This is NOT about the pros or cons of fluoridation.
This is about a single man who decided to play Supreme Leader with the town’s water supply and the Town Manager who failed to adequately supervise him.
Ultimately, it was the State of Vermont that brought the situation to the attention of the Town Commission.
On his own initiative, Kendall Chamberlin turned down the fluoride supply in the town’s water for 4 years. Only the Town Manager knew and he chose not to ask the public or even inform the public. Parents made dental decisions for their kids on the assumption that the fluoride level in the town water was adequate. For that matter, so was the town dentist, who made recommendations against supplemental fluoride on the assumption that the town’s water fluoride was adequate.
Regardless of his reason’s, Chamberlin had no right to change the fluoridation level without consulting the town’s elected leaders and fully informing the public of his proposed action well beforehand. The public should have had adequate time to make their opinions known and the elected officials, not this one man, should have made the decision.
And if they had decided to go ahead and lower the fluoride, dentists and parents would have been informed so they could make decisions regarding supplemental fluoride appropriately.
The Town Commission has since voted to restore full fluoridation.
Hopefully Chamberlin is fired and no longer permitted to hold a position of public trust.
And the Town Commission should give a thorough consideration as to whether they wish to retain this Town Manager when his contract comes up for renewal.
I’ve seen this before. They are not elected and do things nobody knows about until it’s too late.
Chamberlin — who doesn’t live in town and appeared online
A former Richmond employee who worked under Chamberlin pointed out the monthly report is reviewed by the town manager and goes to the state.
“It’s not just one guy doing what he wants. He’s bringing these reports to his boss, who signs them,” said Erik Bailey, now the village manager in Johnson.
What amount is prescribed? Apparently there are state recommended quantities, but the article doesn’t state this is a regulation or any other kind of requirement.
Apparently there was no required amount by anyone in authority so the person who did the work used his own judgement. The city disagreed with his judgement and made a requirement after it found out he was not using fluoride. Presumably he will now follow required amounts.
Sure, if they think he used bad judgement they can fire them.
Not seeing the big deal.
Your body does not digest fluoride and then incorporate it into your teeth. It’s a heavy metal and nothing more. Fluoride has never been, nor will it ever be, required for healthy teeth.
If people wanna combat tooth decay, they merely need to brush their nasty teeth (and choose between fluoride and non-fluoride mouthwash/toothpaste).
Not every municipality in the US even use fluoride, much less the same amount.
Some are poisoning people though, but I’m sure everyone will just look past that part.
they hired him to manage. he did. if they don’t like the way he managed, fire him, but don’t pretend he didn’t make the decisions they empowered him to make. he properly made a decision he was empowered to make. they disagree with his decision.
btw, what was the old level and what did he lower it to?
They hired him as Water and Wastewater Superintendent. He has a certain amount of decision making power and discretion. For example, scheduling chlorine dumps and other necessary maintenance.
He, and for that matter the Town Manager, does not have authority over policy. Only elected officials have that discretion and only in the public eye.
The decision to fluoridate and the level thereof is policy and belongs solely to elected officials.
Somehow, I should have figured Chamberlin would be an old man of the mountain.
To answer the previous three posts.
The recommended level for fluoridation is set by the State of Vermont. Prior to Chamberlin’s intervention, Richmond’s water supply was fluoridated at the recommended level. Chamberlin cut that in half.
I would also note that the Town Commission has strongly rebuked Chamberlin and ORDERED him to restore full fluoridation, which he since has. They have also indicated he will be disciplined. The very fact he is being disciplined is prima facie proof that he did something wrong.
But frankly, the biggest sin was not the act of turning down the fluoridation, but doing so without alerting the public, including the town’s lone dentist.
I would also note that fluoridation has been a major controversy in Vermont, with some Towns rejecting or approving fluoridation by the action of elected bodies or by voter referendum. Several of these votes have occurred in recent years. Chamberlin would have known this is a deeply controversial issue and thus the domain of elected politicians, not mere employees.
If he wants to reduce or eliminate fluoridation, he needs to run for the Town Commission or try to get a referendum scheduled.
Breaking a recommendation is not the same thing as breaking a law, regulation or even a rule. What is the punishment of breaking a recommendation?
Yes, of course those in charge can claim he didn’t use good judgement if they disagreed with him. That is always an employers option.
