Involvement thereon

Toward the end of Monday's select board meeting, Selectman Kurtz made a statement that included his observation about "negative energy."

"Looking back to early March of this year, I'm struck by the amount of...negative energy this board has expended as a group and as individual members - and I include myself in this. My hope for the board is that we become more proactive, less reactive."

It is a good thing to look for ways to avoid being trapped by negative energy. That kind of energy can come from individual obsessions - and we've all seen that in a public setting. It can also come from a selfish and misguided group directive - whether vendetta or personal agenda or prejudice - or sometimes just plain ignorance and fear.

It is always a destructive force. It is manipulative and belittling; and almost always, at its roots, it is dishonest and deceptive in its presentation.

But. Negative energy should not be confused with a positive force fighting against a negative thing. When things do not work correctly, do not happen fairly, do not function honestly and openly, than there is a critical need to identify and restore. That takes courage and tenacity. This is not a task for the faint hearted...nobody much likes it when someone points out the cracks and holes....

Point: Management of the town's finances is a major component of a municipal machine. In June 2009 the town lost Mgr. Jackson, who had brought some long needed order to a chaotic financial situation that had developed in Paris over many years. We have just lost Finance Officer Gendreau who kept a steady hand through a disastrous, though short lived, takeover regime. She also provided guidance when a new full time manager - and chief finance officer - beginning Jan.2010, brought his own understanding to the financial management of Paris

So, now we are left with a niggling question: Do we have a current town manager who brings the best possible judgment to bear on Paris' money matters? Years upon years of municipal experience do not necessarily make that a sure thing..

Just two examples would be:

*From January to April 2010, Mgr. Tarr insisted that money put aside for TIFF payments needed to be budgeted in a way that would cost the town twice. [TPR posting Better check your figures, 1-12-2010]

[editor's note: TIFF = a long term financing arrangement involving tax incentives for businesses to repay towns for infrastructure.]

Financial Officer Gendreau discovered early on what had been misunderstood; but the new manager was reluctant to accept that Skowhegan had used a unique formula for their handling of a TIFF arrangement, and that Paris had different factors and required a different set up.

After a good amount of discussion and input from some focused individuals, the new manager's budgeting plan was finally replaced with the plan used successfully in Paris before he arrived.

* A more recent example is the issue of interpreting the process for how money is to be spent, and involves taking responsibility #1 for learning how things are done - by asking, by reading, by investigating, by figuring out; and #2 by not blaming other people and other things for what should be shouldered by one's own self.

The issue in question is the now infamous set of vehicles, a police cruiser, and later a golf cart. [TPR posting Well Placed Questions, 11-29-2010; and Backtracking, 11-29-2010] The decision maker in question was Mgr. Tarr; the person blamed for not getting it right - Police Chief Verrier - who himself should have been able to figure things out and be responsible; the thing blamed was a purchasing policy - for not being in front of his eyeballs and playing recorded directions to do this about that....

And was there learning from one example to the other? Evidently not. The unfolding of the second issue looked remarkably similar to the first....

Once again, TPR wishes to point out that no single incident, or situation of concern brought up in reference to Mgr. Tarr, is necessarily of complete and totally disastrous proportion. And, somehow, there always seems to be a way to explain away or excuse each incident or situation... explanations that often seem to change depending on the audience...

It is the sum-total of all the situations that makes the impact - the decision-making trend they indicate. Is there a pattern here?

One is left doubting the level of leadership skills and qualifications.....

Point: The following is a continuation of an argument TPR has been making for some time now. It is directly related to the inappropriateness of Mgr. Tarr's position on the NPSW board, an additional responsibility he takes on beyond the responsibility of running Paris.

But, rather than focus on the involved skills, or lack of them, TPR would like to be very clear about the fact that Mgr. Tarr is on that board in the first place because the Paris selectboard appointed him. He is their responsibility and theirs to make a decision about. Just as is correspondingly true for Mgr. Holt in Norway.

The "incompatibility of office," [TPR Starting the New Year, 1-2-2011] is less a function of the person than of the job itself. The town manager, as part of his duties, is responsible for formulating the town's budget, i.e., gathering data from all department heads and boards (e.g., NPSW) who receive and spend taxpayers' dollars.

The president of NPSW, as part of his duties, would be responsible for formulating (even if the work is done by a committee and he only approves it) NPSW's budget, which is ultimately conveyed to the town for funding. This includes making a determination of how many tax dollars the town is asked to budget to pay NPSW.

The two positions (town manager and president of NPSW) are incompatible, as the town manager cannot be asked to approve his own work. This would be the same as the town manager serving on an SAD board - which formulates a budget that is conveyed to the town. [editor's note: Refer to the MMA discussion in the 1-2-2011 link just above. SAD's are specifically mentioned.]

Two questions and an incompatibility of office. Food for thought....

On Monday Jan. 3...

...5 Paris Selectboard members; 1 town clerk; 2 reporters; 1 cameraman; 5 public at large; all met together in the town office for the first meeting of the year.

No town manager.

Chairman Ray Glover: " ...our manager is not present tonight; he had a doctor's appointment, with a specialist out of town, and if the board agrees...to...accept his absence..." Medical excuse was voted on and accepted by the board.

It is a fortunate patient who finds individual medical expertise at work in the pm.

Coincidence that this meeting was to replace the meeting of Dec. 27 that got snowed out - the meeting that was cancelled 24 hours in advance (Sunday 12-26). Probably would have had awkward discussions at that meeting, anyway...harsh words and concerns about a manager's choice for agenda items and all...

