Where does leadership, or better, lack of clear leadership, have its effect on how issues pertinent to the whole town are decided?
A question arises, the answer to which affects more than one party - in fact potentially many parties; the question is clearly stated; decision makers are alert, informed, and willing; not only concerns but factual input from all sides are sought and presented; rules are in place. All that remains is for a decision to be reached by decision makers. Ought to work.
But what if any one of the above items is missing - or not quite whole? Rules not clear, perhaps; concerns and factual input not adequate, maybe? That puts a heavier burden on the decision makers...and what if leadership is not strong there? Not individual leadership, making independent decisions and acting on them - but a cohesive group who can work together under good leadership for the common good, even if rules are not clear?
This poses a different, 2-part dilemma. First is the question of how the decision makers - our selectboard - function in general.
Second is that the issue in question becomes clouded with the frustrations of concerns not being properly addressed - on both sides of the question. Not only that, whatever fallout there is from ineffective action (or even inaction) becomes a force in itself and detracts from the attention the original question deserves.
This 2-part dilemma is happening right now in Paris.
Land use is the hot topic; in particular, public road use for recreational vehicles, ATVs. There has been ample coverage of the details in our local media. TPR wishes to address some perspectives.
The request from the ATV clubs for use of certain roads vs. the concerns voiced by some land owners on those roads has been brought to the selectboard...twice. The selectboard is now 0 for 2 - and a 3rd vote has been requested for the Feb.14th meeting. Looks like a pattern that can be repeated, ad infinitum, depending who has the trickiest plan and the loudest voice....
The fight has become about a single question between what has become two personal points of view. The fact that the whole town will bear the brunt of this kind of decision seems to be lost on everyone - including the board. What comes out of this dialogue, rough and unshaped as it is, could affect homeowners on all streets - and - ATV owners and how they are perceived in the future. It is not a simple issue.
But the issue can be made worse by a lack of proper direction and leadership within our selectboard. A lack in effective leadership in a group can open the door for an individual member's action in other directions, and that will obstruct, and likely prevent, productive, cohesive work.
Consider what our selectboard brings to the table as they seek to help move this town forward:
individuals from the fields of public education, legal practice, law enforcement, tax management, banking. Their varied backgrounds, plus their willingness to put in the hours for what must often seem a thankless job, makes them a potential source for strong positive energy in our town.
However, what if, because of less than strong leadership, one determined individual board member continually seems to step in and wield background experience as a bullying force? Further, what if that individual board member independently moved to use background experience skills to take action in a way that could be interpreted as choosing sides in an argument that affects the whole town?
Who should be the body to curtail behavior of that sort in an individual board member? Clearly the board itself. The issue is leadership.
Paris is a small town. Very little goes unnoticed for very long - even if it cannot always be substantiated specifically enough to be printed in the media. But people see things, they talk to each other, somehow facts emerge, if slowly sometimes.
People in Paris expect their elected officials and hired employees to focus on the things that make this town work.
Right now there is an immediate issue involving how people in this town are going to live together, whether an owner of an ATV, or an owner of property on roads ATVs might travel on. That's the problem to focus on. A solution to this problem will require genuine leadership and setting aside personal agendas.
