That makes sense, like any project there is a project charter and objectives.
Is this a formal document that Is on the public record or informal? Rob *Robert Ahlert* | *781.738.1069* | robahl...@gmail.com On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 1:41 PM Donald seckler <seckle...@comcast.net> wrote: > The term and work of a committee are determined by the “charge” that the > Selects formulate when they solicit volunteers. When the work is complete > the committee disbands. > The charge is the blueprint and the contract regulating the process. > > Thanks. > > Don Seckler > > Sent via cell > > On Jan 4, 2024, at 12:47 PM, Paul Shorb <paul.sh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Rob - > Someone else with a longer history & better memory than I probably > could answer your interesting historical trend question better than I > could. But for what it's worth, my impression is that it has depended on > the topic at hand. > > E.g., in the last few years since I have been on the Lincoln Green Energy > Committee, we have proposed several warrant articles for vote at Town > Meeting and have advocated in a transparent way for a "yes" vote on each. > (E.g., in 2021, a general resolution re climate policy; in 2022, a "home > rule petition" to the state legislature; and in 2023, both adopting the > newly-offered opt-in stretch energy code and volunteering to participate in > the "ten-town pilot" program.) In each case we tried to address concerns > raised (e.g., cost, practicality, impact on the grid, etc.), both before > and during the meeting, so I think voters were able to make a well-informed > choice to vote yes or no. > > On the other hand, as I recall the high-stakes vote several years ago on > how to renovate the Lincoln Public School was teed up as several options > that were sorted through by a structured series of several votes at the > Town Meeting, without the School Board or the ad hoc school building > committee advocating for any one of them. > > - Paul > > On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 12:06 PM Robert Ahlert <robahl...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Has it always been done this way that advisory committees come up with >> specific recommendations rather than just options with corresponding pros >> and cons? Or does it depend on the topic at hand if they are creating >> recommendations versus just options? >> >> Rob >> >> *Robert Ahlert* | *781.738.1069* | robahl...@gmail.com >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 10:02 AM Paul Shorb <paul.sh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Bob - >>> I agree that any such presentation by a Town committee at Town Meeting >>> should make a full good-faith attempt to be fair and accurate. I >>> haven't noticed any deviations from that general rule. >>> >>> However, I do not agree that all such presentations should be "neutral." >>> Rather, it is often very appropriate for a Town committee to develop and >>> make a recommendation as to a particular course of action. A presentation >>> at Town Meeting of such a recommendation would naturally include the >>> reasons for the recommendation and in effect advocate for it. In the case >>> of the recent initial presentations regarding HCA and CCBC, to me their >>> length seemed very appropriate, in light of the complexity of the issues >>> and how much factual grounding we in the audience deserved before we voted >>> on them. Personally, I appreciated the great care that went into developing >>> them, and the fact that they tried to address objections and concerns that >>> had been raised at prior public meetings, on Lincoln Talk, and/or in the >>> Lincoln Squirrel. >>> >>> I didn't see the moderator invite the committee to rebut every comment >>> made in opposition to its recommendation. Rather, my impression is that the >>> moderator uses good judgment as to when to invite the committee to respond, >>> such as in response to a direct question or to provide relevant facts or >>> clarification. >>> >>> As to how much total time was allocated to Town Meeting discussion, I >>> think your beef is not with any Town committee but rather with the >>> supermajority of attendees who eventually voted in support of calling the >>> question. >>> >>> - Paul Shorb >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 7:18 PM Robert Domnitz <bobdom...@hotmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On December 8, 2023, WBUR's On Point posted a podcast of a discussion >>>> between news analyst Jack Beatty and Meghna Chakrabarty. The podcast is >>>> titled, "The Disappearance of Political Persuasion." It references, in >>>> part, the ideas of philosopher John Stuart Mill. The discussion advanced >>>> the premise that democracy is endangered by the demise of political debate >>>> in our country. Partisans on both sides of an issue vilify their >>>> opposition. Listening is a lost art. Frustrated citizens get turned off and >>>> tune out. This is a national issue of critical importance. Is it also a >>>> local issue that we should be concerned about here in Lincoln? Yes, it is. >>>> >>>> >>>> I believe we can do better. In the 25 years I've lived in Lincoln, Town >>>> government has become