by Robert Lynch; August 14, 2025
This is not a news story. This is commentary, pure commentary, my commentary. Let’s get that straight up front. As a news story, what happened this past night may never get reported. Maybe it shouldn’t. And I am not the best person to report it. Not only am I too close to what happened; my reporting it would only add fuel to an all too frightful fire. And Enfield, you don’t need another fire right now.
Wednesday, August 13, just before we laid to rest a drawn-out Town Board meeting, I placed onto Enfield’s agenda a “Discussion Item”: “Town of Enfield Purchasing Practice and Policy.” My request for dialogue followed our failed attempt in late-July to secure at auction a good-to-excellent used tractor for the Enfield Town Highway Department.
I’m mindful, I said, of the need to keep our focus on the merits of issues rather than the people involved, and I’d written my words in advance and read them verbatim from a script; stilted, yet necessary. When I began my statement I never envisioned what would come afterward:
Board:
“Since our last meeting, July 18, the Town of Enfield lost out on a bargain. As Councilperson, I hold a duty to our residents to minimize its chance of happening again. Put bluntly, I came up short.
“At a Special Meeting July 18, our Town Board, at the request of Highway Superintendent Rollins, authorized Superintendent Rollins to use up to $70,000 from the Highway Equipment Reserve Fund to purchase, at auction, a 2022 John Deere mower tractor. Among the four Town Board members attending, the vote was unanimous.
“But we did not buy the tractor, despite Superintendent Rollins’ and our Board’s best efforts. Here’s what happened:
“Superintendent Rollins and other parties participated in an Auctions International online auction July 21 for purchase of the John Deere mower tractor owned by the Town of Arcadia. As scheduled, the auction closed at 6 PM that day. During the auction’s final minutes, two bidders increased their offers back and forth, generally by $100 increments. I presume Superintendent Rollins was one of those final bidders. The auction closed. The recorded high bid, by bidder “ssrebel56” was $61,100.
“Auctions International records indicate that the tractor’s seller, the Town of Arcadia, declined to accept the closing high bid. In accordance with the auction’s rules, the seller set a Minimum Bid of $90,000, which closing high bidders could match and then purchase the equipment. The Town of Enfield, through Superintendent Rollins, did not match that minimum bid.
“In response to my email inquiry, Tom Kuhlman, Highway Superintendent for the Town of Arcadia, wrote me the following message August fourth about the tractor’s sale:
‘Yes I have found buyer, sold for $85,000. Last conversation I had with your Superintendent he offered $75,000. Said that’s all he had budgeted. Sorry I couldn’t let it go for that!’
“Understandable. But let me stop for a moment and make one point clear. Nothing I state here is intended to disparage the Highway Superintendent; his knowledge, judgment or competence or to undercut his authority. Superintendent Rollins exercised discretion that this Town Board, explicitly or implicitly, has assigned his office. I applaud the Highway Superintendent for having located this good, used tractor. I encourage him to seek another one of comparable quality.
“Town Board policy and the consensus of this Board’s majority, as expressed to me by Town Supervisor Redmond in her email message of July 25, is that the Highway Superintendent, not the Town Board, holds final decision-making power regarding capital equipment purchases for the Town Highway Department. As stated by Supervisor Redmond:
‘The town board does not have authority to direct how the highway superintendent expends his equipment line. We have authorized him to utilize $70k from equipment reserves for the purchase. Anything beyond that is the highway superintendent’s discretion to utilize other lines of funding he has available.’
“I respectfully disagree with the wisdom of the referenced policy. We, this Town Board, hold final account to our residents, our taxpayers, for making wise purchasing decisions in their behalf. In time, I will move to modify Town Policy within the confines of the law, so as to accord this Town Board greater authority in the exercise of major capital expenditures; of equipment valued at perhaps over $20,000. But for now, I accept Town Board consensus as the Supervisor has stated it.
“’The tractor is in excellent condition. It is a good tractor,’ I informed this Town Board during our brief meeting of July 18. I had personally inspected the tractor in Arcadia three days prior to the meeting; even though some Town officials, judging from their comments that night, had implied that I should not have performed my inspection. I make no apologies. I performed due diligence on behalf of my constituents. If given the opportunity, I’d do so again. Based on Highway Superintendent Kuhlman’s statement to me, an equivalent new tractor—Arcadia had just bought one—would cost Enfield $161,000, about twice the cost of the auctioned tractor.
“I do not blame our Highway Superintendent for Enfield’s failure to procure the used tractor. I blame myself, and to some extent, I blame other members of this Town Board. We failed to provide the Highway Superintendent the sufficient guidance we should have.