A citizen asked about the replacement for Highway Foreman Frank Danforth. Selectman West said he was with Mgr. Tarr and (TPR understands) former Finance Officer Sharon Gendreau when 6 applicants were interviewed, and narrowed down to 1 - who West thought Mgr. Tarr anticipated hiring. There followed a discussion of how board approval fits in: a rubber stamping after the fact? or a possibility of refusal to approve if the candidate is unacceptable?

As for replacing Finance Officer Gendreau, a former finance officer, Marjorie Risica, will serve temporarily. Mgr. Tarr will seek a full time employee.

A citizen expressed concern about oversight, and asked about how the board would conduct careful supervision throughout the transition process - including monitoring the various accounts. The citizen's concern was as much about the expertise of the current chief financial officer (Mgr. Tarr) as that of a temporary - and eventually a new permanent finance officer.

Former Financial Officer Gendreau will be a hard act to follow. She has provided a stabilizing hand following the loss of former Manager S. Jackson.

Another citizen added her concern about Mgr. Tarr's judgment in financial matters, citing a recent article in Waterville's Morning Sentinel. The 12-29-11 article refers to " 'Accounting restructuring'," specifically, a matter of routing state funds received into a general fund to spend, as opposed to placing them in a reserve fund to use later as they were intended. This happened in Skowhegan, the town where Phil Tarr was manager 2005 to June 2008. [editor's note: During the meeting Monday there was speculation about how many other managers could have come between the issue reported and the current manager in Skowhegan. The manager quoted in the article appears to be the manager who directly followed Tarr. It was only 15 months after leaving that town when Tarr applied to Paris for his current position.]

The incident is not a criminal matter - but it does not inspire confidence. In Paris these last months there has been some sloppiness that has obscured rather than clarified, some ambiguity when transparency would have been more professional. Think golf cart and police car purchases, for example.

This sloppiness and ambiguity did not originate from Finance Officer - Deputy Treasurer Gendreau's office.

Not confidence inspiring. On top of not much confidence there in the first place... The citizens speaking wanted the selectboard to understand that.

And then the topic swerved, to NPSW - the organization designed to coordinate and support the labor that facilitates the way both of our towns handle solid waste. But the topic's focus wasn't as much about the workers, as it was the NPSW board; and Town Manager Tarr's involvement thereon. [editor's note: clarification - the correct title for head of that corporation would be "president", not chairman, as TPR stated in the last posting. It would be "President" Tarr who wears that second hat.]

Starting the new year

Paris Selectboard meets Monday Jan. 3, 7PM, town office. Agenda here. Although brand new creative additions often times appear on the agenda by the time meeting time rolls around....

According to The Sun Journal 12-28-10, this particular meeting, rescheduled because of bad weather on 12-27-10, "...had been planned to be short, with one article on communication between selectmen and town employees."

Item #12 on the agenda for the postponed 12-27 meeting refers to a "discussion of information sources for board members".

Those sitting in the audience at the 12-13 meeting will remember some heated words between Mgr. Tarr and one specific selectman. It was not totally clear what the underlying issue was - but there was no question that there was a clash of wills. Perhaps it was a question of who's in charge here?

There are folks - some selectboard members, some just plain old citizens - who continue to ask questions; because even if things look pleasant and accommodating and all okey-dokey, a not-so-clear issue or situation can be cleared up with a few well-placed questions and some straight answers.

And someone intent on keeping the voting public informed, with nothing to hide, would have no problem with that. Right?

Take the following questions, for example....

Consider the interlocal agreement between Norway and Paris to deal with solid waste (NPSW) and the structured board with combined members from both towns.

*Why are there 2 town managers of participating towns sitting on that board with voting privileges? One of whom not only votes, but is also chairman? Both are responsible for formulating budgets for their respective towns, and those town budgets include amounts formulated by NPSW in its budget.

There is no question that some town managers have skills to share; but, after the initial crisis intervention situation NPSW faced early on, this continuing guidance should be - and should have been - done on an informal, advisory basis.

There is cause to look further into the term "incompatibility of office," as discussed in the Municipal Officer's Manual published by MMA, chapter 2, "Board of Municipal Officers" under the topic of "Conflict of Interest." (See TPR post 12- 05-10 Continuing to track.)

*How is this ok?

Continuing on the theme of a town manager wearing 2 hats...at the 12-13 meeting, Selectboard member Smart brought to the board's attention the cover page from an NPSW request inviting proposals for firms or individuals to apply for the job of conducting a comprehensive analysis of solid waste and recycling operations within or near Oxford County. [editor's note: check the address and title in the middle of the page to see under whose auspices this document appears to be sent out.] It is not the intent of TPR to criticize this project. Consider, however, that at the top level of the joint steering committee for this project sits Paris Town Mgr. Tarr, Chairman of NPSW.

OK. Two jobs - maybe not too hard? But who is this job for? Sel. Smart asked if there wasn't an office at NPSW where Tarr could receive mail and from which he could administrate; and he responded that there was an office at Brown Street, but no one always there to answer the phone or give out information.

*So Paris town office staff should do it?

Another selectman responded that he (Mgr. Tarr) was working for "us," that we asked him to do this. So, is the assumption...

*...it's also ok for Paris staff to do work for NPSW?

Wait - did we ask him to do this - all this? Thought that was for the crisis intervention period early on.... Thought we hired Phil Tarr, at a fine and dandy salary, plus benefits, to manage the town of Paris.

And while we're at, while we're asking questions, lets see how the division of that administrative time is working out....

*... any giving over of Paris duties to office staff so NPSW business gets handled...?

*What kind of oversight is happening at the top level in Paris' municipal machine?

*Whose interest is being served? There need to be some more questions....