Senators Should be Ashamed of Actions

This column originally appeared in The Sun Chronicle on Friday, March 13, 2015

 

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

     

            This is addressed to the 47 Republican members of the United States Senate who recently signed an open letter to the leaders of Iran.

            Dear Senators:

            You should be ashamed of yourselves.  You are an embarrassment to your states, your country, your party and the people you represent.  Your behavior is un-American, bordering on treasonous and treacherous, and damaging to the government you allegedly serve.  And frankly, those are the kindest things I can find to say about what you have done.

            You alleged leaders wrote a letter to a foreign government undermining the President of the Unites States.  You did this while your President and Secretary of State were engaged in negotiations with that government.  You put party politics ahead of our country, and tried to disguise it as standing up for America.

            The topic being negotiated is irrelevant to this conversation.  It does not matter if you agree with what is being discussed.  There are legitimate avenues for you to express support or opposition to this process, and you have stepped beyond them.  You can disagree with the President’s stance on these negotiations at the top of your voice on national television for hours if you like.

            But you communicated directly with foreign leaders who you in the past have (justifiably) accused of sponsoring terrorism.  You flat-out told them the President could not guarantee the government of the Unites States would stand by his actions.  You did so while publicly proclaiming you were just making sure these leaders understood how American government really works.

 

            It seems they understand it just fine, Senators.  You are the ones who apparently don’t get it.

            You have invited others to disrespect your President, your government, and yourselves.  You have made it appear the leader of the free world does not speak for the people who twice elected him.  You have overstepped your bounds, gone beyond your authority, and made yourselves look petty and foolish.

 

            In your letter you used the words “Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement.”  A mere executive agreement?  Like that means nothing?  Like the word of the President of the United States means less because the prevailing political party in Congress does not agree with him?  That disgusts me, Senators.

            Criticize the President all you want.  Slam his actions, his methods, his philosophies.  Complain about his politics and where he is leading the country.  This system of government which you appear intent on undermining gives you that right.

            But the office of President of the United States deserves better than this.  Regardless of who occupies the White House, we are only as good as the word of our President.  That individual carries on his or her shoulders the responsibility to speak for a nation that was founded upon the basic principles of democracy.

            Vice President Joe Biden put it best the other day when he said:  “This letter sends a highly misleading signal to friend and foe alike that our commander-in-chief cannot deliver on America’s commitments — a message that is as false as it is dangerous.  Honorable people can disagree over policy. But this is no way to make America safer or stronger.”

            However, you 47 senators did achieve one pretty impressive accomplishment.  You managed to make the leadership of Iran appear reasonable and rational.

            Iranian response to your letter was exactly as it should be.  They recognized it for the desperately political act it so obviously was.  Iran’s Foreign Minister said, “We believe the letter has no legal value and is propaganda.”  And he was right.

            If this were a group of Democratic senators undermining the authority of a Republican President, I would feel exactly the same.  In fact, I was angry when well-known individual Democrats deliberately undermined past Presidents.

            But this is far more outrageous.  This is a near-majority of the US Senate deliberately devaluing the power and authority of executive orders issued by the President.  It is nothing short of an attack on the very foundation of American democracy.

 

            You Republican senators can try and claim the high ground here, but the end does not justify the means.  Shame on you.  When you disrespect the office of the President to a foreign nation, you disrespect America.

 

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local official.  He can be emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

Tenure For Elected Clerk Not A Good Idea

This column originally appeared In The Sun Chronicle on Monday, March 9, 2015.

 

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

 

      

            Bob Cutler is the elected town clerk in Foxboro.  He would like to remain in that elected post for a long time.

But if it’s all the same to Foxboro citizens, he’d like to skip the part that involves actually running for the office.  He finds that uncomfortable, and thinks he shouldn’t have to do it.  But he wants a guarantee of long-term job security, which would make him the only local elected official to have that.

Cutler has gathered enough signatures to place a proposal before the voters at the upcoming town election to grant him tenure.  If it passes, he will be able to remain in office without running again for another 15 or so years.  Should he decide to give up the full-time paid elected position before that, it will revert back to being elected at regular intervals the way it has been for centuries before now.

Cutler is making use of the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 41, Section 19.  This statute allows such tenure to be granted, and it is not unprecedented.  As of 2014, there were 18 clerks in the state (out of about 351 cities and towns) with such arrangements.  Under that law, he could be removed from office for “just cause” by the selectmen after a public hearing.  He could then appeal their decision to the courts.

