While a majority of the comments and critiques heard at Charter Commission forums this spring have dealt with the costs and benefits of altered election cycles and terms of office, other changes that would fundamentally shift the organization and responsibilities of town boards and administrative staff have received less attention.
These are likely to take center stage when the nine commissioners meet with members of the Board of Selectmen, the Finance Committee, and the Capital Investment and Planning Committee next week. Key portions of the latest draft charter directly affect those three committees. If approved next spring, the charter would greatly expand the authority of the Board of Selectmen, while placing greater responsibility for day-to-day administration in the hands of the town administrator. Most town boards would be appointed rather than elected, and their nonstatutory goals would be set—collaboratively—by a five-member Select Board (a gender neutral name for the current Board of Selectmen). The selectmen would become responsible for maintaining and implementing the town’s Master Plan and for proposing the annual town budget and capital plan. The finance and capital committees would continue to vet those plans, but as independent bodies acting on behalf of Town Meeting. The devil is in the details of the draft charter, which can be found at http://bit.ly/2qEuSYO, but the Press has attempted to clarify those details by compiling a dozen of the commission’s most important recommendations (see “The charter in a Nutshell” below).
Under deadlines set by state law, the commission must produce a first draft and report by mid-August this year; a final draft is due in mid-October. The charter must be approved by a majority vote at next year’s regularly scheduled Town Election in spring 2018. While the preliminary draft is reviewed by the Attorney General for conformity with state laws, approval by the Legislature is not required.
Harvard’s commissioners could recommend against adopting a charter, but so far there is no indication they will do so. As commissioner Charles Redinger said at last week’s forum, there is agreement “at a high level” among the nine commissioners, though they may disagree at a more “granular” level over such questions as whether the Planning Board should be appointed rather than elected (as the current draft proposes), or whether members of all boards should be elected and appointed every two years.
The one goal which everyone seems to agree on, commissioner George McKenna said last week, is the need for a “unified” executive, one that better coordinates the work of the selectmen, the elected and independent boards, and the paid town professionals who deliver services to residents and manage town operations. The idea, he said in a later phone interview, is to “centralize responsibility and accountability at the highest level,” by placing responsibility for “vision, planning, policy, and budget” in the hands of a Select Board.
The Harvard Charter Commission was elected last spring on a ballot question that asked whether one should be formed to “frame a charter for the town of Harvard.” Harvard lacks a charter, as do a majority of towns in Massachusetts, instead deriving its powers from those granted it by Massachusetts in 1732 as well as changes to state law and town bylaws enacted over the years. A charter, in the words of the commission’s website, is a document that “establishes and defines the structure of city and town government for a particular community.” A charter typically creates local offices; distributes powers, duties, and responsibilities among them; and “may establish and define certain procedures to be followed by the city or town government.”
The joint meeting of the commissioners, selectmen, Finance Committee, and Capital Investment and Planning Committee will be Tuesday, May 23 at 7 p.m. in upper Town Hall. It is open to the public.
CLICK CHART TO ENLARGE
