Milton Observer

By Muriel Bristol | January 5, 2019

The Milton Board of Selectmen (BOS) have posted their agenda for a BOS meeting to be held Monday, January 7.

The meeting is scheduled to begin with a Non-Public preliminary session at 4:30 PM. That agenda has six Non-Public items classed as 91-A:3 II (c), 91-A:3 II (a), 91-A:3 II (a), 91-A:3 II (d), 91-A:3 II (b), and 91-A:3 II (d).

91-A:3 II (a) The dismissal, promotion, or compensation of any public employee or the disciplining of such employee, or the investigation of any charges against him or her, unless the employee affected (1) has a right to a meeting and (2) requests that the meeting be open, in which case the request shall be granted.

As before, the language of this RSA encompasses dismissals, but that would run very much against trend in the Milton Town government. Likely, this has to do with a promotion, or raise, or both.

91-A:3 II (b) The hiring of any person as a public employee.

Probably having to do with the truck driver posting.

91-A:3 II (c). Matters which, if discussed in public, would likely affect adversely the reputation of any person, other than a member of the public body itself, unless such person requests an open meeting. This exemption shall extend to any application for assistance or tax abatement or waiver of a fee, fine, or other levy, if based on inability to pay or poverty of the applicant.

These (c) items are perennial favorites. There is only one of them this time.

91-A:3 II (d) Consideration of the acquisition, sale, or lease of real or personal property which, if discussed in public, would likely benefit a party or parties whose interests are adverse to those of the general community.

Again, one would certainly hope that nothing additional is being acquired or leased. The Town owns quite a few properties, which have been abandoned or seized by the Town. The Town has RFPs for demolitions out for bid. There is also the proposed $1 sale of historic District No. 1 Schoolhouse.

The BOS intend to adjourn their Non-Public BOS session at approximately (*) 6:00 PM, when they intend to return to Public session.

---

The Public portion of the agenda has New Business, Old Business, a smörgåsbord of Outstanding Items, and some housekeeping items.

Under New Business are scheduled three agenda items: 1) Discussion on [SIC] the Demolition of Town Owned Properties (Stan Nadeau), 2) Adjust BOS Meeting Dates Due to Town Observed Holidays (Heather Thibodeau), 3) Request BOS Approval to Pay CAI Technologies from the GIS CRF (Dana Crossley).

ZBA Vice-chairman Stan Nadeau wants to speak to the Town’s planned demolition of its condemned properties. This has become a much-discussed issue lately, with some favoring demolition (paid by the Town) and sale, while others would prefer sale and demolition (paid by the new owner). Or some mix of the two approaches. And now we will hear from the ZBA Vice-chairman.

It being much too early to concern ourselves with St. Swithin’s Day, or even Employee Appreciation Day, one assumes that the holidays to be worked around are Martin Luther King Jr. Day (Monday, January 21, 2019) and President’s Day (Monday, February 18, 2019).

Paying CAI Technologies from the GIS Capital Reserve Fund is likely paying for this year’s subscription for the GIS online mapping system. When the BOS approved the GIS online-mapping system, they also set up for perpetual subscription fees.

Under Old Business are scheduled five items: 4) Sign LCHIP Agreement (Betsy Baker), 5) Vote on Warrant Articles (Heather Thibodeau), 6) Town Beach Associated Fees (Andy Lucier), 7) Status of Recreation Commission (Andy Lucier), and 8) 2015 International Property Maintenance Code (Andy Lucier).

Sign LCHIP Agreement. The title leaves little doubt that the BOS will sign the Milton Free Public Library’s (MFPL) Land & Community Heritage Investment Program (LCHIP) grant. LCHIP is “an independent state authority.” Its taxpayer money comes from county registry of deeds fees and Moose license plates. (TANSTAAFL).

Voting on Warrant Articles. Ordinarily, one might expect everyone to get out their inkpads and rubber stamps, but Selectman Lucier had formerly some concerns about the traditional pro forma addendum to warrant articles.

The Town Beach Associated Fees, as well as the Status of Recreation Commission, reach back to the beginnings of this administration. Several meetings have devoted time to seeking an exact breakdown of fees: admission fees, boat ramp, etc. Early meetings questioned too whether the Recreation Commission, which reportedly had gaps both on its board and in its minutes, was even still a valid commission.

2015 International Property Maintenance Code. Selectman Lucier wants to install this Trojan Horse in Milton’s ordinances. He claims its use will never go beyond his personal hobby horse of “cleaning up in this town.”

One need not look very far to find it being misused to require: display of visible addresses on all property, establishment of appropriate size of bedrooms and occupancy requirements in dwelling units, setting water temperature requirements for hot water in dwelling units, insect screen requirements, length of grass, exterior paint standards, etc., etc. Cities implementing this have also “Neighborhood Assessment Teams” to assess violations.