Cutler explained his plans to a surprised board of selectmen last week after he had gathered enough signatures.  He said he needs tenure because the position requires job security.  He told board members, “It can become a popularity contest rather than who is qualified to do the job.  You need security. You can't have constant turnover every few years." 

Constant turnover?  Is he serious?  Cutler himself has held the job for seven years.  The only two times he has run for reelection, he was unopposed. 

 

His predecessor served for more than a quarter of a century, much of that time having to run annually rather than once every three years.  Yet never – not even once - during that long time in office did she ever have anyone run against her on the ballot.

 

So no incumbent Foxboro town clerk has so much as faced an opponent in 35 years or longer.  Yet Mr. Cutler believes he needs job security?  That seems odd at best, and self-serving at worst.

Cutler also claims giving him tenure would help keep the office of clerk “neutral” when it comes to working on elections where he is on the ballot.  "It is still not a comfortable position," he said concerning such a situation. "That is a great benefit with this (tenure)."

A great benefit for who?  Mr. Cutler?  The town certainly doesn’t gain any major advantage.  This occurs only once every three years.  Every other town clerk in Foxboro’s 237-year history has somehow managed to struggle through this discomfort and retain their neutrality.  Mr. Cutler should be able to do the same.  If not, he should step done and give the job to someone who can.

No one is questioning Cutler’s job performance or his right to pursue this unusual route.  But it is fair to question his motivation and wisdom in doing it.  If he were proposing the post be changed to appointed, that would be a totally different story.  It would be a change to the position itself.

But tenure applies only to the individual, not the job.  As Cutler correctly points out, whoever eventually replaces him would have to be elected.  Only Cutler would be granted the privilege of being an elected official who never has to place his name on a ballot.

If Mr. Cutler wants comfort, he should get a new chair.  If he is seeking unconditional love and support, he should consider getting a dog. 

What he should not do is request preferential treatment.  There is no good reason to grant him tenure.  No elected official should be rewarded with what amounts to a lifetime term.  This move seeks to solve problems that do not exist and are being invented. 

Foxboro citizens will decide this issue by voting.  Ironically, that’s exactly what Mr. Cutter wants to stop them from doing.  Their right to vote should trump his need to feel more secure.

 

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local elected official.  He can be emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

North Attleboro Override is Unfair

This column originally appeared in The Sun Chronicle on Friday, March 6, 2015.

 

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

           

            North Attleboro officials are asking voters for a $4 million tax increase.  If approved the additional tax revenue will be used to maintain service levels in many departments including police, fire, public works, and of course the school department.  It is meant to help the town as a whole.

            But make no mistake, this is a school override.  It is designed to lessen the financial burden of those who have children in the school system at the expense of those who do not.

 

            This is not a popular way to phrase this. The description will no doubt anger many.  But it is accurate, and has been deliberately structured that way.

            Selectmen and school officials have agreed if the override passes, fees to school parents for busing and parking will be eliminated.  The fee for riding the school bus is currently $300 per student, with a cap of $600 per family. 

            Town officials estimate the override will result in raising taxes on a home assessed at $350,000 by $250 next year.  It would increase another $125 in the second year, and yet another $48 in the third.  That is $423 over three years, and then that $423 remains every year after.

            So a family with two children currently paying bus fees, living in a $350,000 home, saves about $750 over the first three years if the tax increase passes.  That savings for them will be made up largely from the pockets of taxpayers without school children, who will continue to cover that loss of fees every year going forward.

Now it can and has been properly argued that fees were unfair in the first place.  Charging for busing, parking, and other activities places a heavy burden on parents and families.  It goes against the general philosophy of public education.  If the tax increase fails, officials will raise fees for activities like sports by an additional $350, adding to the financial crunch on parents.

But school officials are saying if the tax increase fails, they will close a school.  Athletics will be eliminated from the budget.  The system will be decimated.

If all that is true, how can they justify eliminating fees?  How tough can things be if they are actually allowing some select folks to pay less?

The tax increase is a tough sell.  The town’s own survey shows parents with kids in school are the group most likely to vote in favor.  Officials believe there is no chance of passage unless “school people” have an overwhelming reason to support it.

