The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1950-02-07-CTMFG-rpt.pdf TOWN OF LEXINGTON REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TOWN-MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT To the Voters of the Town of Lexington This Committee was appointed by the Board of Selectmen in ac- cordance with the following vote of the Town Meeting on March 21, 1949 "Voted. That the Board of Selectmen appoint a com- mittee to report back to the next Annual Town Meeting on the advantages or disadvantages of having a Town Manager for the Town of Lexington." Except by inference, the above vote made no specific request of the Committee to draw conclusions. However, we have assumed that it was the wish of the Town Meeting Members that such be included in the report, and have so interpreted the vote. SCOPE OF STUDY Your Committee has pursued various approaches to the problem. We have interviewed your Board of Selectmen, and authorities on the subject of Municipal Government. We also interviewed a recent Town Official whose knowledge of present problems is recognized, We have studied a volume of literature and charts gathered from educational institutions and from other towns in Massachusetts. We have considered the approaches of comparable towns to the problem, and the present status of such studies. We have conferred with members of other committees engaged in parallel projects. We have contacted officials in towns oper- ating under the Manager Plan. ESSENTIALS OF THE PLAN The Manager Plan does not constitute a form of government, but rather, a form of administration. As practiced in Massachusetts, the Plan retains the Board of Selectmen as the policy-making body, responsible to the electorate. The manager becomes the executive officer of the town, with full authority and responsi- bility for the operation of the various departments. One excep- tion is invariably made full control of the educational pro- gram remains with the school committee. In many cases, however, the town manager is responsible fOr the maintenance of school buildings and their janitor staff. -2- The use of a town manager is not new, Norwood having adopted a simple form of the Plan in 1915. The earliest Plans in Massa- chusetts were the so-called "weak form" which, in actual administration, were essentially the same as that created in Lexington with the appointment of a Superintendent of Public Works in March 1924. The tendency in the past two years has been toward the so-called "strong form", under which the manager has administrative authority over practically every phase of municipal operation with the exception of the school program. This trend has eliminated many elective officers, and made them appointive by the manager. To date, all town manager governments have been created by special legislative acts, drawn up to meet the needs of the particular municipality. Last year, an unsuccessful attempt was made in the Massachusetts Legislature to enact a standard form which might be accepted by any town. The increasing interest -- since 1948, at least twenty-five special study com- mittees have been appointed -- would indicate the possibility of provision being made for permissive legislation under the General Laws in the near future. GROWTH TRENDS The tremendously accelerated rate of growth in the Town has placed increased burdens upon the Board of Selectmen, the op- erating departments, and other boards. To aid in relieving some of this burden, provision was made several years ago for a separate Board of Public Welfare, and more recently for a separate Board of Health. The demand for new homes continues to increase. This obviously involves new streets, additional water and sewer facilities, increased police and fire protec- tion, and more school rooms. The rate of growth may well in- crease in the years ahead, bringing even heavier burdens upon our boards and officials as presently constituted. POTENTIAL ADVANTAGES OF THE PLAN The effectiveness of town management has been demonstrated throughout the country, and in very few cases have manager plans been abandoned. Among the benefits which might accrue to Lexington, we list the following: 1. A full-time administrator 2. Relieving of Board of Selectmen of administrative detail 3. Better coordination of Town activities 4. Better use of personnel 5. More economical purchasing 6. Better coordination of budgeting 7. More effective long-range planning -3- Under ( 1) , a full-time administrator, with authority to make de- cisions, would be available at all times, and all outside contacts with the public would be made through one office. Under (2) , the current and expected growth of the town indicates a need for re- lieving the Selectmen of routine administrative duties. Under (3) and (4 ) , we have observed how the coordination of the highway, water, sewer and park departments under the Superintendent of Public Works has resulted in more effective use of personnel, equipment and facilities. It can be assumed that similar bene- fits would be extended to all departments. Under (5) , we could secure the advantages of standardized purchasing in larger quan- tities at lower costs. Under (6) , budgets submitted to the Ap- propriation Committee by the manager would have been prepared with the over-all needs of the town in mind, whereas now a depart- ment often is primarily concerned with its own needs and interests, Under ( 7 ) , the manager would be working directly with the Planning Board, both on current and long-range projects. POSSIBLE DISADVANTAGES OF PLAN 1 These may include the following: 1. The difficulty of finding a qualified manager 2. The concentration of too much authority in a single person, with the possible abuse of such authority 3. Resistance to change on the part of citizens, elected officials, or Tov!n employees 4• Obstacles to removal from office, and the attendant •difficulties and damage to the town 5. A reduction of citizen interest and participation in town affairs Under ( 1) , we are informed by an authority in the field of government that there is an adequate supply of trained and competent men available. Obviously, salary is a major factor in this item. Under (2) , such a situation might develop, but the Board of Selectmen would have the power of removal. Under (3), this does not appear to be a valid reason. Under (4) , this is a possibility. An unfortunate selection would present problems during the life of the contract with tho manager. Under (5) , this is also a possibility, but we have found no evidence in support of the claim. CONCLUSIONS The Manager Plan is no panacea. There is a lack of history of the operation of such plans in Massachusetts, which makes evalu- ation more difficult. -4- The Town of Lexington has been fortunate in electing to office, and in securing for its appointed officials, boards, and commit- tees, men of high caliber who have served the town unselfishly ana faithfully. It is our belief that the same type of men will be even more willing to serve the Town under a carefully developed Selectmen-Manager Plant, There is no evidence that & Manager Plan would effect a reduction in your tax rate. The rbJc _ :a.ve of the Plan is a more efficient coordination and administration of town affairs a reflection in the tax rate might be a corollary effect. As a result of its study, your Committee unanimously believes that the potential advantages of a Manager Plan outweigh the possible disadvantages. It is our belief that little would be accomplished by adopting a "weak" form of the Plan; study of both types has convinced us that only the "strong" form should be considered. Sooner or later, your capable and willing Board of Selectmen will find its work load too great to bear with efficiency and dispatch. The Manager Plan appears to be a logical means of lightening this load, while promoting the efficiency of administration and preserving our present democratic form of government. It appears probable that the town will ultimately adopt some form of Manager Plan. We feel that further study is necessary to devise the Plan that will best fit the particular needs of our community. Respectfully submitted, William H. Ballard Henry Brask Donald D. Hathaway Michael J. Hopkins Errol H Locke, Chairman February 7, 1950