It seems that the personal service contracts that have generated so much heat at Select Board meetings recently will continue to haunt. In an opinion piece in today's Chronicle, Select Board member Diane Gilbert brings them up as tying our hands when trying to deal with the restructuring of town departments. It seems that "this board" has not managed to exorcise the specters of them yet. I'll post a link to the piece when it becomes available on the Chronicle website.
I can't say I understand what the rationale for including job, salary and benefit protection for town managers could be. No private company that I have worked for would include such language in their employment contracts. I think the best way to put this behind us is to just release the minutes and have those involved give an explanation of why they thought it necessary.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
The ghosts of contracts past
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
54 comments:
I've heard the explanation several times now Bill, I've also heard that these clauses will not be included when the contracts come up for renewal. You and the CFRG, and others may not agree with the provisions, you may say they are not included in the private sector (others have testified these types of clauses are in fact included in private sector settings-I would'nt know being self employed but if private business oweners say they exist and Diane shakes her head and says no who do you believe?)but I must sya your and the CFRG's insistence on making this an on-going issue confounds me. It a good tactic to rile people up chasing 'ghosts' as you say but does nothing to olve our problems. More running in place I'm afraid. It's another dissapointing aspect of where this town is on the whole. More inuendo, hints of impropriety see what sticks, keep the people agitated, what can I get on someone, no solutions.
Isn't it interesting how some town leaders don't want to talk about these contacts. And why would they? What a shame!
Yes, take care of the administrators and forget about the workers!
They are the selfish ones who only care about their own big salaries and perks, while workers get laid off!
Every time something like this comes to light, our leaders want to say 'forget about that', 'that's in the past'.
I wouldn't want to be reminded of it either. What a shame!
Well, now we know why Dartmouth is in such a mess....it's contracts and deals like these that have kept the status quo...
Let's go forward with solutions and get rid of the good ol boys.
“Let's go forward with solutions and get rid of the good ol boys.” Fine…sounds good but don’t destroy the services and town departments that make Dartmouth the wonderful community it is while we continue to work, watch, attack, get rid of….what ever you want to call it…the good ol boys. The two needn’t be mutually exclusive. I have read here repeatedly how wonderful the CFRG is how they have done such wonderful things in bringing to the forefront the issues that need to be addressed to bring Dartmouth’s expenses in line with their revenue. So if that is true then why can’t anyone trust that the CFRG will continue to do that great work even after an override is passed? I ask you Barry will you and your group continue to do what you are doing….I ask people who repeatedly post in support of the CFRG do you not believe in the abilities of the CFRG to continue their “good” work?? We get it you have no faith in our elected officials and town administrators but why don’t you all have faith in the CFRG to continue on while we save our town services so that all citizens young, middle aged and old in this town can continue on. I don’t see the need to bring our town to the brink of receivership to accomplish the goals of the CFRG??
All I hear from the administrators is talk about these contracts. So much so it takes time from what we need to be doing which is move forward.
How often does CFRG need to be told about 'these contracts'? I for one have heard more than I need to about them and guess what? I'm not a good ol boy, not a town employee or relative of one, just a taxpeyer like everyone else, but one who is sick and tired of BillT and his buddies on the CFRG trotting out this contract non-issue every time they feel the momentum slipping away from their slash and burn mentality.
It's ok though because come April 2the CFRG along with our new selectman BillT will provide all the answers. The 'contract' issues will all be resolved overnight and all will be right with the world.
I am not supporting protection clauses in personnel contracts but Ms. Gilbert is just dead wrong when she says they don't exist in private industry. Maybe she feels that way because her services were never deemed necessary to warrant one. But I can tell from first hand experience that retention bonuses and retention clauses in employee contracts are routinely awarded to people having critical skills necessary to keep an operation running. I think at this point in time it would be disastrous if town managers with their empirical knowledge were to suddenly leave in the middle of this crisis. That’s just my opinion.