---

There is also the boxed item list at the margins entitled Outstanding Items, as held over from prior BOS sessions. It features much from Selectman Lucier’s Bucket List. They include this time: Town-Owned Property (see Non-Public Session above), Recreation Revenue and Office Discussion (see Town Beach Associated Fees above), Website Update, Property Maintenance Code (see 2015 International Property Maintenance Code above), Town Report, Atlantic Broadband Contract, NH Listens, and Junkyard. In no particular order.

---

Finally, there will be the approval of prior minutes (from the BOS Workshop Meeting of December 17, BOS Meeting of December 17, Joint BOS-BC Meeting of December 18, and the BOS Meeting of December 26), the expenditure report, Public Comments “Pertaining to Topics Discussed,” Town Administrator comments, and BOS comments.

---

Ms. McDougall has called a fifth meeting of her Milton Advocates group. It will take place again in the Nute Library’s Community Room, on Saturday, January 19), at 10:00 AM to 11:30 AM. All town residents are invited. Bring your best manners. (Not her words).

---

Mr. S.D. Plissken contributed to this article.

---

References:

International Code Council. (2015). 2015 International Property Maintenance Code. Retrieved from codes.iccsafe.org/content/IPMC2015

LCHIP. (2018). Land & Community Heritage Investment Program. Retrieved from lchip.org/

State of New Hampshire. (2016, June 21). RSA Chapter 91-A. Access to Governmental Records and Meetings. Retrieved from www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm

Town of Milton. (2018, January 4). BOS Meeting Agenda, January 7, 2019. Retrieved from www.miltonnh-us.com/uploads/bos_agendas_866_1532474265.pdf

Town of Milton. (2019). 2019 Town-Observed Holidays. Retrieved from miltonnh-us.com/uploads/page_right_491_2175221961.pdf

Youtube. (1965). Cone of Silence. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1eUIK9CihA&feature=youtu.be&t=19

By S.D. Plissken | January 4, 2019

Selectman Lucier dug in his heels again over a fine point of wording at the Board of Selectman’s (BOS) Meeting of December 17, 2018. (This is a bit dated at this point, but it has still some points of interest).

Selectman Lucier objected strongly to the boilerplate that concludes many warrant articles, notably the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) variety. The conventional obfuscation states that

This sum to come from the fund balance and no amount to be raised from taxation.

And well might he object. Note that there aren’t any actual verbs in this word salad. They have omitted the verb “is.” And there is no actor spending or taking the money from the fund balance, it just “comes” of its own accord. They call this the “passive voice.” A prominent politician formerly favored the passive voice: it is the evasive difference between “mistakes were made”and “I made a mistake.” It is meant to obscure the truth. These are well-crafted “weasel words.”

But the part that stuck in Selectman Lucier’s craw was his sudden realization that the fund balance is tax money too. It is just last year’s tax money. “No amount to be raised from taxation” because it was already raised from prior taxation, not spent, and never returned to its rightful owners. (“Soylent Green is made out of people!”).

Selectman Lucier: Before we start the CIP [warrant articles], can I make a statement?

Chairman Thibeault: Yep.

Lucier: Just about every one of these has one line in it, and if this line stays in it, I will not vote for any of these CIPs. And that line is “This sum is to come from the fund balance and no amount to be raised from taxation.” And I want that line … I totally disagree with it, that’s one of the reasons I ran for Selectman. It is taxation, the money is the taxpayers’ money. So, it is being raised from taxation.  I will not approve any of the CIP Warrant Articles with that line in it. So, either it’s … that line is removed from all of the Warrant Articles …

Thibeault. Well, the intent is to say …

Lucier: I know what the intent is, but it’s still … it comes … it still comes from taxation. The taxation … the taxpayers paid for that money. That money came from the taxpayers. It’s not coming directly out of taxation, I get that part. The bottom line is that it came from taxation. People paid their taxes, that’s where that money came from.

Thibeault: I don’t disagree.

Lucier: I will not support … if you want to go down through them and … I will not support one article with that wording in it.

Thibeault: So, that kind of defeats … that’s the whole intent …

Lucier: Well, you don’t have to put that line in there.

---

At this point, an audience member – not me and not known to me – whispered sotto voce an actual out-of-the-box solution:

Audience Member: Just stop lying.

Few even heard it. I found it as difficult to suppress a guffaw, as he had evidently found it impossible to muzzle the truth. He stated an a priori truth: local government should have less lying in preference to more lying. (Discuss).

Selectman Lucier was on fire with this one. Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut.

The blather that followed was tedious at best. Just the same old same old. The out-of-the-box thinkers on the board boldly questioned whether it would be quite legal to proceed further with this novel idea of just-not-lying.

