Sins of the father

Governance in Paris has been described as dysfunctional – some feel the confrontational atmosphere at board of selectmen meetings, in particular, handicaps the smooth operation of town business.

Democracy – a messy and sometimes ugly form of governance – requires respectful debate, compromise and transparency to work effectively.

In the past, these qualities have often been absent in Paris town governance.

If the discussion at the candidate's forum before last Tuesday's vote is any indication, Paris voters want change in town governance: more transparency and less litigation; more compromise and less confrontation. The general gist was this: this town has huge issues facing it: stop fighting and get to work.

To this end, the voters selected Gerald Kilgore and Sam Elliot to represent them.

Within 72 hours of being sworn into office, however, the two selectmen were in a special board meeting to decide on Town Manager Phil Tarr's contract, a huge decision that is being made at the last minute and may have unknown consequences for the town.

It seems that the sins of the father are being visited on the sons.

Not only does the board need to make a decision by June 30 if it wants not to renew Tarr's contract, it is doing so with a reduced board, after Ted Kurtz's abrupt resignation on Monday morning.

Kilgore and Elliot are in the position of making a huge decision without full knowledge of the issues: every Paris resident seems to have an opinion on Tarr's performance, but only two of the board members were involved in his official evaluation – the results of which remain unknown to the public.

Kilgore and Elliot should have voted to abstain until they had more information about the issue.

As much as the board may want to get past the town manager debacle and get back to working on other important town issues, they may find themselves locked into a situation that has the potential to turn into a drawn-out and very expensive legal battle over Tarr's contract.

What Kilgore said at Tuesday's meeting was 100 percent accurate – the previous board should have dealt with the contract issue months ago, rather than let it wait until the last minute.

Now, it seems, that board's lack of action will become this board's responsibility.

What is even more amazing is Chairman Bob Kirchnerr's admission that Tarr's evaluation was incomplete and shoddily approached.

While there may be concern about Tarr's performance, it seems clear that the board is unwilling to play fair with a proper set of goals, (in writing as dictated by Tarr's contract), and professionally conducted evaluation. Instead, it appears simply to be determined to get rid of Tarr regardless.

We hope that with the addition of Kilgore, Elliot and whoever replaces Kurtz on the board, governance in Paris will regain composure, tact, discipline and efficiency, but if this is how the new board opens its term, our fear is that the board's culture may overpower its members.