“When items go to auction, our Town Board cannot predict an exact sales price beforehand. But we can state our preference for acceptable bidding limits. We, this Town Board, did not do so. ‘I’m willing to go to 100,’ one Town Board member, either Supervisor Redmond or Councilperson Hinkle, remarked that night during pre-vote discussions. I should have joined her in stating that opinion. I did not. I regret not having done so. If an apology to anyone needs be made, that’s the one I should make; to this Town, to its taxpayers. A mower tractor purchase stands in our Capital Plan, its purchase now moved to 2026. Our taxpayers may pay a painful price for the mistake we made last month.
“I recommend that in future decisions regarding the purchase of capital equipment made available at auction, we, the Town Board, provide clearer guidance as to how high an offer we would accept, where our comfort level lies. Furthermore, we should always transfer sufficient funds from the applicable reserve account or accounts to cover that maximum acceptable bid. Had we done so July 18, we might have saved Enfield taxpayers $75,000, maybe more. (Expect tractor prices to rise next year.) We’d also have a like-new John Deere mower tractor.
“We, Town Board, can do better. Let’s try.”
I then invited responses from others. My request got answered.
****
Put bluntly, what flowed from my invitation can best be described as an “excoriation.” Our Town Supervisor, Stephanie Redmond, in a full-throated scold of me, faulted not only the procedural reforms I’d advanced; but also, more importantly—and at her argument’s core—my even having taken the initiative to inspect and inquire into the equipment the Highway Superintendent had attempted to buy, yet didn’t. Redmond alleged I lacked the mechanical wisdom to evaluate the equipment considered. Asked calmly, yet directly by me as to why he’d chosen not to offer more money for the tractor, Highway Superintendent Barry “Buddy” Rollins answered it was because he didn’t want to.
Already, Supervisor Redmond’s avenging words have gained their permanent place in the meeting’s audio archives. We can all listen to them and weep. It would be better still if they wandered their way into the nearest wastebasket.
You’ll likely not read those words quoted by me. I’m working too hard at the moment to mend the tattered shreds of Enfield civility. Yet the opprobrium which our Town’s highest officer heaped upon an elected colleague that night truly matters. Not only did our Supervisor shower irreparable embarrassment upon herself, she also diminished the stature of her office and the reputation of the beloved town she professes to serve.
Most dangerously, Supervisor Stephanie Redmond’s vitriol cast a haunting chill over that hot summer night’s meeting room. It conveyed an air of retribution.
I’d proposed purchasing policy reform. The Supervisor advanced a correction of her own. She’d have Town legal counsel draft a policy that would limit officials like me from any independent inquiry into the Highway Superintendent’s purchases, of my employing objective oversight. Another Councilperson sought to dissuade the Supervisor from pursuing her initiative that far. We’ll see if Redmond’s wishes grow legs as time passes. Still, it’s obvious that reprisal these days does not confine itself to people and places far removed from Applegate Road.
In May 2021, in response to past squabbles long since forgotten, attorney and mediator Ronald Mendrick authored a report for Enfield. It was commissioned by the Town Board, paid for by Town taxpayers, and discretely tucked away, yet accessible even today on the Town website for anyone to read. (Search the “For Residents” tab under “Report of Investigation.”)
Ronald Mendrick interviewed 13 people then involved in Town government affairs. He drew conclusions. The mediator found that a “culture of controversy” had infected Town of Enfield politics and had done so for many years past. It had festered to that day. It had prompted back-and-forth bickering among those both in and out of power. It had led to “yelling” and “swearing” at Town Board meetings. Once, even law enforcement needed to intervene. Mendrick offered recommendations on how we could all break the habit, the cycle, the culture of controversy; how we could better behave, become more productive, and serve our constituents more effectively. Running 24 pages, it’s a long read. But I encourage you read it.
Amid the clamorous criticisms and dispensable rebukes that punctuated the close of Enfield’s August 13 Town Board meeting, I sandwiched-in a single paragraph from the mediator’s voluminous report of four years past:
“[A]ll discussion by officials should address the issue, not the person suggesting or speaking about it. That is, in debate rather than address a person, speak about the issue and the direction to be advocated, even when supporting another’s position. For example, instead of starting with ‘Jane has a good point, and I support her position,’ start with ‘adopting the resolution would be best for the Town because …’. Making it about the issue, not a person, sets the tone for respectful discussion of the merits and gets away from the personal attributions and feeling of personal attacks….”
During much of what I recited, the Supervisor talked over me.
Enfield needs better Town Board oversight in its management of capital purchases. In time, perhaps with new people to work with, the change will happen, but not now. In the Mendrick Report’s preamble, an unattributed source described Enfield as the “wild western hills” of Tompkins County. At least a few of us would like to see those hills flattened a bit. That they have not been.
I attempted to take the high road this past Wednesday night. I sought to address a tough issue, one made controversial only because one or more members of our leadership team had chosen to personalize the debate. The “high road” proved too potholed to navigate that evening. My chosen vehicle sadly headed toward the ditch. Maybe in time—with everyone’s help—we can steer it back toward the center line for the betterment of all.
Peace.
Bob Lynch
###