’s just running interference, as usual.
And that’s never been the idea behid the town meeting system. It’s what makes representative town meeting a farce.
Who but loyal TMMs such as John Bassett have seen any positive results from the time spent on Town Meeting over the years?
By the way, I wonder if John has ever openly disagreed with the Town Moderator at least since the time he ran for Selectman several years ago. Who has the chance to disagree with the Town Moderator in the course of Town Meeting with his heavy hammer?
As a non-TMM, I propose “Town Meeting nullification.” Let’s see how it plays out on cable. It’s the silly season once again.
I like Jim’s observation that the Building Dept. seemed finally to be enforcing the Zoning Bylaw in this case, only to be undercut by the Board of Appeals. As to Archie’s question: I don’t disagree openly with many people. I probably haven’t openly disagreed with Sandy. And I won’t openly disagree with Archie. I do think Sandy’s a good Moderator. And I do hope that we keep focus on the quality of the Board’s decision in this case.
It is a bit dissonant for me to be defending the Brookline Building Department.
My point comes down to this: The selectmen have stacked all these boards with so-called experts whose sole purpose, from what I can tell, is to do whatever the hell they want because they know better than anyone else.
Fine. So what do we need all the “professional staff” for? Supposedly they are on board because they compensate for a part-time, citizen-based form of government. If a ZBA panel is made up of expert attorneys in zoning law, what do we need a town counsel for?
Seems like a lot of people tripping over each other to me.
John Bassett has defined himself as a mugwamp. I don’t care if he does or does not disagree with me, or anyone else. For that matter, I don’t care if Jim Conley agrees or disagrees with me. There are times when positions have to be taken. If someone in authority out there is serious about a complaint for verbal assault, I am prepared to say they are silly. With all of the issues facing Brookline, Massachusetts and the country, do we need this sensitivity with a “he said, she said” brouhaha? If a complaint is pursued, this Town will once again provide guffaws to other communities. If the matter were before a jury, I can just see the jurors laughing at the prosecution. Or is it that the authorities in Brookline want to single out Arthur Conquest for a political lesson? If so, that will not stand. With friends like you, John, Arthur and Ruthann just might need a lawyer.
First time I’ve been called a mugwump. So I googled it. Pretty funny. I disagree with Archie.
Growing up in the ‘hood, a mugwamp was someone whose mug was on one side of the fence and his wamp on the other side. Also back in the ‘hood, when there were still horses and wagons on the streets, I learned what was in the middle of the road.
President Truman complained about his economic advisors, stating that he needed a one-handed economist because all his current advisors would say “On the one hand” with their advice and then “On the other hand” with still further advice.
So let’s wait until all the evidence is in, give Arthur Conquest a fair trial and then hang him? Ain’t gonna happen.
And, John, you’re making progress.
[...] Remember that June 5th hearing into what happened at the ZBA/Brookline Police after-party a week ago today? You know, the hearing that Town Meeting Moderator Sandy Gadsby implied would be held when he said: “…I have spoken to the Chair of the BOS and he has assured me that issues relating to the ZBA hearing and its aftermath will be included on the agenda for a forthcoming regular meeting of the Selectmen. Given that the Selectmen appoint the ZBA and act as our Police Commissioners, that meeting would be a far more appropriate forum than Town Meeting for a constructive discussion of the unfortunate events of last week.” [...]