They thought it might be wise to consult the Town lawyer in this whole matter of just-not-lying, as well as soliciting the insights of other out-of-the-box advisors. Sort of like asking your barber if you need a haircut. Should we recognize the Chief of Police? And our Department of Revenue Administration (DRA) masters might have something to say about this whole just-not-lying thing. We could consult the oracle RSAs. Maybe ask other towns if they are still lying.

Or, they could just stop lying. Too funny. Rest assured: some degree of lying will feature in this year’s warrant articles.

---

Some of you may recall the BOS meeting of November 5. A tag team of Chairman Thibeault and this very same Selectman Lucier announced, with evident pleasure, that $500,000 would be taken from this very same fund balance in order to reduce this year’s tax rate. (Just the rate, mind you, the budget amount would increase, per usual).

Selectman Lucier: I’m going to make a motion that we take $500,000 from the fund balance towards the tax rate … and you want to set the new taxes.

Chairman Thibeault: And that will bring the tax rate to $25.48.

Obviously, Selectman Lucier did not see then the great big nut over which he would stumble in December.

And it is a tough nut. That fund balance – from which the BOS took $500,000 – is the very same fund balance that would trigger his December language qualms. The BOS arranged for a marginally decreased tax rate (41¢) to cover a vastly increased budget – presto! – through the mechanism of shoveling other taxpayer funds into the deficit. Yes, the $500,000 came from last year’s taxation. You know, the year with the stupefying revaluation. Not exactly a loaves and fishes miracle was it?

Unfortunately, Selectman Lucier did not feel his just-stop-lying urge prior to uttering November’s big $500,000 lie. He had his revelation – his road to Damascus moment – while poring over similarly lying boilerplate in CIP warrant articles in December.

---

Let us see if we can help him find some other tasty nuts. Why was there such a huge fund balance in the first place? The Town overcharged each taxpayer an average of at least $185 last year. Some more and some less. (Do the math: $500,000 / 2700 = $185.19). Just stop lying.

Might this perennial over-taxation be intentional, a sort of rolling overage, so as to have always a fund balance from which to “top off” CIP funds? If so, then the CIP program demonstrably does not prevent tax hikes and spikes, it guarantees them. (At the end of the last administration, the Town revealed that it had at least twenty-nine bank accounts). Just stop lying.

The BOS spoke openly of leaving $1 in one or more of those voter-approved accounts. The accounts’ purposes have been fulfilled, and the accounts should be closed, but the presence of a solitary $1 allows them to be kept on life support indefinitely. Through this trick, the BOS need not seek voter authorization again in the future. (Pledge allegiance at the start of each meeting, but subvert democracy immediately thereafter).  Just stop lying.

Proposed budget increases on the ballot are engineered to look smaller than default budgets. Heads they win, tails you lose. More sleight of hand. Just stop lying.

One could go on and on. Keep looking, Selectman Lucier, you might find another nut or two. They’re all around you.

References:

O’Brien, Mollie. (2014). Looking for Trouble. [2nd Verse: The first time you shade the truth]. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGXK0doxsp8

Town of Milton. (2018, November 5). BOS Meeting, November 5, 2018. Retrieved from youtu.be/cUrFKYBXC4c?t=418

Town of Milton. (2018, December 17). BOS Meeting, December 17, 2018. Retrieved from youtu.be/SLBEx1a45pQ?t=7924

By S.D. Plissken | January 1, 2019

Many have written on authority and its nature: what it is, how it is asserted, acknowledged, or granted, and how it may be ignored, withdrawn, lost, or refused.

Auctoritas

The English word authority is derived from the Latin auctoritas. The Romans took that to refer to someone having a certain amount of prestige. Such a one would have the ability to rally others to support his (or her) endeavors. While it did have a political aspect, its use was not limited to politics. It would be possible to exert this quality in religious, judicial, commercial, familial, personal and other spheres.

It was partly a respect granted to those who were deemed wise, successful, or otherwise blessed. They had influence. Their endorsement or recommendation had weight.

For the Romans, it had roots also in ownership. The auctor was the author, creator, or founder. He (or she) was the maker, the homesteader, the originator, the inventor, the owner, or the one who augmented, enlarged, or expanded an existing property or enterprise.

The Romans made a political distinction between auctoritas (authority) and potestas (power). The Roman orator Cicero said, “Cum potestas in populo auctoritas in senatu sit,” which may be translated, “While power resides in the people, authority rests with the Senate.” The Classicist Theodor Momsen defined auctoritas as being “more than advice, but less than a command.”

Note that, as described, the components of auctoritas may be lost or withdrawn. The prestige of those whose advice, endeavors, or endorsements fail might be shaken. A succession of poor outcomes might cause one’s authority to diminish markedly or even evaporate entirely.