So they are trying to buy those needed votes by dangling the fees as a carrot.  One of the school committee members actually used that analogy earlier.

When Selectman Patrick Reynolds was just candidate Reynolds, he had this to say about increasing taxes:  "Before we talk about overrides, we need to look at how government is spending money. The key is to spend smarter, not spend more.”

Now that he is in office, he has changed.  Recently he said:  “Voters have a choice to make, and it’s a simple choice.  They can choose to increase their taxes and keep the services the way they are now, or they can choose to save their money and say that they’re okay with losing some of their services.”  He added that he believed the override “is the most fiscally responsible thing we can do.”

I guess that whole “spend smarter” thing just didn’t work out.

North’s financial needs are very real.  The services in question are valuable.  But the way this tax increase is structured is patently unfair, obviously biased, and overly political.

If the schools are in need of additional funding (and they are), they should not be eliminating fees.  More than anything, a tax increase must be fair to as many as possible.  This one doesn’t come close.

 

These additional taxes would benefit much more than just schools.  It is reasonable to take into consideration that school parents picked up much of the revenue burden through fees over the last several years.

But the very idea of totally eliminating some fees when your financial need is greater than ever makes no sense.  Unless – of course – you are trying to sell a tax increase that wouldn’t pass otherwise. 

Then, it just might work.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local official.  He can be emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

Please Help Hit-And-Run Victim Rest

This column originally appeared in The Sun Chronicle on Monday, March 2, 2015

 

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

 

            As the Assistant Town Clerk in Seekonk, Karen McHugh had to pay attention to details.  She had to notice the little things and take care of them.  It was a big part of her job, and her job was important.

 

            Now Karen’s friends and family are counting on the good people of Seekonk who she so faithfully served, and perhaps their friends and neighbors, to do their job.  The mystery of her tragic death must be solved and closure brought to those who loved her.

            McHugh was walking in front of her Seekonk home on Friday, January 30th, trying to get to her house from her garage.  The large snow banks forced her to briefly walk on the edge of the roadway.  Before she could reach the comfort and safety of her home, she was hit by a passing car and killed.

 

            According to police, that car then continued along Arcade Avenue in Seekonk, heading towards Taunton Avenue.  It left behind some glass, some smashed signal light lens cover material, and the broken body of an innocent victim and dedicated public servant.

It has been about a month now since local police began an intensive search for the vehicle and driver involved in this horrible incident.  Despite their best efforts, the results have been discouraging.

 

Authorities believe the car in question may have been a dark-colored General Motors sedan.  The lens they discovered could possibly be from a 2004-05 Chevrolet Malibu Classic, a 1997-2005 Malibu, a 1997-99 Oldsmobile Cutlass, a 1997-98 Oldsmobile Achieva, a 1996 Chevrolet Beretta, or a 1996 Chevrolet Corsica.  They also believe the vehicle would have some front-end damage, and a broken directional signal or side marker.

So far both the driver and the vehicle are unidentified.  But they are both out there somewhere.  Hiding perhaps, trying to stay out of sight and out of trouble.  And somewhere, somebody knows something about them – even if they don’t yet realize it.

While Karen McHugh rests in a cold grave, the person who killed her is likely somewhere warm and safe.  While Karen’s family and co-workers mourn her death and deal with their grief, that driver and any passengers they may have had with them have to deal with knowing they must either step forward, or look over their shoulder for the rest of their lives.

 

This was probably a terrible accident.  It is doubtful the driver meant for this to happen.  Maybe they didn’t even realize it at first?  Or maybe they were drunk and are now afraid of the consequences?

 

Regardless, they had no right to simply drive away and leave Karen McHugh bleeding on the ground.  They will be held responsible for what they have done, in this world as well as the next.

 

Because you see, somebody does know something.  Someone saw something.  They may not yet realize it, it may not have dawned on them yet – but it will.  And then that person will talk to authorities, and there will be no place for the hit-and-run driver to hide.

 

Maybe you know someone who had a broken light recently.  Perhaps you know of someone who had a perfectly good car, then suddenly didn’t have it.  Maybe someone said something strange about the incident, and you passed it off. 

Perhaps you saw what appeared to be an old burned-out car in the woods somewhere.  Maybe you noticed a large mound someplace where something large might have been buried.  Perhaps you saw someone unexpectedly donate or junk a vehicle.

 

You can contact Seekonk police at (508) 336-8123.  You can make an anonymous report at (508) 336-7027, Ext. 9.  You can write a letter, send an email.  They will check any lead, appreciate any help.

Karen McHugh deserves to be at rest, as does her family.  Her community is a close one, and they watch out for one another.  Her family will keep searching, the police will keep searching, and people from Seekonk and beyond will keep searching.

 

One of those “little things” is going to fall into place soon.  That driver knows this.  He or she should step forward now and stop living a lie.

Karen McHugh was important to her community, and that community will not rest until she can.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local official.  He can be emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

MBTA Problems Stem From State Officials

This column originally appeared in The Sun Chronicle on Friday, Feb 27, 2015

 

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

       

            If the latest fuss over the MBTA by state legislators and officials weren’t so harmful and hypocritical, it would be funny.  But it’s hard to laugh when one of the key components of your state’s economic engine is running like a gerbil on a worn treadmill.

            The Winter of 2015 will go down in history as the time when state officials rediscovered their mass transit system.  Though most of them probably haven’t ridden the beleaguered T in a while, many are now discovering they have to at least look like they are paying some attention to it.

            The MBTA has long been a tremendous source of patronage for legislators and governors.  Because it is technically a separate entity from state government, officials have long considered themselves politically insulated from it.  They are always quick to jump on the T’s accomplishments, but are adept at distancing themselves from its many problems.

            You have to wonder why it took the worst winter of our generation for lawmakers to realize the MBTA has not been spending enough money on maintenance and equipment.  Their apparent amazement at the overly-generous pensions, collective bargaining agreements and executive travel expenses they helped create makes it difficult for anyone to take them seriously.  But since most of them run virtually unopposed, I guess they can get away with this “holier-than-thou” act.

            The fact the T had serious issues in the midst of eight feet of snow over a few weeks is hardly shocking.  Most of us had trouble getting to the end of our driveways.  That the local mass transit system could not move hundreds of thousands of people given the weather should not surprise anyone.

            Now suddenly there are committees being formed, and Gov. Baker is acting tough and issuing ultimatums.  While the call to action is a welcome change and reforming the MBTA is a great idea, we should all remember that politicians created this problem.  They built the MBTA, politicized it, milked it for their political advantage, and now are using it as a scapegoat.

            Gov. Baker is a prime example.  While running for his current job, he refused to take a position on the T expanding service on an existing (though in need of upgrading) rail line to Gillette Stadium.  After he won and the snows came, he suddenly found the courage and wisdom to say it is a bad idea.

            But at the same time – as the Sun Chronicle’s Jim Hand so insightfully noted in his recent commentary – he stands firmly behind bringing rail service to the New Bedford/Fall River area.  This is something politicians have been promising for years, even though the price tag is absurd and it would require far more new construction. 

            That’s because he needs votes from that heavily Democratic area, just the way his predecessors did.  So he caters to them despite the foolishness and the cost.

            Politicians can’t make it without serious support from the long-ignored South Coast communities.  But towns like Foxboro, Norton, and other surrounding towns just don’t have enough numbers to be “important” to those who make the rules.

            Foxboro gets some attention because of the stadium and the desire to develop the land around it.  The state and the MBTA are willing to spend big bucks on service there because they believe they will get it back in economic development, new jobs, and increased revenues.  Whether they are correct in that assumption remains to be seen.

            Local politicians are not exempt from the hypocrisy surrounding the T either.  Foxboro selectman and former state legislator Virginia Coppola recently backed Baker and again criticized T officials for not communicating better with the local leaders.  She blasted the MBTA for not seeking local input, declaring: “So much for transparency.”

            The Foxboro Board of Selectmen criticizing others for a lack of transparency is a bit like the Yankees telling other teams they shouldn’t spend so much money.  But that’s another story for another day.

            Make no mistake - the problems with the MBTA are largely caused by a lack of leadership and sound fiscal management from the State House.  The T is crucial to our future here in Massachusetts, and we must both maintain and grow the system if we expect it to survive.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local official.  He can be emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

Speaker Term Limits Debate Embarassing

This column originally appeared in the Sun Chronicle on Monday, February 16, 2015

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

            Question:  What do you call a creature with no spine or backbone?

            Answer:  A Democratic member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives.

