The community is both energized and on edge. Not everyone agrees on how best to proceed on a variety of issues. We can see political streams running along side municipal policy making processes. Seeing as incumbents enjoy significant promotional advantages between election cycles they should expect to be treated like politicians on an ongoing basis by those who strongly disagree with them. This holds true to some degree regarding national elections. When George W. Bush won re-election to the U. S. Presidency for a second term in 2003 many local pundits and activists did not rally around him with a show of support-I know I did not. He was criticized at every turn.
When it comes to local politics however different rules should apply. Some prominent locals feel criticisms of those elected should stop after election day and that we should rally as a community around the winners and stop playing, “gotcha.” Some argue we should not intermingle governing with campaigning, that the two are distinct. Based on these parameters I expect we as a community to change our attitude as we move forward. I expect from this day forth for us to rally behind our newly elected United States Senator Scott Brown and shut down criticisms directed at him and his policies. I expect the dominant political elements of our city to accept they do not think for everyone. I expect us to write letters to Senator Brown like he is a Democrat. I expect if he disagrees with us we will accept that this is a democracy and he won the seat. In this circumstance I expect we will accept that we are heard but not agreed with and then we will shut up. I expect there will be no chip on our shoulder as a community toward Senator Brown and that we will expand the Happy Valley all the way to his office in Boston. If not, how else will he do anything for us?
One political affair playing out locally regards the proper charges and protocals of the city’s Social Services and Veterans Affairs Committee (SSVAC). The SSVAC is comprised of Ward 3 City Councilor Angela Plassmann, Ward 6 City Councilor Marianne LaBarge who also is its chairperson, and Ward 7 City Councilor Gene Tacy.
Should its members discuss introducing drug sniffing dogs into the schools, gating private property in Northampton’s meadows as a method for inhibiting crime, increasing local marijuana fines and encouraging the Valley Advocate to eliminate its escort ads? Should a man running a camera (Adam Cohen of No Porn Northampton and the North Street Neighborhood Association in this case) be permitted to ask a question or otherwise comment during a subcommittee meeting? Who has jurisdiction over these issues if not the SSVAC? The Public Safety Committee? Ordinance Committee? School Committee? All of the above? Northampton City Council President David Narkewicz responded to a request for comment.
He said the marijuana fines and Valley Advocate escort ads would be within the purview of the Committee on Public Safety. Specific issues concerning proposed drug enforcement activities (e.g. drug sniffing dogs) and other policies and procedures within the city’s schools would be the purview of the School Committee and would not come before the City Council unless there is a broader ordinance change involved. The issue of limiting access to the Meadows crosses the jurisdiction of several council and non-council committees including Public Safety, Economic Development, Housing and Land Use, Board of Public Works, and the Agricultural Commission among others. He does not believe these issues fall within the purview of the SSVAC.
Councilor Narkewicz added,
“Though we’ve established separate jurisdictions for developing and reviewing public policy through our committee structure, this does not preclude City Councilors from requesting that an idea or initiative be reviewed by a particular committee of jurisdiction whether or not they are a member of that committee. Councilors are also not precluded from directly introducing orders, ordinances, or resolutions in the City Council addressing any issue within our purview.”
On the topic of public input and participation at Council committee meetings, he refers to Chapter 22-1D outlining the powers and duties of our committees:
(5) Committees will normally set aside a period for public comment during each meeting.
(6) Committees are also empowered to hold public hearings, discussions, workshops, and other activities designed to inform the public and to provide forums for public expressions of views related to the specific responsibilities of the several committees.
“This gives committees broad latitude for taking public input on issues under their jurisdiction and I would defer to the individual committees and chairs to determine how they want to structure meetings in order to best carry out their responsibilities. In answer to your specific question, this could certainly include empowering the chair to recognize members of the public at any time during the course of a meeting. In fact, effective July 1st the new Massachusetts Ethics Reform Act mandates that ‘no person shall address a meeting of a public body without permission of the chair, and all persons shall, at the request of the chair, be silent.'”
