One of the goals that I have in creating this blog and in running for Select Board is to raise the level of discussion in the town. While I disagree with the positions taken by LizO, Phil Lenz, Kathleen or TheSherpa/Kali in comments on this blog, that's it. We disagree. I have not questioned their reasonableness or their good intentions. They have laid out their side and I have argued mine. I'm sure they are good people who want the best for their families and the town. What we have are philosophical differences. For example, I think the schools must cut extra curricular activities if they don't have textbooks. Phil and Liz disagree and think we should just spend more and have both. I think the town understands the need for more funding but wants priorities set, some cuts, and a commitment going forward to try to live within our means. My take is that the townspeople lack confidence in the current administration to get that done. Kathleen, Kali, and others disagree.
I have and will continue to address issues and will try not to question the motives of those who comment or my opponent in the Select Board race. That said, I feel justified in challenging unfounded or misinformed statements made here as to my knowledge of the issues, motivations or character. This is not about me, you or anyone else. It is about the issues facing the town. If you think I have my facts wrong, say so, and lay out your case. Backing it up with cited sources or other documentation adds to the credibility of any argument. If you think my position is wrong, tell me your opinion and why you hold it. I may disagree or I may change my mind. The latter is unlikely if the substance of your argument is that I just don't understand or that I am unreasonable.
Saturday, February 9, 2008
Tone and substance
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
Bill-T,
This will be my final post to your blog because I find the slanted dialog neither helpful nor enlightening. Bill-T I’m not sure how you will find the time to rescue Dartmouth, if elected, when you spend so much time publishing this tainted rubbish. You and your minion Barry see yourselves as public servants; well I’m part of the public and a taxpayer and gentlemen you are not serving me in anyway. You want to usher monies away from the bottomless pit, as you describe it, but all I see you doing is throwing the town in that same pit, in its place. With all do respect I think it is you who is misinformed. There is a silent majority who yearns to restore Dartmouth back to the beauty it once held. What qualifies you to decide what form our town should take? What qualifies you to claim to speak for all of us? You base your conclusions on discussions you have heard in coffee shops around town well you won’t hear anything from the silent majority because we are all busy working. And Barry please do not waste your time responding back with your rich man poor man bologna. My wife and I work hard for what we have. You somehow find it necessary to demonize people more successful then yourself. Although I will admit that government has made mistakes in the past and present, you Bill, will not stop this from occurring in the future as you would have us all believe. Part of the problem is having a governing body made up of part time volunteers. Everyone has a suggestion and an opinion no matter how misguided. I offer as an example Barry’s rant about the town’s IT infrastructure. Next time you question the purchase price of IT equipment here’s something you should know about it before you make a comment. Most capital equipment purchases are based on a 5 year cost-of-ownership finance model. In the case of PC’s the purchase price only represents 25% of the total cost. In case you don’t understand what that means to a budget, buying the blue-light special at Wal-Mart, be it cheap at the start, will cost the town much more in the future with higher maintenance costs and repairs. But I bet if Dartmouth blindly took your suggestions and purchased this level of equipment when the support cost went up you would forget it was your suggestion in the first place and blame the town and it’s managers for the rise in expense. The committee you are so proud of has how many members, maybe six? That represents .02% of the population and you dare to call yourself a public servant. You dare to speak of the voters as though you have some grand influence over them. You want to tear Dartmouth down and build anew. You want to reduce the services below acceptable levels and have a town lottery to decide what gets restored. Well here’s a concept folks. Let’s take the revenue projections for the next five years and bounce it against the projected expenses for running the town including the services we all enjoy. Let’s raise the tax base sufficiently enough so that perpetual over rides won’t be needed. Let’s not waste money but let us not start at the bottom either. Let’s preserve that in which we love by investing in it. If you choose not to want to invest in Dartmouth then please move to a community more suitable for you. But please stop trying to take away what so many Dartmouth residence have work so hard for. Lastly, I congratulate all current and past public servants and board members for truly trying to maintain the quality of our town as revenues began to dwindle. Like a parent not wanting their child to hear bad news they made poor decisions in spending down the town’s stabilization funds to maintain service levels and by doing so, gave residents the false sense that sufficient monies were being collected and later mismanaged. Their only sin being that they should have gone in front of the town sooner with the bad news that more monies were needed to maintain the status quo. In smaller doses the people would have gladly responded. We all agree that an over ride is necessary but Bill you speak as though you and you alone know how the town will vote. Is it possible you believe that the recent over ride defeat is a mandate? It failed by the smallest of margins. It failed because of poor communications and the loud-mouth drumbeats of misinformation your support group bombarded the public with. You intimidated the uniformed and elderly by preying on their fears. But I promise you, your propaganda will not be so successful in the future. The silent majority will not continue to be silent anymore. As far as your candidacy and the success of this blog, good luck to you. As I see it you have three or four loyal supporters, you got to be proud.
kali, I've been reading this blog since January 15th and all I can say to you is that when I read anything from you it sounds like you are a very frustrated person! When you say "what qualifies you to speak for all of us?" all I have to say is, every citizen of this town has the right to speak his or her mind and should! You have a lot to say about Barry, but he was only one man who stood up and spoke his mind, while it was hundreds of people who voted.It's too bad that you cannot be part of a discussion that includes all views, not just your own! Dartmouth is still beautiful in my eyes!
kim b, well said. Thanks for speaking your mind.
Kali, Goodbye, We all know who you are and it is truly unfortunate that our town leadership has come to this.
Kali, I am sorry that you haven't found the dialog here enlightening and informative. As it says at the top of the blog, I'd be happy to give you the necessary permissions to post here if you would like to add your view to the discussion as well as commenting :-)
I for one will miss Kali's opposing points of view.
bosco, never fear. I'm sure he will resurface on this blog again under another name or you can probably still find him on southcoast response where personal attacks are the norm.
Post a Comment