Opinion: Details to consider before special election

By Kara Fleming

It’s been cited that 80% of Massachusetts towns Weston’s size have five-member select boards. However, this generalization overlooks major factors: not all towns are similarly organized, nor do all boards carry the same responsibilities. Weston’s board is defined as a “policy” board because it is supported by a Town Manager who performs duties that in other towns remain with the board itself; and, it appoints separate working and study committees to research issues and make recommendations. Some towns operate with “working” boards that retain more hands-on responsibilities. Many boards also face complexities Weston does not—such as dispensary and liquor licensing, commercial industries, and tourism.

When towns are examined by region, a clearer picture emerges. Coastal towns have tourism, hospitality and several commercial industries. Some towns expanded their boards during a population boom in the ‘90s and early 2000s. Weston’s population has remained largely flat for over 25 years and is not projected to grow significantly in the next 25. Among the bedroom communities, like Weston, the results are mixed, pointing to governmental organization.

It’s been stated that a larger board brings more expertise for healthier debates and balanced solutions. But this is precisely why Weston has long relied on publicly-appointed working and study committees made up of experienced residents. They conduct in-depth discussions and debate before presenting recommendations for further consideration. This process has encouraged constructive dialogue and balanced outcomes through many. Would Selects becoming the working committees actually expand perspectives or would it reduce the multitude of resident voices?

The strength of Weston’s democracy depends on resident participation—the “direct democracy” aspect of New England town government. In the past 10 years, five Select Board elections were contested. Expanding the board might exacerbate this situation resulting in more uncontested races. Our executive board composed largely of uncontested members raises important questions: Is there demonstrated skill and judgment required to govern effectively and uphold public trust? Could those known to be lacking the necessary fortitude or approach gain access and introduce operational or reputational risks?

The claim that a larger board improves transparency and efficiency because two members can talk outside a public meeting is counterintuitive. All deliberations of a three-member board must occur publicly. Town Counsel noted a statewide increase in Open Meeting Law complaints and violations involving five-member boards and some towns reported obvious private discussions and decision-making among three members. As for efficiency, other towns reported productivity not improving and town staff was negatively impacted—a potential financial concern. Weston’s projects are prioritized for fiscal reasons, and progress also depends on the capacity of other public bodies.

Finally, the assertion that no town reverted to a three-member board is misleading. Ayer reverted and Groton considered it. Belmont rejected expansion twice and Lancaster said no on ballot. Pepperell and Holliston reformed their governments and held-off on board expansion.

The Town Governance Study Committee advised revisiting board expansion after conducting a comprehensive review of Weston’s government and improving citizen engagement. The committee was dubiously dissolved soon after giving this recommendation.

Kara Fleming is former executive level staff for the town of Weston and a former member of the Town Governance Study Committee.

Read more about the upcoming special election: