The Select Board voted not to endorse a move to change how Finance Committee members are appointed, saying the method proposed in a citizens’ petition would constitute a possible conflict of interest.
More than 130 residents signed the petition calling for a vote at the upcoming Special Town Meeting to have FinCom members appointed by the Select Board rather than the Town Moderator. Bob Domnitz, representing the signatories at the board’s June 16 meeting, said “there’s very little connection between residents and their priorities and the people on FinCom.”
When openings arise on the committee, they are not advertised, nor are candidates publicly interviewed, Domnitz said. Also, as an individual, the Town Moderator’s deliberations are not subject to the open meeting law. Further, the doings of the FinCom itself are often obscure because that body does not hold hybrid meetings that residents can view from home, he said.
“There’s very little engagement with the FinCom,” Domnitz said, though he added, “that’s on us as residents” and acknowledged that the town routinely follows the committee’s budget advice.
But his allegations provoked a sharp response from board member Jim Hutchinson. “If residents have problems with the budget, they need to come to FinCom meetings or at least the annual budget hearing,” he said. “You can’t say they’re disconnected from residents — that’s not fair. I bristle and object to the notion that they’re disconnected.”
He and the other two board members agreed that the biggest issue with the proposal is that, under the petition’s proposal, the Select Board would be in charge of naming the people who would then have the power to approve or disapprove the town budget submitted by the board.
“I struggle with this idea that we could be perceived as having a conflict of interest for determining their budgets,” board chair Jennifer Glass said.
“I do find our arms-length relationship with the Finance Committee is helpful,” said board member Kim Bodnar, who then asked Domnitz if the petitioners had given any thought to improving FinCom transparency without changing the town bylaw.
“What’s the problem we’re trying to solve? I feel like we’re in good financial shape as a town,” Glass said.
The problem, Domnitz replied, is that what the FinCom recommends is “so weakly linked to what residents want [that] it feels not really democratic.”
In what may or may not be a coincidence, some of the first people to sign the citizens’ petition are among those who have also been outspoken on LincolnTalk in opposition to spending more money on the community center, or in opposition to the Nature Link project.
“We begged for an open process [of FinCom appointments] but it was flat-out denied,” said Karla Gravis. “It feels like a little clique is choosing each other for this committee.”
Sarah Postlethwait went even further, accusing Town Moderator Sarah Cannon Holden of “gaslighting” about requests to offer input that were “completely ignored.” She emphasized that she was not attacking FinCom members per se but rather the “closed-door process” by which people are named to “what is now basically a self-appointed committee” because “the current moderator has almost entirely given up the role” of recruiting and vetting candidates.
Domnitz also implied that there isn’t sufficient “liberal vs. conservative” diversity on the FinCom, but the board and Holden pushed back, saying there has always been an effort to recruit FinCom candidates with a diversity of views.
“I’ve always felt like every FinCom I’ve been in front of has had a variety of viewpoints and different takes on approaches to finances and asked really probing and difficult questions, as they should,” said Glass, who has also served on the School Committee and the Property Tax Study Committee.
Holden said that in fact, one person she tried to recruit for the FinCom was explicitly against one of the recent town-endorsed proposals, but they said no. This points to a bigger issue, which is that regardless of who appoints FinCom members, it’s hard to find qualified people who are willing to serve, she and board members noted.
“There are some very valid suggestions for how things could be done differently,” such as publicly announcing FinCom vacancies and having public interviews of candidates, Holden said.
When discussing what formal stance the board should take on the issue, Hutchinson said he was not in favor of the proposed change, though “there may be some process pieces that could be worked on and improved.” The other Selects agreed, voting not to endorse and saying they would issue a formal statement as to their reasons immediately before the Special Town Meeting on June 25.
Also on June 16, the Select Board voted unanimously to support Article 1 — the transfer of money from the stabilization fund to the community center building project to close the gap that appeared when bids came in $2.3 million over budget.
If it’s “so difficult to find qualified candidates” through the closed process. why not publicize the openings? There are plenty of smart people in Lincoln who would be eligible. How is the closed process justified then?
Exactly. This has been brought up several times over the years and it falls on deaf ears. This is the first time I’ve ever heard the moderator mention anything about a more open and transparent process. She must have finally listened and felt a bit of pressure. But that’s not the way they really want it. The selects don’t want it. They want to keep things internal so fincom can hand pick members who align with their viewpoints. It does not make sense to me the selects say it would be a conflict of interest. So it’s a conflict of interest for all the other boards they appoint? So is it not a conflict of interest that the moderator is solely responsible for fincom appointments and she defers to fincom members to quietly and internally handle the picking with no public or transparent process? I know of several smart ivy league business school residents who would be perfect for fincom. For the selects to say no need to change the way fincom members are selected because the town is in great financial shape with AAA Bond rating. With almost no oversight, fincom has been over taxing residents for years to build up the slush fund/reserves which is more than double what is necessary to keep a AAA rating. The apparent philosophy is that when they need more funding for a project like the community center they spin it as – well we already have this money set aside so it’s not going to have tax implications on residents. Of course it’s going to affect residents. They’re going to rebuild the slush fund back up with more of our money. A blatant example of what happens when there’s no open public process and no oversight regarding fincom is the fact that we were mistakenly paying for Hanscoms teachers benefits for years at the tune of half a million dollars per and it went unnoticed until one resident picked up on it and alerted all relevant boards- School committee, Town administration, and fincom. And those boards did nothing about it initially until they were consistently pressured by this resident who discovered the mistake.
So, yes, we need a more transparent process When selecting fincom members.
Please vote yes on Article 5 to help this process along.