I think that a constructive post-override discussion should move away from the terms “misinformation” or even “misconception” when describing many issues.
Throwing competing numbers back and forth without resolution doesn’t build consensus, doesn’t built trust, and doesn’t advance policy. It’s just a “we say” “they say” world.
As I understand it, and please correct me if I am wrong, the city has a current set of budgetary guidelines and policies put into effect in 2011. These weren’t arbitrary, but instead based on budgetary deficiencies and failure to address chronic issues such as pensions, roads, and schools. There was unanimous consensus on these policies at the time in the City Council.
Those guidelines are for the most part the basis of our current budget allocations and account structure. The budget numbers that the city quotes are based on these guidelines as well, and form the basis of the override.
Arthur has provided an alternative set of ideas to address fiscal priorities. Councilor Gentile lays out a list of sources of funds but for the most part doesn’t discuss how they are constrained by budgetary policy. What’s missing is the context and discussion.
Guidelines are guidelines. They aren’t constitutional, and they aren’t even law for the most part. But, again, they aren’t arbitrary either; they are put in place for a readon. Changing guidelines is a matter of policy. We have a process for resolving policy issues: debate and consensus in City Council, working with the executive, accountable to the voter. It won’t be solved on an email list and shouldn’t be done by fiat. The process may unfortunately take a long time and its outcome can’t be presumed.
Similarly, it’s easy for an individual to go through a list of budget items and call some “pet projects” and some essential. But different members of the public and the Council have different views. That’s all part of the deliberation process too, and why we have a deliberative body like Council.
For example, Arthur as mentioned the ARPA money allocated to plan and trial a safer Washington Street from Chestnut St to Lowell or Walnut, suggesting that it could perhaps be spent on schools.
On the other hand, MassDOT’s crash portal documents 203 crashes on the stretch from Davis Ct. to Lowell between 2012 and 2022. At least 67 of those crashes are the result of left turns that force drivers to cross multiple lanes of traffic. Lane reduction and the creation of dedicated turn pockets for left turns has been shown to reduce crashes up to 47%. Even Councilor Gentile supported the trial. We need to use official forums so that people can have their say. And it isn’t fast.
All these details can come out when we talk and listen to each other. That’s supposed to be what happens when City Council deliberates. It doesn’t happen when on an email list, though that’s a great way to get ideas on the table so that they can be discussed.
—Mike