            That joke may be funny to many of us, but what is not amusing at all is the hypocrisy and lack of courage displayed by most Democratic members of the House recently regarding the vote to eliminate term limits for the position of Speaker.  As was correctly noted in a recent and extremely strong editorial in this newspaper, this is nothing less than our elected officials going back on their word.

            In 2009 our esteemed state legislature voted to place strict term limits on the Speaker position.  They did so in large part due to the unchecked and overwhelming corruption that has been allowed to occur in that post in recent decades.

            Since the mid-1990’s three different Speakers have resigned under a cloud of controversy.  One ended up pleading guilty to tax evasion.  One resigned amidst perjury and obstruction of justice charges.  A recent ex-Speaker is currently serving time in prison for mail fraud, conspiracy, and various other crimes.

            That is and should be an embarrassment to the citizens of Massachusetts, and even more so to the men and women who serve in the House itself.  It is especially embarrassing to the Democrats, who are in complete control of that chamber.  When they came together six years ago and recognized that term limits was the only real and effective way to keep the power of these individuals in check, it was seen as a small step towards true reform.

            Now that has been exposed for what it really was:  A publicity stunt to lessen the pressure and allow them to go back to “business as usual” while placating the public and taking advantage of the short memories voters in this state have displayed.

            Current Speaker Robert DeLeo was one of those who worked to institute the term limits.  But now that he is approaching the point where they would actually apply to him, he has changed his mind.  His reversal is inexcusable, self-serving, arrogant, and displays blatant disregard for anything but more of the same in what might be the most corrupt state legislature in America.

            And because of the power he is allowed to wield, legislators from across the Bay State who depend on the crumbs he tosses to them and their districts will give him anything he wants.  Even worse, they will defend their gutless actions by pretending they are really doing it for the people they represent.

            An example is Rep. Paul Heroux (D-Attleboro).  Heroux was not in office in 2009, and has never been a supporter of term limits.  But recently he made the following comments on the situation.

            “This change in the rules is much ado about nothing. No harm has been done. Unlike some past speakers, the current speaker has not been indicted or convicted of anything. He has only been speaker for six years, half the time our current mayor has been in office who does not have term limits.” 

Heroux then added, “If he starts to act against the interests of our district and our state, I will reconsider my support for his leadership role in the House.”

            It’s comforting to know Rep. Heroux stands ready to lock the barn door if the horse is stolen for the fourth time.

            And in case you think this is just a Democratic Party problem – think again.  Republicans have no term limit on the position of Minority Leader.  And while Rep. Betty Poirier (R-North Attleboro) voted against the removal of term limits, she said she understands the rational for it.  She said if they stayed in place, Democrats would spend too much time jockeying for position to become the next Speaker.

            Unlike now apparently, when they just jockey to stand in line and kiss his butt.

            I am generally not a fan of term limits.  But given the absolute power of the Speaker position and the lack of fortitude of Massachusetts legislators in general, in this case they are a necessary evil.

            You lost all credibility, Mr. Speaker.  But then again, you never really had that much to begin with.

           

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and can be emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

Rough but Happy Winter for New Grandfather

This column originally appeared in the Sun Chronicle on Friday, February 13, 2015.

AN INSIDE LOOK
By Bill Gouveia

This has been a horrible, expensive, amazing and wonderful winter.  I can’t wait for it to be over, yet I never want it to end.

Let’s start with the bad part.  That shouldn’t be hard for any of you to figure out.  We are currently in the midst of what could be the most snow ever to fall in this area over a single winter.

I’m not a snow person.  I would be fine with a green Christmas.  I’m not into sledding, snow angels or sliding my car sideways into a Jersey barrier.

I have a 300 foot driveway that starts off uphill, a bad back, and an intense hatred of snow-blowers and shoveling.  One more storm and I’ll be able to claim my plow guy as a dependent.  There is currently more snow on the roof of my house than fell in my yard all last winter, and I now have to pay to have it all knocked down into said yard.

All that’s enough to depress a hyena.

But in the midst of the cold, white blanket of gloom – there has been intense happiness and joy.  While this could have easily been the Winter of the Empty Wallet, for me it will now always be the Winter of Wonder.

First, there was the little matter of the Patriots.  In perhaps the greatest Super Bowl ever played, the team I have faithfully followed for more than four decades prevailed.  They overcame a league that hates them, a distrusting public, and the best defense in the NFL to win their 4th title in the last 14 years – and do it in style.

