My Turn: Elect, don’t appoint

By RAY GODIN

Published: 05-11-2023 5:15 PM

Montague voters will decide an extremely important issue at the polls this year, specifically whether to change the town clerk and the treasurer-collector positions from elected to appointed offices. For a number of reasons, I for one think this is a terrible idea, and would like to share with you why.

First and foremost, these are both constitutional offices, and are elected as such to ensure the basic democratic principle of a separation of powers within the government. Town government has it’s parallels with both state and national governments in this respect. At the state level, these positions are elected (state treasurer and secretary of state are comparable) so that whoever sits in the governor’s office does not control the functions and the personnel in these offices. In my humble opinion, putting control of these positions in the corner offices or the Select Board’s table at town hall negates the whole point of separation of powers.

Putting the clerk and treasurer/collector under the control of either the town administrator or the Select Board makes very little sense since none of those people are familiar with the intricate details of what actually happens in these offices. While I’m sure they know that the treasurer/collector collects taxes and the town clerk oversees elections and keeping records, I’m willing to bet they have little knowledge of legal and functional technicalities of how those activities actually take place. While the elected official can always tell the administrators or Select Board members that they are required to follow state and federal regulations and laws on much of what they do, giving the corner office or the Select Board hiring and firing authority over these posts does not guarantee that the appointed clerk or treasurer won’t find themselves on the unemployment line simply because the appointing authority just doesn’t like them, or the way they conduct themselves in their offices. If the administrations feels there is a need to have firing control over these offices, then perhaps it is time for a recall procedure to be added to town bylaws.

A similar attempt to make these positions appointed as opposed to elected was tried by a different administration a number of years ago, and was soundly defeated at town meeting. Quite frankly, it was a thinly veiled attempt at a power grab at that time, and many of the arguments favoring appointed positions then are the same ones we are hearing today. For the record, I am not saying that this year’s attempt to make these positions appointed is a power grab by the current administration, but I’m not ruling it out either. (There are some folks in town hall and within other town departments who see it as a power grab, but obviously can’t say so publicly without putting their own appointed jobs at risk).

Prior to the recent special Town Meeting there was very little public discussion on the proposed change from electing these positions to appointing them. To the best of my knowledge, there was one small article in the Montague Reporter coverage of two Select Board meetings on which the subject was an agenda item. If the Reporter was correct, there wasn’t any discussion whatever in at least one of the meetings. To quote a friend (who has a different view on the issue), discussion of these changes prior to the Town Meeting was sudden, diffuse, and hasty. While there was more discussion of the changes on the Town Meeting floor, several of the members clearly stated they were opposed to the changes, but would vote in favor of the articles so that the changes would be on a ballot that the entire community can vote on.

Several town meeting members indicated their concern is that Montague does not have a broad enough pool of candidates with the experience and skills to run these offices, or that keeping the positions as elected reduces the eventual office holder to being the winner of a popularity contest. With due respect, I disagree. There are a number of residents who operate (or own) multi-million dollar businesses. In doing so they have the financial acuity to keep those businesses running (at a profit) or they would have closed or gone bankrupt. While the laws and regulations that they deal with are different from those that guide local government operations, they are still laws and regulations that must be followed. I would suggest that, while there are significant differences between private business and local government, there are people in the town who have the knowledge and skill sets that would be required of those elected to hold these offices.

As for the argument that the town would be better served by an office holder who’s abilities are determined by the elected or appointed leadership of the town, as opposed to winning a popularity contest at the polls, I would submit that the average voter is very capable of reading a resume, listening to or watching a debate between candidates, and making a determination through their vote as to who does and who does not have the skills to run these important offices.

I urge you to join me at the polls and vote against changing the town clerk and treasurer/collectors from elected to appointed.

Article continues after...

Yesterday's Most Read Articles

Driver taken to hospital after Interstate 91 rollover in Bernardston
Deerfield woman gets probation in stabbing case
Greenfield Police seek robbery suspect
My Turn: Biden’s record and accomplishments are extremely positive
Greenfield’s Lucas Allenby, Landon Allenby qualify for USASA Nationals
Springfield man gets 5 years in Greenfield shooting case

Ray Godin lives in Turners Falls.

]]>