Charter Commission and Ballot Questions

I decided that since everyone else seemed to be doing it, I might as well throw out my endorsements and recommendations.

I reserve the right to change my mind @ any time, but here's what I think right now:


Ballot Questions

Question #1 - BINDING - Should the Town (Tax) Collector position be changed from an elected position to an appointed one?

Personally, I believe that electing people is a good idea. I tend to be more suspicious of appointed positions. That's why, unless I hear a REAL good argument, that I say to vote NO on Question #1.


Question #2 - NONBINDING - The Council Review Committee suggested the reorganization of the council into 9 positions - 5 District Councilors and 4 At-Large Councilors. Do you agree with the opinion of the Council Review Committee?

I will never vote for a "nonbinding" question again. They are marketed as non-binding and as a "good indicator of voter interest". They end up being a mandate for a particular course of action. Suddenly, the "non-binding" question is now the basis for binding legislation. Furthermore, I'm not a real big fan of the 9 Councilor plan (I'll explain more later). I say vote NO on Question #2 or leave it blank.


Question #3 - BINDING - Should a 9-member Charter Commission be formed for the purpose of reviewing Barnstable's Charter?

I have been an avid supporter of the formation of previous charter commissions. I support a review of our current charter. I am in favor of a mayor. Yet, I simply cannot endorse Question #3. Something just does not feel right about this. My gut says to vote NO. The timing of this review and the forces in the background of this push just give me a bad feeling about this. I say vote NO on Question #3.


Charter Commissioners

IMPORTANT NOTE - REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU VOTE ON QUESTION #3, YOU ARE STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR VOTING FOR UP TO 9 CHARTER COMMISSIONERS! So, even if you vote NO on Question #3, still vote for up to nine commissioners!

Absolutely Vote For These People:
I wholeheartedly endorse these candidates as the best candidates for Charter Commission.

Lucien Poyant
Lucien has served the town well for many years and has been active in past Charter Reviews.

Dennis Guyre
A fresh voice in Barnstable politics... he's willing to listen...

Michael Daley
Michael was the Chairman of the last successful Charter Commission in Barnstable.

Marcy Dugas
Marcy has been an advocate of village representation on the Council.

Richard Clark
I never thought I would endorse Clark, but I find that his support for a mayor and fresh outlook on Coucil makeup nicely compliment the fact that he doesn't want to completely do away with the current charter.

Deborah Shiftlett-Fitton
As she mentioned in her Barnstable Patriot capsule she is one of the few candidates not related to some past charter review or the Council Charter Review Committee. She sounds as if she will remember the villages when determining Council make-up.


Good Candidates (Strongly recommend voting for these candidates)
There are nine seats on the Charter Commission (if it is voted in)... These two should be strongly considered.

Allen Goddard
Charles Haggerty


Vote For These People Only because you have to vote for NINE:
You should be picking only 3 candidates from this list and the one directly above, in addition to the first 6.

Peter Doiron
Even though Peter is associated with the COG movement, I cannot help liking a lot of what he has to say compared to some of the other 21 candidates. I don't think he would be that bad of a choice. Certainly the only COGer I could even think of voting for.

Royden Richardson
Roy is another former Councilor I didn't think I'd ever be endorsing. I think he is a better option that anyone else not mentioned yet.


Vote for these candidates only if you have a MAJOR beef with any of the higher ranked options:
These are desperation picks... only to be used in emergency... Alphabetical order...

John Alden
John Brennan (*Also running for Town Council)
Sheila Cullinan-Geiler
William Elkins
Robert Jones
Susan Rohrbach


DO NOT VOTE FOR THESE CANDIDATES UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES:
Alphabetical order - these candidates all have EXTENSIVE ties to COG!

Oliver Cipollini
William Cronin
John Julius
Gregory Milne (*Also running for Town Council)
Bradley Ouimette
Taryn Thoman


MY VIEWS ON THE CHARTER

My views on the charter are complex. Personally, I don't think that the current charter is that awful. On the other hand, I do want a mayor. I really like village/precinct representation on the Council.

Is the current charter broken?
I honestly do not believe that the current charter is "broken". While it is not a perfect document, it has worked pretty well - AAA Bond Ratings and All-America City Awards do not come to crappy towns. There is definitely room for improvement, but the situation is not dire, as some would have you believe.

Mayor/Town Manager
I definitely want a mayor. I want the town's top official to be accountable to the voters. It does not matter what we call him - an elected Town Manager is fine with me. However, if people think that a mayor is a fix-all for every problem they see in the town, I have two words for them - Buddy Cianci.

Council Make-up
There has been a lot of complaint that having 13 Councilors is too many. I believe that 9 is way too few. I might be willing to compromise at 11, but I really do not think that 13 is too many. It seems to work well enough.

