AMHERST — More clues about how Amherst is populating its many boards and committees emerged this week after town officials released partial details about the approximately 130 applicants who have sought positions since the new form of government went into effect in December.
The information was released after the Gazette appealed to the state’s supervisor of records for disclosure of the candidates’ applications. The town in May had denied access to the records citing a personnel exemption in the state’s public records law.
In a June 5 decision, Rebecca S. Murray, supervisor of records, ruled that while candidates that were not hired or appointed have a privacy interest, the town did not meet its burden to withhold the records entirely. As a result, the town was ordered to turn over the records, redacting information that pertains to candidates who have a greater privacy interest in the appointment process.
“The public has a recognized interest in knowing whether public servants are carrying out their duties in a law-abiding and efficient manner,” Murray’s ruling states. “The public has an interest in transparency in the process of hiring, managing and compensating public employees …
“It is unclear why the Town cannot redact identifying information and provide remaining information, such as educational and professional training and experience, in order to shed light on the applicant pool while also protecting privacy interests,” she wrote.
The records turned over by Amherst town officials are in a spreadsheet form and do not identify any names of applicants who filled out community activity forms to serve on panels like the planning and zoning boards, license and ranked choice voting commissions, board of health and council on aging, to name examples. They do provide an applicant’s work experience and qualifications, reasons and interest for serving, and other details such as age, gender, racial and ethnic background, and languages spoken.
The ruling comes as the Town Council faces scrutiny over the process by which candidates are screened and selected to town boards and committees.
Click here to open PDF in a new window.
Under the process, developed by the Outreach, Communications and Appointments Committee, a five-member subcommittee also known as OCA, some councilors are concerned that both its appointments, as well as ones by Town Manager Paul Bockelman, will not be done in an open and transparent manner.
District 1 Councilor Cathy Schoen said she would like to see the names of all people who fill out community activity forms and who are interviewed for specific positions to be made public while District 3 Councilor Dorothy Pam said at a meeting in May that the town would likely get more applicants for town boards and committees if the appointment process was more public.
“I think the public wants to know who applied and who was appointed,” Pam said.
Amherst’s approach to records access will continue to differ from the city of Northampton, in which all applications to serve on boards and committees can be viewed by the public at City Hall.
“We treat the application as a public document as soon as it is filed with the mayor’s office, whether they are put forward for appointment or not,” said Lyn N. Simmons, chief of staff for Mayor David Narkewicz
Amherst argued against the applications being public documents, seeking to withhold them in their entirety. The town manager is appointing authority for the vast majority of appointees, and in these cases … most applicants for positions appointed by the Town Manager would have no reason to expect public discussion of their candidacy,” the town stated in its response.
Town Manager Paul Bockelman explained that Angela Mills, his executive assistant, went through all the community action forms and was allowed to black out names and other ways people might be identified based on Murray’s decision.
“We have been told we can take personal names off and personal identifying information,” Bockelman said.
Town Council has received communication, both oral and written, from residents about the appointments process.
This week, Dillon Maxfield, who ran for an at-large seat on the council, expressed frustration that he was not appointed to the Board of License Commissioners.
Maxfield, of 290 North Pleasant, observes that he lives across Kendrick Park and near the former Porta restaurant and bar, which created numerous problems for authorities over the winter, including serving underage people and violating the terms of its licenses.
Instead of being appointed, Maxfield observed that professors, lawyers and former Select Board members were named to the board, which is similar to what has happened with other committees.
“I can’t help but wonder if working-class people like myself are being denied,” Maxfield said, adding that Amherst should want its government represented by all residents.
He said he has been asked by friends whether working-class people are being denied appointments.
“The answer I have to give is I don’t know,” he said.
Two former members of the Charter Commission have also been concerned with the process.
Meg Gage said she understands the worry from some councilors that when names are public people may not be willing to apply and that may further limit the applicant pool.
“But that is heavily outweighed by the appearance of cherry-picking candidates,” Gage said.
There is a perception, she said, that some qualified people are being denied positions on committees.
Former Select Board member Gerry Weiss wrote a letter to the council expressing that the community activity forms not be personnel records.
“It seems to me that it would be in the best public interest and in the interest of transparency, that such applications not be considered personnel records unless the law clearly defines them as such,” Weiss said.
Scott Merzbach can be reached at smerzbach@gazettenet.com.
