On Monday, the Auburn City Council is scheduled to consider a resolve to bar city staff from cooperating with the duly-elected Lewiston-Auburn Charter Commission.
Wrong.
The charter commission’s work is nearly complete, with an early plan already drafted. For nearly two years, commissioners have worked with city staff, businesses, community and social service groups, elected officials, citizens, political groups, churches, you name it, on both sides of the Andro.
It’s been an inclusive and exhaustive process, and for Auburn City Councilors to raise a barrier now does a disservice to the very process citizens voted to support.
You could blame politics.
Mayor Jonathan LaBonte does.
For years, he has blamed the on-again, off-again support, the contention between the Twin Cities’ respective councils and disagreement on spending, organization and mission of various consolidation commissions and studies on politics.
And, on Thursday, the mayor said he was ruffled by the commission making its work “political by trying to prove there will be operational savings.”
What?
We don’t want proof of savings?
Who’s playing politics now?
The mayor’s position is that city staff is too busy doing the work of Auburn government, which he does not believe includes aiding the commission.
Why not? This entire project is about city government, and who better to provide information and help the decision process than city staff?
The work of the commission is not being done on a whim.
In June 2014, three people in Lewiston and three in Auburn were elected to represent the cities’ respective interests on the charter commission. And, in June last year, both City Councils voted to support the commission’s work, reiterating its importance.
The councils’ votes of support won $50,000 in state funding to aid in the commission’s study, which has already been paid in good faith.
But, now, LaBonte believes the commission is over-stepping its authority. That members should simply draft a charter, not consider how consolidated cities might function.
That’s short-sighted.
And, of course, once he took such a strident position, pockets of social media blossomed with support.
That support is based on emotion, not information.
When the charter comes before voters — and it will — it will be critically important for people to understand what the document means, not just what is says.
Let’s just put aside, for the moment, the do-you or do-you-not support consolidation argument.
Any work that city staff has done or may do to support the work of the commission does not mean the city, or its staff, supports consolidation. It just means they are carrying through with wishes expressed by citizens at the polls for an elected group to study consolidation and present a plan for consideration.
That plan could be approved.
Or, it could be rejected.
Who knows, but right now it doesn’t matter.
What matters is that, in order for any comprehensive plan of any quality to come before the voters, the cities must work with the commission.
Lewiston is willing, so why not Auburn?
Former Auburn City Councilor Mary Lafontaine has said, “without information, we can’t make a good decision.” She’s absolutely right.
And, in Lewiston, Charter Commissioner Gene Geiger has said “the idea is to do a high-quality study to get credible, clear, fully fleshed-out information about how a combined Lewiston-Auburn would function, what savings there would be, what the services would be and so on.”
And, then let voters decide.
In making his argument for the Auburn City Council to ban staff help, LaBonte made the point that the staff reports to the city manager and the manager reports to the council. That’s a bit short.
The council reports to the citizens, and they have asked for this work to be done.
So, get it done. Get it done right.
jmeyer@sunjournal.com
What: Great Falls Forum discussion on work of the Lewiston-Auburn Charter Commission to date
Where: Lewiston Public Library, 200 Lisbon St.
When: Noon, Thursday, May 19
Who: Lewiston-Auburn Charter Commissioners Chip Morrison and Holly Lasagna
Send questions/comments to the editors.