I traveled to Kansas City to watch them early in the season.  They got beaten like a drum, and people were whispering that Tom Brady was all done.  They were trailing Baltimore by 14 points – twice – in their first playoff game, but came back for the big victory.  They hung tough, battled back, and eventually captured the ultimate prize.

And that wasn’t even the best part of this snow-covered season.

No, that came this past Monday.  On that day, the weather didn’t matter.  The Governor declared a state of emergency, the snow continued to fall like it was never going to stop, and the temperature dropped dangerously close to below zero.  But I didn’t care.

On Monday, I became a grandfather again.  For the 4th time – just like the Patriots.  And as Bob Kraft said after the Super Bowl:  “I never thought another could feel as special, but this one absolutely does.”

Addison Claire Gouveia made her debut on Monday, joining her sister Avery on the family roster coached by our son Nate and daughter-in-law Melissa.  She is already the odds-on favorite for Rookie of the Year, and as you read this her grandmother and I are on our way there to sign her to a lifetime contract.

So far we have only seen her perform on video, but that was more than enough to convince us she is a proven winner.  We’ve made some pretty good signings in the past, including the aforementioned Avery, our youngest grandson Sam, and of course our original superstar grandchild Will (did I mention his name is William?).  Clearly, the Pats are not the only organization building a dynasty.

And we are not sitting on our laurels.  Just like the Patriots are already out there searching for new talent, our front office is doing the same.  Son Aaron and his wife MJ are currently in the midst of yet another addition, and have even timed it perfectly.  The next new player is due just about the time the Super Bowl champs open up the new season in September.

But right now the focus is on Ms. Addison.  She is beautiful, obviously brilliant, and just what we needed to forget this cold, dreary, slushy winter.

As we watched our son hold her and smile, little else seemed to matter.  This weekend we will rock her in our arms and welcome her to the extended family that loved her before she was even born.

For the rest of you, this may be the toughest winter ever.  But for me, it’s one of the all-time best.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and proud grandfather of four.  He can be emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

North Attleboro RTM Needs To Do Right Thing

This column originally appeared in The Sun Chronicle on Monday, February 9, 2015

 

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

            Kudos to North Attleboro selectmen for doing the right thing last week and finally sending the oft-delayed Special Charter Act to Town Meeting.  It is the first of two critical steps towards complying with the expressed desire of the town’s voters to have this come before them for a binding ballot decision.

 

            The second critical step will come on March 23 when Representative Town Meeting (RTM) begins deliberations on whether or not to send this question to the legislature for placement on a future town ballot.  The Special Act Charter cannot be approved and/or instituted unless a majority of citizens at a town election vote for it.

 

            So when RTM members cast their votes next month, it will not be in opposition or support of the charter proposal itself.  They will not be giving it their stamp of approval should they send it to Boston.  Their decision will not be – and should not be – indicative of whether or not they believe changing the form of government is a good idea.

 

            The only question RTM members will have before them on March 23 will be:  “Should the voters of North Attleboro be allowed to decide their own future, or are we who were elected to represent them going to once again prevent that from happening?”

 

            No amount of explaining, politicking or excuse-making can change that fact.  Some will cast the upcoming process in a different light, but North Attleboro citizens and voters should be very clear on this.  RTM will not be voting on whether the form of government should be changed.

 

            All they will be voting on is whether or not to let their citizens cast ballots.  They will either trust them with this decision in the manner prescribed by law, or treat them like little children and tell them to leave it all to the RTM members.

 

            RTM is supposed to be the voice of the people.  Members are elected to carry out the town’s business.  They have knowledge and experience that can only come from getting intimately involved in overseeing a local government.  And yes, their job is to lead and make important decisions.

 

            But it is not their job to be obstructionists.  It is not their job to stop elections from happening.  It is not their job to dictate.

 

            If the charter proposal is allowed on the ballot, there will be plenty of time for RTM members to be heard on whether it should pass.  There will be the opportunity for vigorous campaigning on both sides of the issue. 

 

            If you are an RTM member, you owe it to the voters to give your opinion on the charter during a campaign.  If you oppose the government change, that is the time to say so.  Stand on the rooftops and shout your position if you are so moved.  Your view on the charter is important and needs to be aired.

 

            But there has to be the opportunity for debate.  Not just within your small elected group, but amongst the people you serve.  You have an obligation to further that debate, not prevent it from occurring.  Changing the form of government should be decided by that most American of methods – a vote of the people.

 

            North Attleboro will have a silly preliminary election this week for no good reason.  How can you allow an election to just reduce the number of candidates, but deny one on the form of government?

 

            The selectmen did not take a position on the charter proposal because it was not the time to do so.  No doubt they will make their feelings known if this advances.  They properly recognized that at this moment, this is a simple situation.  You either let the people vote, or you deny them that right.

 

            For over a decade now, North Attleboro voters have been asking for the right to cast a binding ballot on their form of government.  Next month their RTM will either give them that right, or deny them once again.

 

            If RTM members fail to send this proposal forward, it would be a clear indication they do not value the intelligence or the rights of their constituents.  Here’s hoping they follow the example of their selectmen, and do the right thing.

 

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime local official.  He can be emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

A Letter to Haters of The Patriots

This column originally appeared in the Sun Chronicle on Friday, February 6, 2015

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

            This is an open letter to all you Patriot-haters out there. 

            We Pats fans (the real ones, not the bandwagon folks) want you to know and understand a few things.  Please take a moment, set aside your natural and instinctive distrust of our team and organization, and try and comprehend a few simple facts.

            First of all, we are New Englanders.  We take our sports seriously.  Yeah, we know – you think you take your sports teams seriously too.  And that’s cute. 

But you have to grasp the reality here.  These teams are our family, and we treat them with the same love, respect and lack of patience you generally reserve for those actually related to you.  In New England, we don’t ask or care about your religion.  However, if you have the wrong sports team affiliation, we could have some serious problems.

But here’s the thing.  No one is tougher on our teams than we are. 

We are not sycophants who blindly pledge allegiance to our sports franchises and never say anything bad about them.  We don’t take what they tell us at face value.  We question them, we criticize them, and we hold them accountable.  We ain’t easy.

It’s popular to think of us as obnoxious and spoiled sports fans these days.  New England teams have won nine professional championships over the last 14 years.  The latest – in case you missed it – was this past Sunday when the Patriots and Tom Brady won their 4^th Super Bowl title.  And we are enjoying this Golden Age immensely, often at your expense.

But it took the Patriots over 40 years to win their first title.  They spent most of that time as the laughingstock of professional sports.  The Bruins had a 39-year barren stretch between Stanley Cup acquisitions.  The Celtics had a 22-year gap between NBA championships. 

And the Red Sox?  That was an 86-year drought they made movies about.  So when you call us obnoxious and completely spoiled – well, you’re half right.

My point is we know what type of an organization the New England Patriots are.  They are business-like, they make a lot of money, and they carry themselves in a manner often seen as brash and arrogant.  They are not always an emotional group towards fans or players.  We don’t deny any of that. 

Our coach is a downer.  He doesn’t really care what you or we think of him.  He wins football games and has built the best organization in sports.  If he had to cut his own son from the roster for salary cap purposes – he would.  He doesn’t like the press, feels no need to answer simple questions, and knows exactly how good he is at his job.

But the Patriots are not cheaters.  They are champions.

Spygate?  Come on, you didn’t really fall for that, did you?  We know the Patriots did something after specifically being told not to do it.  In the words of Bill Belichick, they videotaped a guy who was giving signs in front of 80,000 people.  They broke the rules and were punished.

That happens to every NFL team on a weekly basis.  They hold, they jump offsides, they grab a facemask.  They get caught, and they are penalized.  The Patriots were stupid about it, and they paid a price.  A steep one.

Deflated balls?  You can’t be serious.  There may now have only been one football that was seriously under-inflated in that 45-7 AFC Championship game.  People are believing this crap because they want to, not because there is any real proof.  It just suits your purpose and your hatred.

We get that.  Mention the word “Yankees” around us and watch what happens.  Irrational hatred of winning franchises is not new or unfamiliar to us.

We have no problem telling off our teams when they deserve it.  If the Pats had actually done something, we would be all over it.

But this team and this franchise are just good.  They are winners.  You can call them cheaters and invent excuses for their success all you want.  But it won’t work.

Sorry to let the air out of your complaints.  Now if you’ll excuse me, I have some celebrating to do.  My team just won the Super Bowl.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime Patriots season ticket-holder.  He can be emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.