A recent Plymouth Independent article on town employee healthcare coverage speculated about my motives without reaching out for comment. Assigning intent to an elected official without seeking their perspective is not thorough journalism – it is lazy headline writing designed for clickbait, and it demands clarification.
The claim that this proposal failed out of “fear” is simply false.
I voted against sending this item to Town Meeting not because of union pressure or political considerations, but because the proposal advanced by my colleagues was underdeveloped, lacked proper vetting, and did not align with the collective bargaining process.
The timing of the proposal was also deeply problematic. Negotiations on the next round of municipal contracts are imminent, and introducing a unilateral benefits proposal now risked unnecessary friction and undermined constructive dialogue. Worse, it would have put the unions on their heels before we even had a chance to talk, creating tension instead of cooperation.
The proposal itself was fundamentally flawed. It was introduced without thorough cost analysis, without legal clarity, and without meaningful stakeholder consultation. It would have placed Town Meeting in the middle of labor negotiations and sent a message that negotiated benefits are subject to political leverage – an approach that would weaken the town’s bargaining position and erode trust from our workforce. Even the proponent acknowledged to the Independent that the potential benefits would not deliver possible savings for many years to come. Simply put this assessment came without consideration for the real impact on real working people’s lives.
A responsible path to addressing retiree healthcare liabilities is clear: conduct a careful cost analysis, understand legal constraints, engage stakeholders, and negotiate in good faith. That process was not followed here. There were no immediate savings, no implementation framework, and little consideration for recruitment, retention, or employee morale.
The rejection of this proposal was not about fear – it was about sound judgment.
Fiscal responsibility is my priority, and I am focused on protecting our town’s long-term financial position. Leadership does not mean advancing half-baked proposals to Town Meeting or ambushing employees. While some may be tempted to make political theater out of these processes, my goal is to make meaningful progress. True leadership means advancing well-prepared, collaborative proposals — not putting negotiations at risk, creating unnecessary tension, or mischaracterizing principled opposition.
– David Golden
Golden is chair of the Select Board.