3 thoughts on “Charter Review: Town Manager Won’t Have to Live in Town, New Communication Requirements Proposed

  1. Dropping the residency requirement is a positive thing. It’s a vestige of an earlier era. If we have learned nothing during the pandemic, one thing is the ease of being fully engaged without having to be in the room…or the town!

  2. This town should NEVER, EVER allow a town manager to acquire such power and reach as Mike Driscoll has in his pocket. We have 5 schools in town, are replacing 2 simultaneously with a 3rd in the docket because of the long time resistance of the town manager to engage in capital projects that are both positive and necessary. Driscoll has no vision, never has, outside of his goal to balance the budget yearly (makes his life easier), often at the expense of the greater good for the community. I hope the town council incorporates language that realistically limits the political and executive powers of the town manager.

    • The Town Manager has led with fiscal responsibility that allowed the building of these schools without a debt exclusion. He has fully funded the town’s pension liability, which is almost unheard of in Massachusetts communities. He isn’t perfect, but his efforts have absolutely served the people of the community well! NONE of this would have happened without the change to a strong city manager form of government 40 years ago. NONE!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *