Another Excessive Spending Spree

I believe the correct override/exclusion is $12,000,000 dollars, of that amount $8,900,000
will be used for one thing, they will shift what its for by shuffling the cards, so to speak and the remaining
3,000,000 is for guess who, surprise the teachers once they get it will go to the teachers pay/retirement fund!


By The Tax and Spend Outing

Vote No on 2 1/2OverRide SCAMS!

That would be a stab in the back of the taxpayers. Over rides are for long term capital infrastructure projects like roads and buildings.

It is no wonder there is such a mistrust of our town government. The schools can do whatever with their funds allocated to them.

This is why any OVER RIDE should be voted down. Show me real government reform, like reining in the school department's unilateral control over their funding, then come back and talk turkey about an over ride.

Maybe then, the voters might feel more trusting of their government.

Voter's only control over our government lies within the over ride vote. Don't give it up. Stand your ground if you want government reform.

By Fixed Incomer

It Is A $20.9 Million D.E.O.

$12 mil. in new dollars allocated for capital needs. $8.9 mil. to retire old debt. By paying off the old debt we have new money to spend. Missing in the equation is the amount of the old debt. If the old debt was $7 mil., that would leave us $l.9 mil. in new money. Of that we know we will be paying for trash collection. So how much is the old debt, how much will we gain to expend towards operating needs, what other operating needs will we put the money towards, if any, and should we be including operating needs in a debt exclusion override? Missing from the ballot question will be the amount of the override; evidently State Law prohibits the printing of the in total dollar amount, rather the Law stipulates the breakdown of alloted funds (?). 'Taxpayer' I thank you for taking the time to post an explanation of Mr. K's plan, which in theory appears to be an advantageous way to generate new funds. However, since operating expenses increase yearly, is it prudent to include those expenses in a d.e.o.; how will the expenses we eliminate from operating this year be paid for next year? If I am wrong I hope someone will show me where I am off course; but this does seem like a costly quick fix to me. The quick fix for operating expenses being temporary when in the form of an override of any genre.