Councilor Narkewicz concluded,
“Whatever format(s) a committee utilizes for gathering public input, however, I do think it is important for the public comment period, hearing, discussion, workshop, etc. to be listed on the meeting agenda and for the chair to explain the public input process and then moderate it accordingly.”
Fair enough. I must say I was LOL when I viewed the SSVAC clip for the first time on Northampton Media, thinking on how some community members would have a visceral reaction over the dialog. “Oh yeah, that’s going to go over well,” I thought.
While I offer no comments at this time on the merits of the various proposals SSVAC members discussed I would like to comment on the perceived appropriateness of their behavior for what it’s worth. For some background I did a quick web search and found the definitions below for, “social services.” I’m sure there are others. Below those I’ve included the portion of the city code which somewhat ambiguously outlines the charge of the committee in question. Following that is the suggested agenda for the meeting as provided by the Clerk of the City Council, Mary Midura. Ms. Midura no longer serves as staff for the subcommittee. The Committee’s minutes are to be provided by Councilor LaBarge to Ms. Midura.
To me the criticisms of the SSVAC on some level seem politically driven and sensationalized, in order to make a point I presume, but I would not say they are completely invalid. Turf struggles over jurisdiction are common in policy making at the local, state and federal levels respectively and that is what this is. If the SSVAC discusses providing a needle exchange program for drug users that is okay. If it discusses increasing fines for public marijuana consumption that is not okay. In short, if the SSVAC wants to discuss granting a social benefit to someone that is okay. If it wants to discuss penalizing or regulating someone that is not okay-those are not its charges.
Should SSVAC members have discussed that which they did? To some the their discussion broadly constitutes a social services type of dialog that could lead to improvements in the social welfare of the community. To others the discussion is out of bounds and constitutes enacting regulations that could violate civil rights and liberties. I argue there is a middle ground between those two polarized extremes and the community should seek it out.
In viewing the 11-minute clip on Northampton Media I noticed one SSVAC agenda item that has been overlooked to date. To my knowledge most if not all committees and subcommittees in the city have a portion of their meetings designated for New Business. On the suggested agenda for this committee meeting on February 22 is an item, “New Business.” During this portion of a meeting members are permitted to introduce new topics for discussion and possible action. I did not notice Chairperson LaBarge use the exact words, “New Business.” But for all intents and purposes that is how the conversation appeared to me-members discussed new items and deliberated on how best to proceed. Whether or not one agrees with the merits of their proposals or with their tone their behavior does not seem to go beyond the realm of their responsibilities. Summarily the councilors are promoting an escalation of the, “War on Drugs,” and they are not trying to hide this agenda-quite the contrary.
For example, this was part of Councilor Plassmann’s platform during her campaign for office. Her opponent, former Ward 3 City Councilor Robert Reckman, said during a public debate I attended at Bridge Street School that he thinks the city does not have a drug problem. Plassmann disagreed and she was elected to office. She now stands as the public decision maker representing the Third Ward.
Moreover, the SSVAC discussion in question could lead to future agenda items for and policy proposals from the Committee. During the clip I did not hear motions made nor did I observe formal actions taken on these proposals. And though I support a strong grain of populism in the city I recognized long ago that often proposals taken up by decision makers do not well up from the citizenry directly. Yet some in the community are displaying an agitated discomfort at the members of the SSVAC for, as Councilor LaBarge put it, brainstorming during their meeting.
So there is some angst in the city over protocols. Is this a good thing? The community and its talking heads are speaking publicly on drug use and procurement processes in the city. People are wagging their fingers while delivering lectures during the Council’s public comment period. Is there a drug problem in the schools or not? Is there a procurement problem in City Hall or not? And what is up with that landfill?