As far as At-Large Representation is concerned, I am against a large amount of it. I could see a working system that had a total of 13 Councilors - 9 District Councilors and 4 Councilors At-Large. However, I believe that, in general, the accountability that village representation gives cannot be replaced by At-Large Councilors. It would be too easy for one section of the town to dominate the Council.

The legislative bodies of the State and Federal governments have many more local representatives that regional ones (senators). I think the same logic applies here. Having many more local Councilors helps keep a higher level of accountability and keeps the village identies alive and well.

Automatic Review
Another charter option getting a lot of attention is an automatic review process. Many candidates are recommending that the next town charter include a provision ordering mandatory reviews every five years. I think this is a bad idea. Why mandate review if it is not necessary? Then, when review is needed, people will say "We just had a review" or "We have one scheduled in a couple of years, so it can wait". I think this measure will only hurt future reform.


Closing

Frankly, it doesn't matter what I say, if you don't vote. So, please, get out and vote. Bring your neighbors. Be involved. And check out the candidate profiles for yourself @ the Barnstable Patriot's Dotcommons site. Some candidates even have videos there. Read up, Watch up and be and Informed Voter!

The Post Deleter!

When someone posts something to a blog, it's kind of like a public record of their thoughts. That's why when someone deletes an entire post (comments and all) without an explanation, people notice.

Yesterday, October 30, Eric Schwaab posted a post detailing a discussion he had with State Representative Demetrius Atsalis. In it, Schwaab called both Atsalis and Schwaab's opponent in the upcomin election, Incumbent Councilor James F. Munafo, Jr., both "thugs", among other things... It was not a pretty post by any stretch of the imagination... It was not an inroads to a productive working relationship between possible Town Councilor and State Rep... It was not a "consensus building" post...

On the one hand, Schwaab felt strongly enough to post the message and leave it up on his site for quite some time... Yet, he altered the "public record" that his site provides... Maybe he realized that the post made him look bad... or maybe someone called him out because the post was too nasty or perhaps just plain wrong... All I know is that he took it down with NO explaination... That means he must be ashamed of it... Why this wonderful "consensus builder" have to change anything he says on his "non-hate blog"???

The fact is that he doesn't have a problem taking his shots... and he sure makes plenty of them... but I've never seen him apologize once... I've seen John Julius apologize (I assure you that that unbelievable fact is true)... but never Schwaaab... Wonder how his colleagues will feel if they have to serve with a guy who has fun by taking shots at elected officials? I wonder what he'll do if he's elected to the Council and doesn't have the "new majority" he's banking on...

Will he leave this board the same way he left the Hyannis Water Board?

Update on Post Below!

This is an important update on the post below. Mr. Schwaab's video from yesterday has been removed and replaced with a new version... because it was TOTALLY wrong!

I was lucky enough to still have a copy saved on my computer to share with you to show you that this guy will say anything. Watch the original version here, and the post below... then saunter over to his site to see the new video... It's a riot.

Hypocrisy? You Decide.

My video has been up for 4 days now. Eric Schwaab has no response. Watch it for yourself below. Mr. Schwaab proves that the very reason he says he is running for office is a farce. The video isn't simply about phone calls - it is Eric Schwaab admitting that the reason he says he is running for office is made up...



Anyway, one of the things he has been doing is complaining that I am making "silly little movies"... Yet, he has his own silly little movie sitting on the front page of his blog... An anonymous caller (supposedly) left a message on the Calvary Baptist Church phone... The movie plays the message and includes the maker calling out the owner of the phone number... And I love how he words his entry so that he insinuates that a Munafo supporter was responsible... Way to sensationalize things...



A few things

• First: Mr. Schwaab has no business complaining about my video when he is posting his own. It makes him look silly.


• Second: ANY church that makes political statements of ANY kind are going to get calls like that. Some people cannot handle the idea of church and politics mixing, and are going to feel the need to voice their opinion.


• Third: Calvary Baptist is a great church and they provide excellent services to the community with their food bank. However, as a church and non-profit food bank, they most likely have what is known as 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status. This status allows people who donate money to the group (including Mr. Schwaab) to write it off on their federal taxes as a charitable donation. This incentive encourages donations, and without it, they will lose income. One of the quirks of this status is that these organizations cannot make political endorsements - posting signs is an endorsement. Now, I don't think that this rule is right, but it is the law... unless Calvary wants to lose its exemption...


• Fourth: During this incident, Mr. Schwaab "helped" the church by taking home the signs of other candidates. This is at least the second time he has interfered with the signs of another candidate. He needs to learn to leave other people's property alone. This "help" is actually against the law...

Decorum Note:

It's worth mentioning here that Mr. Schwaab responded to my video post. He didn't say anything about the video, and proceeded to violate the rules here. His comments were deleted. I put the rules in place for a reason, and expect some respect for them if you want to post comments. The site rules are placed right at the top of the page on the right. They are very clear. If you cannot follow them, don't waste your time posting here.

