Keep thinking spring as it's working and the so-called snow showers have either gone away or just been a few sprinkles and that’s it.
In happenings in both towns, the selectmen’s meetings in both Hamilton and Wenham, and their proceedings, ended up causing some unhappy voters, and generated quite a few comments in stories in local newspapers and the local websites.
Over in Wenham, town folk who tuned in to watch the meeting on local cable TV on Tuesday found that this meeting was not airing live on TV. The live broadcast had been cancelled by the town administrator, and the reason given was it was a working meeting and they would be discussing some articles for the warrant list for the town meeting.
More than one person has told me that they felt this was a flimsy excuse to cut off TV coverage, and that one of the subjects being talked about was .
In checking with positions in other area towns, it was noted that these jobs paid a much higher rate than those in Wenham, and so these town jobs should be considered for raising the pay scale in Wenham, so they would be in line with similar jobs in the area.
In light of this subject at this meeting and the lack of TV coverage, several comments have been made around town, that due to one of the town employees that might in line for a pay raise would be the town administrator, that with no TV coverage of the meeting, any discussion of pay raise would just be confined to this meeting.
Unfortunately in this case, human nature shows up and what public sees happening in this case may or may not be what actually took place. And this is not the first time that no TV coverage of meetings has drawn the ire of folks with the League of women voters group complaining about lack of meetings on TV a few months.
Public officials, in dealing with the taxpayers, have to tread a fine line as what they do in meetings may be correct, but incorrect in the eyes of some observers who see it a plan to make a change in an item that they don’t like.
And back in Hamilton, what should have been a discussion “behind closed doors" between selectmen on remarks made by one member to the press in regards to the , the chairman brought it out in a open meeting of the board and it generated considerable coverage in the daily newspaper and a lot of comments on Patch.
The incident in question really was a case of one person’s interpretation of what was said to the press, and talking to members of the media was carrying it a bit too far and sounds like members being censored.
As the paragraph said above, board policy discussion belongs in the board and not out in a regular meeting, and hopefully a lesson has been learned.
That’s all for this week. And don’t worry about what people think, they don’t do too often.