Op-Ed: I Will Vote Against the P&Z Ordinance Change

At the referendum on May 6, you will be asked to vote on changing the current ordinance that governs our Planning and Zoning Commission, converting our current Planning and Zoning Commission into an elected board. This will take place over the next four years. By statute we cannot remove appointed people from their positions so those positions will be filled as they expire.

There is one term ending at the end of this year. If the ordinance passes there will be an election for that seat this November. One term ends at the end of 2026, and that term will be extended until Election Day 2027. The seats will all be filled during municipal elections, hence the extension. The terms ending 2026 and 2027 will be filled on Election Day 2027. Similarly, the terms ending 2028 and 2029 will be filled on Election Day 2029. There will still be five members serving six-year terms, and no more than four people from any one party. After 2029, vacancies will be filled by the remaining members. Before that the selectmen will still appoint members to fill vacancies.

I feel compelled to point out what I think are the pros and cons of having an elected board. Both models exist within the state. Many of the decisions faced by these boards are more technical in nature, and so expertise can be useful. In towns where the planning and/or zoning boards are elected, often decisions become highly politicized. One could certainly argue that that is appropriate, given the nature of some of the issues faced, but others feel that does not lead to the best decisions for the town.

Having boards be appointed gives the advantage of selecting members from both parities based on areas of expertise such as backgrounds in construction, architecture, real estate and law, which are all represented on the current board. The Board of Selectmen is obviously elected by the people, and in the current system, the selectmen decide who will serve. Also, it is often a struggle to get volunteers to serve on various boards. Adding the burden of needing to campaign and run for election may make it more difficult to find willing candidates. Lastly, the current appointed board has two members of each party and one Unaffiliated. An elected board could have four members of one party and an Unaffiliated. That should be considered.

Of course, the counterargument is simple. The people should decide who serves on this board. The merits of that argument are indisputable. Planning and zoning does make some important decisions which can weigh heavily on the direction our town will take in the future, and so, the people should pick the board’s members. 

As your first selectman, I believe you are entitled to know my personal opinion. While I admit the merits of both an elected and an appointed board, my opinion is that an appointed board will better serve the town. I will vote against this ordinance change.