GN: City Manager Lynch was kind enough to respond to my question about his comments in the Sun that indicated he was taking a hands off approach to expanding the License Commission.
Gerry,
As I indicated in our call yesterday morning and on WCAP I thought I was having a casual conversation with the reporter last week on the upcoming License Commission appointment and the prospect of its enlargement to five members in the future.
In that conversation in I was asked where the home rule petition was in terms of filing…had I filed it? I explained the process whereby the legislative vote of the Council, which was prepared by the Administration via the Law Department, is forwarded to the state legislature via the City Clerk. Legally, it’s a Council action/vote and thereby communicated to the delegation via the Clerk. I was asked if I had contacted the delegation with the home rule petition. I reiterated the process that is used to legally present the legislative body (Council)petition.
Unfortunately, the Sun article conveys a sense that I was maintaining a hands off position since it was a Council vote. That is not accurate. I was simply explaining the process of transmittal. The article also explicitly indicates that there hasn’t been much if any progress. This characterization is also inaccurate since it is too early in the process. Representative Murphy will be filing the legislation but properly waited until the new session that began yesterday. Had he filed it in November it would have died since the Legislature is not in session which in turn would have necessitated a new Council vote. Apparently, the reporter was not aware that the Legislature was not in session in November and December and could not act upon the petition.
The legislation will be filed by the January 18th deadline along with other home rule petitions of the City. The administration will be meeting with the delegation within the next month or so to discuss these items and our other legislative priorities.
I would also note that the notion of increasing the size of the Commission was initially floated by the administration a year ago as a means of improving the representativeness of the body in reviewing Commission related issues
Bernard F. Lynch | City Manager
Although I do not know for sure, I believe the action by the Dracut selectmen was outside of any contract. It would not be required, and therefore a “gift”.
As for treating public employees differently than their private sector counterparts, there is a difference when you consider who pays. For the public sector, it is the taxpayer, who gets no benefit from the action, and indeed some Dracut residents were actually harmed by the action according to reports in the SUN. For the private sector, there may be benefits to the company, whether it be goodwill from a charity event or something else, but the cost is effectively borne by a reduction in their profits, not the taxpayer.
It may be wise for a public sector boss to give some bennie to the employees in order to improve the workplace, but whatever that is should be bound by rule or budget upfront, and not be at the whim of the boss without regard for those paying the bill.