To the editor:

Over the past two years, I have watched our town council, specifically the four members who have been driving decisions as a voting bloc: councilors Gleason, McDowell, Patton and Reise. I’ve been concerned by a continuing pattern of indecision and inconsistency in their actions. Pick any example, regardless of where you stand: budgeting, staffing, school bonds, trash pickup, disc golf and even a basic understanding of our Town Charter provisions.

Across these and other issues, these four councilors have demonstrated confusion over facts, procedural requirements and their own role in governing. They don’t understand the distinction between their policy and oversight responsibilities and the management and administration of town functions by staff. This confusion has contributed significantly to the council’s inability to commit to a course of action, resulting in second-guessing staff, questioning motives or failing to effectively explain actions they have taken — or reversed. They rely far too much on the town solicitors’ advice on policy matters, as opposed to legal opinions.

To govern effectively, leadership requires clarity, consistency, a willingness to make difficult decisions and the ability to explain them clearly. Too often, those qualities have been absent. After two years, they still don’t understand their role.

To some degree, inconsistent governing is understandable. After all, we choose our leaders from among ourselves, and none of us are experts or experienced in this line of work. We are citizen leaders, not professional politicians.

What prompted me to write, however, was the Sept. 28 council meeting and a straightforward agenda item: setting a public hearing date for the upcoming ballot question on changing our elections to nonpartisan. I watched this simple decision run right off the rails, driven by councilors Gleason and McDowell.

Both are clearly unfamiliar with our charter requirement. Neither showed any interest in helping voters gain a fuller understanding of this change to our election process. Mr. Gleason, incomprehensibly, suggested it might be better to hold the hearing after the election. Ms. McDowell questioned the need for any hearing at all, despite the charter requirement. Both expressed unhappiness that they may have to sit through a lengthy meeting with the public to explain their positions.

This attitude is unconscionable, not just another example of indecisive or inconsistent governing. Nor was it ignorance of our charter provisions. And it certainly was not an exercise in transparency. This was an attempt to thwart the process of open government, where actions are fully vetted, explained and defended for the benefit of constituents before they cast an important vote.

Thankfully, their arguments were ignored, and the council set the public hearing for Oct. 13. I urge everyone to attend, ask questions and require town council members to explain what they are doing.

Please do not take my word for any of this. The meeting video is posted on the town’s homepage. You can watch for yourself — and then vote for someone else on Nov. 3.

Jim Seveney

Portsmouth