Here’s another question. Why did the SSVAC discussion draw such a negative knee-jerk public reaction from some members of our community? Serving in any capacity for a public agency comes with its share of scrutiny and members of the city’s other committees and boards should take notice. The way I see it Councilor Tacy publicly, passionately and relentlessly questioned the wisdom of the Higgins Administration’s $134 thousand bucket loader purchase. This embarrassing climate required an aggressive political push-back. The SSVAC discussion provided such an opening and it has now been dutifully exploited. The lesson intended: politicians who live in glass houses should not throw stones.
Finally, after participating as a blogger and witnessing last fall’s local political elections there is no public person that properly exemplifies a nonbiased arbiter of civil dialog in the city, present company included. We like to think of ourselves as objective and open minded; that we are on the right track. But perhaps we are not what we make ourselves out to be. Politicians, residents and the media have more or less staked out their positions and there are few surprises when local people and members of the media express their thoughts. That said, an enhanced level of public scrutiny can only serve to benefit the public in the long run by more clearly articulating the details of our city’s policies and identifying those responsible for enacting and enforcing them. The impression left however is that the evolving political climate is defined as a problem by those who might prefer Northampton’s glass house be less than crystal clear.
Social Service definitions
Benefits and facilities such as education, food subsidies, health care, and subsidized housing provided by a government to improve the life and living conditions of the children, disabled, the elderly, and the poor in the national community.
social service
n.1. Organized efforts to advance human welfare; social work.2. Services, such as free school lunches, provided by a government for its disadvantaged citizens. Often used in the plural.Main Entry: social serviceFunction: nounDate: 1851: an activity designed to promote social well-being; specifically : organized philanthropic assistance (as of the disabled or disadvantaged)
[Amended 11-20-2003 Editor’s Note: Amended at time of adoption of Code (see Ch. 1, General Provisions, Art. I). ]
A. The Committee on Social Services and Veterans Affairs shall:
(1) Address and recommend policy for social and human services offered by the City.
(2) Establish liaisons between the City Council and other City committees, boards, and organizations dealing with social and human services including, but not limited to, the Board of Almoners, the Board of Health, the Committee on Disabilities, the Council on Aging, the Human Rights Commission, the Public Health Nurse, the Veterans’ Affairs Office, and the Youth Commission.
(3) Advise the Mayor on dispersal of public funding pertaining to human services programs, such as the community development block grants.
(4) Promote City policies that enhance cooperation and coordination between City services and private and government-funded agencies.
(5) Cooperate with local veterans’ associations and planning of local ceremonies honoring veterans.
B. Membership. Membership shall consist of three City Councilors.
C. Meetings.
(1) Ordinarily, the Committee shall hold a regular meeting once per month.
(2) At least quarterly, representatives of the departments, boards and committees listed in Subsection A(2) above shall be invited to attend a regular meeting.
February 22, 2010 suggested SSVA AGENDA
Approval of Meeting Schedule 2010-2011
ORDERS for discussion:
- Amend the Charter of the City of Northampton (Referred by City Council September 3, 2009 to Committee on Economic Development, Housing and Land Use, Board of Health, Committee on Public Safety, and Social Services and Veterans Affairs Committee)
- Acceptance of Provisions of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 111, Sections 26 A – E inclusive to Create a Health Department to Replace the Board of Health (Referred by City Council September 3, 2009 to Committee on Economic Development, Housing and Land Use, Board of Health, Committee on Public Safety, and Social Services and Veterans Affairs Committee)
- Petition to the Senate and House of Representatives of the General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to Accept Certain Provisions of M.G.L. Chapter 111 and to Allow the City of Northampton to Appoint a Commissioner of Health with Certain Specified Credentials (Referred by City Council September 3, 2009 to Committee on Economic Development, Housing and Land Use, Board of Health, Committee on Public Safety, and Social Services and Veterans Affairs Committee.
- NEW BUSINESS
ADJOURN
The next meeting of Committee on Social Services and Veterans Affairs is March 16, 2010.