The Mandate of Heaven

The Chinese had a similar concept, which they expressed as the Mandate of Heaven. Its manifestation or evaluation seems to have been retrospective. Its expression might even be termed post hoc (or after the fact).

Heaven embodied the natural order and will of the universe. It bestowed its mandate on a just ruler. Heaven did not say so out loud or at the outset. The just and successful ruler was assumed to be enjoying the Mandate (or approval) of Heaven. The poor or unjust ruler, who experienced a succession of calamities, be they natural, military, or political, or who was overthrown or defeated, was presumed to have experienced Heaven’s disapproval: they lost the Mandate of Heaven.

Intrinsic to the concept of the Mandate of Heaven was the right of rebellion against an unjust ruler (Wikipedia, 2018)

A successful rebellion was taken as a sign that Heaven had withdrawn its approval from an unjust ruler and shifted it to the rebel leader. By virtue of his success, the new ruler now held the Mandate of Heaven.

The New England author, Miss Sedgwick expressed a similar line of thought, in which talent and worth deserve distinction, and of which the Almighty signifies his approval:

Talent and worth are the only eternal grounds of distinction. To these the Almighty has affixed His everlasting patent of nobility.

Voluntary Servitude

The sixteenth century Frenchman Étienne de la Boétie penned his seminal essay, the Discourse on Voluntary Servitude in or around 1576. (A fascinating read). In this essay, he introduced the concept of voluntary servitude, or political acquiescence, so to speak. Even the tyrant will have always his active supporters, his beneficiaries and hangers-on, his toadies, if you will. Those who benefit directly from his rule.

But neither these active supporters, nor the several layers of similar beneficiaries and partial beneficiaries beneath them, are enough to keep the ruler in his seat. It requires also that the bulk of the ruled at least acquiesce in their own enslavement. The tyrant remains in place only because the ruled permit it, albeit passively, and perhaps even contribute to it.

De la Boétie advised them:

Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces.

Many writers, across a wide variety of academic disciplines, have acknowledged and echoed De la Boétie’s fundamental insight. Tyrants rule only because those ruled acquiesce in it. If the subjects withdraw their support, continued misrule becomes impossible.

The Lack Thereof

I have intended to write on this topic for some time. A recent social media post caught my interest and draws me out now. (Perhaps half-cocked). It pointed out that Milton’s various Boards and Committees have trouble finding members to serve upon them. Their meetings are sparsely attended. Voter apathy is at an all-time high. (A substantial majority of the registered voters do not bother to vote). These have not been my words. Its author is well intentioned, but is mistaken in thinking exhortations alone can change anything at this point.

Confucius said that the beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper names. Milton is a failed state. A succession of unjust rulers, running from near the turn of the current century, have all imposed the impossible: tax increases that were more than the rate of inflation. The current administration is only the most recent iteration of this pernicious run of failures.

Less than a year ago, one-sixth of the voters chose to dissolve the Town government entirely. Talk about withdrawing support. Bravo! I challenge the selectmen to put that measure back on the ballot themselves. Have the Town lawyer spruce it up, give it some real teeth. Do it as a sort of vote of confidence. You do imagine you enjoy the voters’ support, don’t you? The numbers of disincorporaters could not possibly increase.

From the social media description, it seems that Milton’s voters – those bearing the burden of its unconscionable tax increases – have already taken De la Boétie’s advice: few vote, fewer attend, and fewest of all fill seats on the boards and committees. The electorate need not put its hands upon the Town government, but only cease to support it.

And the effects may be seen in the Roman sense too. A succession of failures have reduced the Town government’s auctoritas. Its most recent budget failure has certainly diminished its authority, as it well it should have. No one wants to be a part of that.

The next administration must reverse course immediately, right from the outset, or they will fail too. One hopes that the change is not already too late. Budget cuts, large ones, with concomitant tax cuts, large ones, are the only path to restoring any kind of authority. Otherwise, it is just another exercise in potestas. And support ebbs even faster in the face of that.

Milton has not yet lost the Mandate of Heaven, although that must inevitably come. Nobody can say exactly when the tipping point will come. It is only after the Mandate is irretrievably lost that it is acknowledged to have been lost.

References:

De la Boétie, Étienne. (1576). The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude. Retrieved from mises.org/library/politics-obedience-discourse-voluntary-servitude

Wikipedia. (2018, November 11). Auctoritas. Retrieved from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auctoritas

Wikipedia. (2018, December 4). Catherine Sedgewick. Retrieved from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharine_Sedgwick

Wikipedia. (2018, November 21). Discourse on Voluntary Servitude. Retrieved from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discourse_on_Voluntary_Servitude

Wikipedia. (2018, December 24). Mandate of Heaven. Retrieved from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandate_of_Heaven