Let the conversation begin

Since I was young enough to stuff a campaign flier into a front door, I have been interested in the process of governing. It says a lot about who we are, and often tells a lot about where we have been as a community. I have always believed that living in a community carries clear rights; the flip side of which is a critical set of responsibilities. There is no free lunch. As Bob Dylan once said, "you gotta serve someone."

I have always thought of my experience on the Newburyport School Committee as part of a larger "community conversation." How we value our schools, the expectations we have of our education system, and the level of accountability we expect represent not just a budget item; it is essentially a down payment on the future.

Why Run

The task of the Charter Commission is to take that conversation to a different level. Our Charter has remained essentially unchanged since Woodrow Wilson was president. It was crafted to serve the community that was Newburyport 90 years ago. I think a legitimate subject for consideration is whether the structures it defines for governing our city still serve us efficiently, still promote efficient use of resources needed to make the community work. Is it functional, is it transparent, and does it have the flexibility to allow this community to grow and address new needs, and those that we might not be able to imagine in the future?

That is a conversation worth having. I am asking for a seat at that table.

After nine years as an elected official serving Newburyport, I have had up-close and personal experiences in the practice and theory of governance. Those experiences, a lifetime of interest in how communities work, and a core set of consistent values will contribute to a thorough and vigorous public discussion about the role of government in the life of a community.

Those Values?

My public career, and my life as a parent, educator, non-profit director, freelance journalist, advocate, and tax payer have consistently reflected my values.

Transparency- I think it is critical for the credibility of a governance model that it be transparent. What the people see is what the people should expect.

Participatory democracy is a messy business. We need to participate, though. It is part of paying the freight for living in a community. Inclusion is not a luxury, it is the foundation of democracy.

Informing the constituency is absolutely crucial to the process of governance. I have always resisted the idea that governance is too complicated for the community to understand, and that ideas must be presented as either/or, black/white, yes or no. It has always been my experience that if you provide people with all the information they need to make a decision, the odds are pretty good that they will make a good decision for the community. On the other side, an informed constituency is critical to the life of a community. I believe people have a responsibility to get the information they need to make decisions that affect their community.

Accountability is critical to governance.

Efficiency in the functions of governance is also critical. I believe that the norm should be governance that use resources it has efficiently, smartly, and flexibly. If the community believes that tax dollars are not being wasted, it allows the conversation about funding additional needs like infra-structure or services to occur with honesty, and promotes trust.

Even given the range of possible topics for a Charter Review, I can honestly say that all I bring to the conversation are the above values. I have no "horse in the race" regarding Mayor vs. City Manager, or any other issue. In the coming weeks, I will share some of the experiences I have had that will help shape my participation in the discussion, if elected; but I have no dominating belief about what the outcome could or should be.

Let the conversation begin.