"Beware," Henry David Thoreau once said, "of all enterprises that require new clothes."
There's nothing pastoral about the Auburn City Council, though, nor Mayor-Elect Richard Gleason's encouragement of his council colleagues to have pride in their appearance. He's been asking them to respect the city's standing dress and meeting conduct codes.
This has rankled some councilors, namely Dan Herrick and Mike Farrell, who think Gleason's pursuit of pressed and polished has been tailored for them. Herrick has jokingly (we think) threatened to wear bib overalls and a straw hat to an upcoming meeting in protest, like he's fresh from the cornfield from Hee Haw. Farrell thinks these city policies don't apply to him as a councilor.
"I don't feel that I am an employee of the city of Auburn," he told the paper recently. "If I come in to the meeting with my clothes all torn up and my shoes on the wrong feet, am I going to get written up?"
No, but he would be laughed at. (Though it would be funny to see appearance ticketed like overtime parking. Talk about fashion police.) Farrell is, however, an official representative of the citizens of Auburn. If he respects them, he should show it by respecting his appearance while in the chambers. Gleason's request does seem sensible; he wants councilors to dress professionally while doing the business of the public.
Why is this even a question?
If one looks back through history, garments and government have always gone together. A distinguished Roman senator would likely have been jeered off the floor of the Forum if their toga was in tatters or their sandals were soiled, for example. The connection between holding office and public appearance is as old as representative government itself.
Clothes may not make the man (or woman), but a little decorum never hurt anyone either.
For Auburn, Gleason is not seeking anything extravagant: not necessarily shirts and neckties, he says, rather an effort on behalf of councilors to be presentable. Of all the requests he could make of councilors, this seems the easiest to heed.
So Thoreau's advice, in this instance, should be ignored. Auburn city councilors, particularly when starting a new working relationship, should not engage in acts of civil disobedience over attire. There are much bigger issues to address ahead. And really, Gleason isn't asking for that much.
He could have asked for togas.

It is sad that an elected officer would not want to present themselves in the best possible manner when representing his or her constituents or community. It makes one wonder if such a person can not be bothered with such a simple but important matter, can we reasonably expect them to make the greater effort frequently required in conducting the people's business? I have my doubts. I also question the impact of this behavior on prospects for the city. As a business professional, I am not encouraged to do business when the person across the table does not present themselves as a professional or in a professional manner. City Councilors are our frontline in economic development interaction, this conduct is not conducive to a positive outcome for our city.
It is sad that an elected officer would not want to present themselves in the best possible manner when representing his or her constituents or community. It makes one wonder if such a person can not be bothered with such a simple but important matter, can we reasonably expect them to make the greater effort frequently required in conducting the people's business? I have my doubts. I also question the impact of this behavior on prospects for the city. As a business professional, I am not encouraged to do business when the person across the table does not present themselves as a professional or in a professional manner. City Councilors are our frontline in economic development interaction, this conduct is not conducive to a positive outcome four our city.
OK so LET HIM COME IN A NICE FORMAL DRESS NEXT TIME THEREBY REPRESENTING AUBURN PROPERLY as it was, what like one of the closest for gay marriage to pass!!!
Your comment was ridiculous! There is a difference between cross dressing and homosexuality. What does this article have to do with the recent vote for same sex marriage anyways?
It's none of his business.
Jon Albrecht Dixfield
In order to make comments, you must verify your account.
In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. A member of our staff will call you to verify this information. To join in, fill out your user profile completely and check the box "please verify my status." We'll get back to you within one business day to verify your account.
Login or create an account here.
Our policy prohibits comments that are:
- Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
- Excessively foul and/or vulgar
- Inappropriately sexual
- Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
- Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
- Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned.