No. Smithfield again considers change to town manager

By SANDY SEOANE Valley Breeze Staff Writer

 

NORTH SMITHFIELD – An idea that’s twice failed to win the support of voters and was briefly discussed then rejected last July, is back again.

A proposal to change from an elected town administrator to an appointed town manager is once again being considered by the Town Council and a public hearing on the issue has been scheduled for Monday, Dec. 7.

The plan would require a voter-authorized change to the town charter.

Supporters say that the language is different this time, and was crafted specifically to eliminate any possibility of cronyism or political appointments. And they’re hoping that process could be moved along quickly, so that a special election could be held prior to the larger municipal elections in 2016.

Two public hearings are required before the General Assembly can grant the town authority to put the issue on a ballot.

“It seems like there is some timing urgency,” said former Town Council President John Flaherty, who attended the meeting where the change was discussed last week. “Before you know it, we’re already in April. You probably shouldn’t wait until November because then it’s going to kick over to another cycle.”

The idea last appeared on the ballot in 2010, when 66 percent of voters confirmed their preference for elected leadership.

Twenty-one towns in Rhode Island currently have a town manager, while only 13 have elected leaders at the helm. And supporters believe that previous attempts to change government in North Smithfield failed because they lacked strong criteria for how the individual would be appointed, a weakness that will be changed this time around.

Michael Clifford, the recently resigned Budget Committee chairman who will begin his appointed role on the school board this month, said (Budget Committee member) “Mike Rapko and I took the language that was proposed last time we had a charter review commission and we refined it to put more specific guidelines, criteria and a process for selection. We addressed everything in there that people had criticized with the prior language.”
Councilors are considering holding a special election for the question in April, a roughly $10,000 expense that Flaherty pointed out was budgeted in this year’s financial plan. The town originally planned to place the question on the ballot at the same time as the special election to replace the late Councilor Ernie Alter last July, but held off after numerous residents expressed concern that not enough voters would be available.

Residents expressed similar concerns when the topic was discussed last Monday.

“The last time we talked about this it was going to be put on the ballot for July 4, which would be a time when nobody could vote and this is so important,” said Carol Drainville. “I would like to see it at a time when the majority of people are able to vote. I am concerned about this.”

Dan Halloran, a former town councilor and vocal opponent of the idea, told The Breeze this week that he is opposed to the idea of an April election.

“They want to make it easier for this to pass. It was soundly defeated (during a regular election) in 2010,” Halloran said. “I think they want to lower the bar.”

Clifford said he supports the idea for primarily financial reasons.

“The list speaks for itself. The more financially strong communities are the ones with town managers with experience and expertise for the job,” Clifford said.

Other towns that still elect their leaders are Central Falls, Cranston, Cumberland, Johnston, North Providence, Newport, Pawtucket, Providence, Warwick, Woonsocket, Bristol and Lincoln.

The problem, as Clifford sees it, is that the job comes with a roughly two-year learning curve, and by the time a new town leader is up to speed, he or she is facing another election cycle.

“I think that’s how all these problems are allowed to happen. You have to have someone with the skill set to step in on day 1 and make a difference, not learn in office in two years,” Clifford said.

Plus, he said, elected leadership is more effective in a large city, where there’s a larger pool of potential candidates.

“In a small town there are less people willing to give up a career for a two-year stint,” he said.

The new language includes a more extensive screening process than past proposals, and a longer list of criteria for eligible candidacy. All applicants would be screened by the town’s personnel board, and only the names of the ones that meet criteria would be forwarded to a nine member screening committee.

The screening committee would include one member from each of seven boards laid out in the Town Charter, plus two members of the personnel board. Final recommendations would go before the council.

“If we had a council that was interested in giving it to there friend, there’s no way they could,” said Clifford. “It’s really delineated well.”

Town Administrator Paulette Hamilton would not qualify according to Clifford because of the criteria that the candidate hold a bachelor’s degree.

“As far as I know, there’s no one in the wings that meets the criteria,” he said

Councilor Kimberly Alves said she would want to make sure an election was held at a time convenient for voters.

“You want a vast majority to come out. You don’t want 100 voters passing this,” Alves said. “You want a full election.”

Clifford said he’s concerned the issue could get delayed. “If you wait until the November election then we’re stuck with this form of government for another two years.”

The topic is also expected to be on the agenda for the council’s meeting on Monday, Nov. 16, where the language changes will be discussed.