But what makes it amazing, is that after his comments were removed, Mr. Schwaab complained about it on his site. He said, "It looks like my new friends over at the 3rd Precinct Truth blog are afraid to engage in an open dialog. They are deleting comments." He didn't mention the fact that he violated the rules here - thereby warranting comment deletion. Anyway, not less that 4 hours later, he deleted one of his own comments on the very same page. Amazing! How can he sit there and say that, and then do the very thing he complained about.

Mr. Schwaab, please stop by, comment on the video... As long as you follow the rules, I'm more than willing to host you here... Open dialog is welcome, as long as you follow the rules of this forum... I doubt that you can respond to the video, but the invitation is open.

New Video (Post Updated)

This video has been up for almost 24 hours now. I know Eric Schwaab has watched it. He has no response to it. So, this is an open challenge to Mr. Schwaab - Do you have a response to the video?

Anyone is more than welcome to post here, as long as they follow the rules... Can you respond, Mr. Schwaab?

Oh, and I find it ironic that Mr. Schwaab has the gall to say that he doesn't "use the phone". Funny... I wonder what Chris Kehoe has to say about that... Maybe you can respond to that, too, Mr. Schwaab...


Check out this video from the debate... Eric Schwaab contradicts himself and proves the reason HE says he is running for Councilor is a farce...



Even more info on the debate & this video to come soon.

What Is This World Coming To?

Ran across this link posted on Eric Schwaab's site by a commenter, and now placed on the front page of his blog.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzjmVWVCfWA

This kid obviously has no idea what he is talking about. It's sad that people use kids like this. Sure it's "cute", but it sure isn't right. That kid deserves better than this.

I don't have a problem with wishing someone "Happy Birthday" (Happy 50th Eric), but when you have the kid talk about political issues he knows nothing about it really makes me wonder what is happening to this world.

Are You A Town Councilor, Too???

*Please note the sarcasm in the post title.*

Do you disagree with Eric Schwaab, John Julius, Gary Lopez or any other COGer? If so, according to their logic, you must be a Town Councilor (or working for one).

I find it amazing how adamant John Julius is that I am a Councilor. I AM NOT. David Still confirmed it over on the dotcommons site, but that wasn't good enough for him. I don't know what will, and it really doesn't matter. They say things like that because they simply can't handle the idea that people in this town, other than Councilors, disagree with them.

Take the Barnstable Blog, for example. It is an anonymous blog that does not agree with COG. However, instead of just accepting the fact that a regular common citizen is running it, they start accusing people of running it. They have no proof of their accusations, but tell them to the world like it is gospel. (If they're willing to make these kind of allegations, imagine what they would do if they REALLY knew the name of the person who writes it.)

When Schwaab took this act much further a few weeks ago, it really bothered me.

The internet and the blogosphere are designed to give users basic anonymity unless they choose to reveal more. In the case of myself and a great number of other Barnstable commenters and bloggers, we choose to remain anonymous. (We'll get into why in just a sec.) However, Eric Schwaab crossed the line from cyberspace into the real world when he called up Chris Kehoe (a local businessman) and proceeded to harass him with unfounded accusations about the authorship of a blog that has been particularly critical of Schwaab. He was making unfounded claims that Kehoe was/is running the site for a Town Councilor.

Calling someone about a written blog is CRAZY! Calling to accuse someone of writing a blog, when you have absolutely no proof to back yourself up is just INSANE.

Kehoe says Schwaab called 5 times. FIVE! Schwaab says he called only twice. I don't believe him. When Chris Kehoe went to the police to file a complaint, he HAD to have some evidence to back him up. I doubt that a successful businessman like Kehoe is stupid. Not only is filing a false police report a serious crime, but it is one that can quickly be verified via phone records. DUH! I'm willing to bet that an analysis of Kehoe's phone records and Schwaab's (if it is ever done) will show that the candidate called more times than he admits... AND that he lied to the Barnstable Patriot.

However, the big issue here is not the number of times that Schwaab called, but the fact that he actually called! Schwaab has NO proof that Kehoe writes that blog. NONE! Yet, he didn't have any problem calling him to talk to him about that blog. Blogs are online communication tools - telephones are not! If Schwaab really wanted to talk to the writer of the Barnstable Blog, the best way to actually get the REAL author is to contact him on the blog or via the contact info the author may or may not have posted there (like email).

This is why I choose to remain anonymous. I do not want to have phone conversations about politics or my blogging with Eric Schwaab, John Julius, Janet Joakim or anyone else in this town. However, I am more than willing to discuss anything online - here or the dotcommons site. My personal life is exactly that - PERSONAL. Never should my personal and political life cross.

If a person makes the decision to remain anonymous, then others in the online community should have the decency to respect their decision.

I find it disappointing that I need to remain anonymous to protect myself from the politics in Barnstable.