Override questions formulated $5,600,0000!!!

The Select Board met this afternoon and approved 7 override questions and a debt exclusion question. The library trustees request for an override question of $54,000 to reopen the North Dartmouth branch was not approved for the ballot by the Select Board.
So there is no complaint that the order of the questions was fixed to influence their passage, the Select Board drew lots for the ballot order of questions. Here are the questions in the order that they will be placed on the ballot.

Police $520,000 Funding for 7 additional police officers, one of whom will be a School Resource Officer (SRO)
This first is the only question that I will vote for. BT

Library $90,000 Funding for books and operating costs for the Southworth library

Schools $2,094,000 Funding for texts, computers, teachers, staff, and reopening Cushman and Gidley schools

School fees $325,000 Funding to eliminate school fees
If we are trying to increase revenue, why would we pass an override to eliminate a revenue stream? This one really has me puzzled

General Government $1,511,000 Funding of $1,200,000 for level services for all town departments (except schools) and $300,000 for new employees.

Debt exclusion $3,174,000 for 10 years Debt exclusions are temporary overrides which expire when paid off. This one adds $300,000 a year to the tax levy for 10 years

Stabilization fund $1,000,000 This amount was voted to allow the town to continue funding the budget without an override through FY11.

The Select Board has directed that the police department will be funded for level services even without the override. So failure to pass the General Government question does not cut the police department budget. The separate police question adds 7 officers.

Voting for the $1,000,000 addition to the Stabilization Fund may have introduced a sunset provision in this override question, if passed. The Mass General Law on overrides includes this from MGL Chap 59,sect 21C(g):
If a question as aforesaid shall provide for assessing taxes for the purpose of funding a stabilization fund established pursuant to section 5B of chapter 40, the assessors shall in each successive fiscal year assess property taxes for the same purpose in an amount equal to 102.5 per cent of the amount assessed in the next preceding year in which additional taxes were assessed for such purpose, but only if the local appropriating authority votes by a 2/3 vote to appropriate such increased amount in such year for such purpose. The voters of the city or town, by majority vote at a referendum, may alter the purpose of a stabilization fund or authorize the assessment of such additional property taxes for another purpose. In any year in which the local appropriating authority does not vote to appropriate such amount as aforesaid, the total property tax levy for such year shall be reduced by the amount that could otherwise have been assessed, so that such additional taxes may not be assessed for any other purpose. BOLD EMPHASIS MINE, BT
My reading is that if not voted to continue in future years, the Stab fund amount of $1,000,000 would be removed from the tax levy. I am not sure that the Select Board intended to have it that way.
Some of the numbers I gave above may be off a few tens of thousands, I do not have the worksheets that the Select Board had today. The Budget Director keeps insisting that these numbers are "fluid" and keep changing all the time. I haven't figured out yet why that would be and nobody challenged him on why the numbers change from meeting to meeting. In fairness, I have to note that Select Board member Gilbert pointed out several times that the numbers were different.
Anyway there are the contestants for our override sweepstakes. Any one care to bet on the winners? Leave your thoughts in comments