In the first three parts of this article I explained how the Wareham Board of Selectmen has a plan to grab power in April through their handpicked Charter Review Committee.  If successful, this consolidation of power will take from you, the Wareham voter, the power to enact legislation and the power to control your tax dollars.  The proposed charter change will limit information, limit debate, and place all real power in the hands of just a few individuals.  In this installment, I explain how the Charter Review Committee itself made choices to limit debate and control information, as they decided on a way to get their plan approved by the town.

 In Massachusetts, there are three ways to change a charter.

•  By an elected commission. This requires a public hearing, a preliminary report, a final report to the Board of Selectmen, and approval on a town election ballot. No town meeting approval is necessary. Major changes to the form of government can be proposed this way. The process is specified by Massachusetts General Law Chapter 43B.

•  By an appointed committee, such as the current Charter Review Committee. These changes, also governed by Massachusetts General Law Chapter 43B, are limited and cannot be used to make major changes, such as eliminating town meeting. The warrant article proposed by the committee requires a 2/3 town meeting approval, approval by the Attorney General, and approval by the town as a ballot initiative.

• By a Special Act: By a simple majority vote at town meeting, the proposed changes are sent to the Massachusetts legislature (called the General Court). Although there is no legal ballot requirement, the state legislature usually wants to see a voter acceptance provision in the initiative. Historically, this was the only means of changing a charter prior to 1966.

As you can see, the Special Act method is the fastest path to change, requires the least consensus (a majority vote at town meeting), and does not require any public hearings prior to any decision making by the proposer. On the 5^th meeting of the Charter Review Committee, on May 14, 2009, a vote was taken to pursue the Special Acts route rather than the other methods specified in Massachusetts General Law Chapter 43B.  The Charter Review Committee meeting minutes describe what happened.

Leie Carmody made a motion that we pursue the Special Act Charter method and if it fails at town meeting then we move directly to a Charter Commission vote.  Ed seconded and Alan called for the vote. It was unanimous, 7-0-0.

 Alan encouraged all to read the material that was provided by Kopelman and Paige and return for the next meeting prepared for a discussion and moving forward on our ideas.

Thus before the committee had read important material from Kopelman and Paige, it already had voted unanimously to change the form of government using the Special Acts route.    To summarize, after 5 meetings averaging less than 1 hour 17 minutes each, with no public input, no administration input, and no departmental input, both the direction and means for the governmental change had been fixed. 

There's a lot to learn about making changes to a charter by looking at the alternative of using an elected commission, the form to be used when major charter changes are desired.  That route requires by law (Massachusetts General Law 43B:9A) that a public hearing be held within 45 days after the election which creates the commission.  Plenty of time is allotted for research and discussion - up to 18 months.  The town meeting must approve the proposal by a 2/3 vote rather than the majority needed by the special acts route [Note: as explained in the bullets at the beginning of this article and in the comments below, there is no town meeting vote required when a commission is used.  A 2/3 vote is used only when minor changes are made by a committee under M.G.L. 43B].  The Wareham Charter Review Committee chose the path that would most limit debate, most limit discussion, and involve the fewest people in the decision making process.

In the next installment, I will describe how the Charter Review Committee settled on a particular choice of town governance called Plan B.

Why you should fear Political Power Consolidation - Part 1

Why you should fear Political Power Consolidation - Part 2

Why you should fear Political Power Consolidation - Part 3

Why you should fear Political Power Consolidation - Part 5