Prediction time

I'm pretty sure I can foresee how two of the charter changes on the March ballot will go.

Treasurer and city assessor are going to stay elected positions. Like I said on the mayor/manager question, Vermonters prefer more voting to less. I can't think of a single time I've seen a local electorate give up its ability to vote on something.

On the other hand, I predict with moderate confidence that the changes authotizing longer suspensions in the Fire and Police Departments will pass. There was enough outrage over Schauwecker's paid administrative leave this one seems like a pretty safe bet.

The police commission is a tough one. If the aldermen wanted to abolish the commission outright or make it into a directly elected body, it would be a clearer case to argue. The hybrid commision they are looking to create clouds the issue. The aldermen seem to want to have it both ways, and I'm not sure that's the kind of change people were looking for in the wake of the police scandals earlier in the year.

The outrage over those scandals was strong, though, so my guess is the change passes, but I wouldn't bet the bank on it. If I start hearing a lot against the proposal, I may well change my bet between now and election day.

Jensen's turn

I tried to reach Police Commission Chairman Larry Jensen for the piece in today's column, but we didn't connect until this morning.

He said he was going before the Board of Aldermen tonight and intended to speak his piece there. Whatever he has to say will likely be in tomorrow's paper.

Whither the Police Commission?

So, I haven't posted for a week or so. Bad blogger!

The big news today is the aldermen looking to put three of their members on the Police Commission - or, at least, Charter and Ordinance looking to do so.

My first thought is that while the change would not, technically, bring the commission under the control of the board, the public is going to see it as doing so.

Three may be a majority on the commission, but it's still a minority on the board, and the commissioner/aldermen could wind up bucking the will of the majority of the board. Unless there is a deep and obvious division in the board, though, that's a distinction that likely won't matter, especially to public perception.

If the public is going to view the move as a power grab it seems like the board might be better off, politically speaking, doing just that.

My other thought has to do with a comment by the lawyer Charter and Ordinance brought in that the change would give the voters some measure of control over the commission. If that's the goal, it seems like making the commission an elected body would do the job much more efficiently.

I'll be collecting reactions from around the city, either for the Monday column or a piece before that.