To the editor: 

As president of the town council, my charge is not only to protect the openness and transparency of our process, but also to ensure that our citizens can be confident in their government. To that end, I am responding to concerns raised in a Barrington Times’ editorial.

Contrary to suggestions in last week’s paper, the work of the council is transparent, and we conduct our business in the open. Town meetings are readily accessible, and we hear from the public on nearly every issue that comes before the council. Meetings stretch late into the evening as we invite public debate because of our commitment to a transparent, open, and inclusive process. Participation has increased dramatically in the last two years as more members of the public have joined our meetings and shared their views. This process has allowed us to make Barrington safer, more resilient, and more welcoming. 

I agree wholeheartedly that effective government requires transparency. Issues of how taxpayer dollars are spent, for example, or potential conflicts of interest are matters that warrant unwavering transparency. And yet, these are not the issues that have been raised.

The suggestion that I prevented one council member from discussing town business with other members is absurd, baseless, and insulting. I cannot prevent anyone — councilor or resident — from emailing or calling our colleagues. When the same member repeatedly risked violations of the Open Meetings Act, (and therefore violations of transparency), I urged caution and adherence to the law, but he is, as always, free to send whatever emails he wishes.

Another colleague and I took issue with Mr. Brier’s decision to shout at the town manager, in front of a crowd of people, including other town employees, just before our December meeting. Encouraging members of the council to be judicious in their public speech is not discouraging transparency. Public humiliation is never an acceptable way to resolve a disagreement with a town employee. 

Elevating every interpersonal conflict to a public forum does not serve the interests of transparency or the community. Acrimonious public disputes should not be the recourse of choice to resolve personal disagreements. As public officials, we have a platform, and with that platform comes a certain responsibility — to treat people with respect, to try to assume the best intentions in our colleagues, and to remember that we are all working to serve our community.  

To do our jobs well, we must focus on the important issues facing our town, such as the pandemic, climate mitigation, the budget, and senior housing, to name just a few. As elected officials, we should be respectful in our critiques of our colleagues and others. When we resort to shouting, personal attacks, and public humiliation, we distract from the issues at hand, and we make it about ourselves, rather than our town. 

In the end we are all neighbors — let’s treat each other like it.

Michael Carroll

Barrington