more interested in leading - or controlling - and >>>> less interested in listening. Our Town Meeting is now largely an exercise >>>> in rubber-stamping the recommendations of town committees. Although >>>> residents who attend Town Meeting are, in effect, the Town's legislators, >>>> they need objective information to make decisions. Do they get objective, >>>> balanced information from Town committees? Increasingly, the answer is no. >>>> >>>> >>>> We can appreciate the efforts of town volunteers that investigate >>>> issues of importance to the town. However, when we receive recommendations >>>> from town committees we should recognize that those recommendations result >>>> from research that has been filtered through the particular values and >>>> priorities that their members bring to the table. By the time a committee >>>> recommends a proposal at Town Meeting, the committee is invested in the >>>> outcome. We rarely get a neutral summary of the pros and cons. If a >>>> committee member dissents from the majority's recommendation, we rarely >>>> hear about it. If we want to consider "the other side of the story," we >>>> need to figure it out on our own. >>>> >>>> >>>> I hasten to add that there is one Town committee that deserves high >>>> praise for the respect they give to residents at Town Meeting. I am >>>> referring to the Finance Committee. Year after year, they give a >>>> scrupulously neutral accounting of the financial implications of particular >>>> proposals. Sometimes, when I'm feeling lazy, I wish FinCom would just tell >>>> me which way to vote. But they don't do that. They force us to weigh the >>>> options and think. Contrast that approach with the advocacy position taken >>>> by virtually every other Town committee that proposes something at Town >>>> Meeting. If we're wondering about the possible downside of a proposal, we >>>> have to either figure it out on our own, read Lincolntalk (where it's hard >>>> to separate fact from fiction or conjecture), or hope that someone at Town >>>> Meeting can use their rigidly enforced two minutes to deliver a fact-based >>>> explanation of why a proposal should be opposed. Although our town >>>> committees are ideally positioned to give us a neutral summary of the pros >>>> and cons, they rarely do that. They consistently give us only the reasons >>>> to vote "yes." >>>> >>>> >>>> Procedures currently followed at Town Meeting reinforce the imbalance >>>> between town committees and residents who want balanced information. My >>>> sense is that this imbalance has accelerated in the last year or two. For >>>> example, the two minute rule for speakers seems to have sprung up >>>> spontaneously at the 2023 March Annual Town Meeting. Town Meeting >>>> procedures that were printed in the Warrant for the ATM during the period >>>> 2007 - 2022 contain this flexible language for speakers from the audience: >>>> >>>> >>>> "...there is no hard and fast rule as to time but for speakers from the >>>> audience floor a two to three minute period should be sufficient." >>>> >>>> >>>> The 2023 ATM Warrant tightened this language: >>>> >>>> >>>> "Please keep your comments to no more than two minutes." The new two >>>> minute rule has been rigidly enforced. >>>> >>>> >>>> In contrast, rules for the sponsors of Town Meeting articles have been >>>> relaxed: >>>> >>>> >>>> The 2007 - 2022 Warrants had a "...guideline..." of "...no more than >>>> ten minutes" for sponsors of articles. >>>> >>>> >>>> The 2023 Warrant had no guideline or limit for sponsors of articles. >>>> >>>> >>>> Do we get an informed, democratic outcome when residents' comments are >>>> tightly limited, while town committees are given as much time as they need >>>> to advocate for their proposals and then repeatedly allowed to rebut >>>> comments from the audience? >>>> >>>> >>>> If you arrive at Town Meeting always knowing in advance how you'll >>>> vote, you might think that two minutes for speakers is too generous. But >>>> John Stuart Mill would not be happy with you (see 1st paragraph and listen >>>> to the podcast). >>>> >>>> >>>> Going forward, here are two things for us to work on: >>>> >>>> >>>> First, in its role as the Town's legislative body, Town Meeting should >>>> take the opportunity to discuss and approve a set of rules that promote >>>> robust, even-handed debate. And second, let's encourage our Town committees >>>> to follow FinCom's example by presenting a more neutral summary of their >>>> proposals. >>>> >>>> >>>> Bob Domnitz >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>> Browse the archives at >>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> -- >>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>> Browse the archives at >>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>> Change your subscription settings at >>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>> >>> -- > The LincolnTalk mailing list. > To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. > Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/ > . > Change your subscription settings at > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. > >
-- The LincolnTalk mailing list. To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
