It's all about the people. "Let's let the people choose." Heard that the other night at our selectmen's meeting from the vice chair.
Is letting the people choose good if the choice is an item high on an elected official's priority list - but not good if it involves allowing budgetary oversight or hard questions about long term plans?
Do the people get to choose whether the budget they voted in last June is followed? According to MMA description, in a town meeting form of government (e.g., the Town of Paris) the legislative body determines what laws ought to govern the town and "the amounts of money to be spent." Does that include money-decisions made in secret (even from part of the selectboard) that are gobbling up money budgeted for items - like legal fees - with no thought for the future? [See earlier posts (1) (2) (3) on this topic.]
Do the people get to weigh in on the ill-advised plan to consider hiring a full time town manager before (1) the interim town manager is finished being paid, and (2) the former town manager's legal claims are resolved? Where is the town's attorney, anyway? Does he only speak in whispers to a solitary selectman at odd intervals, now and then?
Is someone trying to convince voters that all funds are fluid in this town? That all money is equal? That if it's on paper - somewhere - we can use it? And if it's not on paper, but someone talks about the need for it, magic will happen?
[Figures below are from Budget Committee Ch. Forrie Everett]
Consider:
Former Town Mgr. Jackson's wages 7-1-09 to 7-1-10 were budgeted at $64,116.00. As of 11-03-09, she has been paid $42,774.52.
Assuming Int. Mgr. Thorne stays, from 7-13-09 to 2-13-10, he will have been paid $18.600.00
The 2 will have cost the town a total of $61,374.52. That leaves just $2742.00. Twenty-one weeks from 2-1-10 to 7-1-10 when new budget comes out; that makes it $130.57 per week for this new town manager. Whatdayathink?
Take it from the contingency fund? Oops, using that for legal fees .... Fire equipment really shouldn't really be all that negotiable....well, there's the insurance money for the damaged roof of the old fire station...no one needs to vote to use designated funds for something different, do they? Why would the voters need to be asked anything? And of course there's the rushing out to hire a company to do the new property revaluation for the town, to be paid for by borrowing against our own money. Every tax payer will see that added to his/her bill next year...We have to do this reval before...before...what? or what will happen?
Too much. Way too much.