Retention bonuses exist in the private sector, but folks are also held to a higher standard. If some of the Dartmouth "special contract" folks were out in the real world, they would have already been canned. It does not matter if it was mismanagement, poor planning, or just the "real world" as some claim - if a company gets into the poor shape Dartmouth is in, they clean house and start over. Let's hope we get that chance!
To Dartmouth said- Let’s put a warrant in front of Town Meeting abolishing the SB, Finance Committee, SC and all town managers and in it’s place let’s anoint the CFRG. After all they are experts in education, finance, law enforcement, human resources, road maintenance, landfills, dog catching, information technology, issuing meeting minutes, bussing, needs of our elderly, libraries, waterways, and open spaces. I probably forgot some of their other areas of expertise but I’m sure Barry will enlighten us. How amazing all this knowledge from a simple cabinet maker. How does he do it?
to dartmouth says - the DOR report that CFRG and BillT rely on for their support for arguments also says in multiple places that Dartmouth WAS NOT mismanaged. It says they have managed to maintain services for a long time without having to seek overrides. There is a lot of support for the financial management practices that the town has followed for years- yet this information is never discussed by BillT or the CFRG. They constantly bring out why arenet they following the DOR recommendations when time and time agian the SB demonstrates they are doing just that.
BillT was kind enough to link the DOR report in one of his blogs so folks should read the entire thing. There is nothing in it that says the town has been mismanged - just the opposite in fact.
But as they say the truth doesnt sell newspapers or get excitment going on blogs. Too bad.
Anonymous, He does it by being honest, calm and CREDIBLE! Something that the voters don't find in most of our leadership.
The point that Ms Gilbert made was that job guarantees in these contracts make it more difficult to effect changes in the structure of our town. Some changes may be needed going forward if the town is to save costs. Do you agree with that assessment?
It is the current town administration that have brought us to the brink of receivership, not the CFRG or the taxpayer. Some commenting here and in the papers feel that we arrived at this point while being well run and efficient. The two seem mutually exclusive to me. Bankrupt and well run?
I have posted about the DOR report here and, as recommended by an anonymous comment, you can read the entire report here. My take on the report is that we failed to adequately anticipate the future impacts of current decisions. Is that mis management? I posted about that here.
Bill why don't you, Ms. Gilbert and Barry come clean. You have an axe to grind with the town manager and treasurer. A grudge I suspect born out of MS. Gilbert's mistrust for anyone that disagrees with her. She speaks of the SB as if she wasn't a part of it. You probably would do the same Bill since the two of you are so much alike.
That's the crux our our disagreement then BillT. The DOR report cites a number of recommendations, they also concluded the town was well managed-that does not jibe with your assertion of mismanagement. That we are on the brink of receivership is not from mismanagement but from insufficient revenues-one cure to that is also mentioned in the DOR report and that is an override. Implementing every single one of the recommendations (underway presently) would not change the finacial position the town finds itself in.
Your's and the CFRG's role in exascerbating the problem by continuing to throw out charges of mismanagement is simply not accurate and helped to put us in this very position whether you and the cfrg like to admit it or not. That's how this 1 person feels. I may not agree with everything the town administration has done to date but to say they are soley responsible is nonsense. Something as cut and dry as the attempts to get the override passed for officer Mello failed in this town, so am I to believe that the administration is responsible for that too? It seems so easy to sow the seeds of mis trust in this town and there's been plenty of sowing going around.
Bill, I don't envy where you will find yourself come April 2, you will have your hands full.
Comments here today call for myself, Barry Walker, or the CFRG to come up with a plan for the town. This has been a pretty common theme here lately. It seems to me that these comments are a bit off the mark. The town employs full time, highly paid administrators, department heads, and supervisors to run our town and they are responsible for coming up with such plans. The Select Board is responsible for creating policy and giving direction to the managers. If the plan put forward is to lay off the people who provide services and keep the department heads, it is the Select Board that must ask for those plans to be recalibrated, if they think that is needed. I think that is the case for the current layoff plan.
Since I am running for Select Board, it is fair to ask what I would do. I would proceed this way. First, we need to know what our expenses and revenues are projected to be. That has been done. Next we need to have a discussion on what are the priorities for the town. Some are fixed by law, those are easy. Then going forward, priorities must be set for the remaining services. Each department must be given a cost reduction goal in dollars which matches up with available revenue. The department heads must be held accountable for delivering the high priority services assigned to their departments and to meet the cost reduction goals. The departments must allocate funds to the higher priority services and cut from those of lower priority. My observation is that the town managers and department heads have not been planning on how to deal with the budget reductions that must be addressed if override questions fail. Within the past month, this has changed but let's not forget the Police Chief came to the Select Board ready to ask for more funding and was told the Friday afternoon before his Monday presentation that his department would be cut.It seems to me he should have been planning from last year to face cuts. (Yes, I know the Select Board has decided not to cut the Police, but why would that decision be made so recently? The answer is there were no priorities set) Since I believe this cost reduction program will be needed even if the overrides pass, I think they should be doing it in earnest now anyway. One exception is the school department which I believe has been prudent in addressing the circumstance that they will confront if the school questions fail. What should come forward in the end is a plan that works within the available revenue, and contains a list of what will have to be cut and what will be retained. If we had that plan right now, instead of letters from department heads in the paper asking for continued funding, the work of convincing the voters to fund an override would be done. By the way, that plan, and it's presentation to the public, is one of the recommendations made by the DOR.
this cynic just posted my interpretation of the "repectfully submitted" letter by Ms. G. Does respectfully submitted mean that she refrained from spitting on the letter before mailing? The 'Dartmouth six' may have a different definition of respect.
Bill, every department head presentation that I heard from at various SB meetings listed what happens should the OR fail. I admit to missing the Police Department presentation so can't speak to that one. D.Hickox and the school department gave the most detailed presentations in my opinion, but the rest, library, verterans agent, Iacaponis, gagnes office etc., all have given detialed persentations on what will go should the override fail. They all also said the losses are based on their understanding of priorities and that most of the losses are no longer cuts to the 'fat' of town government but to the bone. When they start to talk like that I hear the real problem yet many simply say its a scare tactic. Well, it's pretty scary knowing our roads are going to continue to deteriorate becasue there is insuffcient funds to fix them so maybe it is a scare tactic, but based in reality. So no maybe CFRG does not have the burden of presenting alternatives but you will come April 2. The calls will continue to ceom to fix the roads, plow the streets, remove dead animals, ask why can't I borrow books from our de-certified library. You're answer will be? Idnetify the priorities and cut out the lower ones.
Bill-T, Barry and Diane-G please explain to me how it is responsible for the CFRG to post "Vote No" signs around town when you three claim to support some of the override questions? Bill I have to say your alliance with these two is disappointing and you've lost my support.
Do you really think that BillT, Diane & Barry have control over what signs people put in their yards! Please!
BlllT has said many times, this town needs an override to get us through this fiscal nightmare, but our town leaders need to act quickly to make changes in the way we do business. Since the SB doesn't have cojones to do the job, they have energized the personnel board to look into contracts.That has taken 8 months!!!! Time is precious and something Dartmouth doesn't have. It appears that the only time the SB acts quickly is when they act to get an override on the ballot! Yes, we need an override and in part because nothing has been done that equal dollars (except PAYT & Darkness,ha).
Kim, correct me if I'm wrong. The "No Signs" originated last override attempt and was one of the CFRG’s communication instruments used to persuade voters. Barry is always positioning himself as a public servant only out for the good of the voters he says. This same mantra is what Bill and Diane preach. When you go on the public speaking circuit, particularly trying to sway opinion, you have a responsibility for the outcome of your actions. If they believe, as I do, that such advertising actively works against the passage of the overrides and it is being done with instruments they created, they need to speak out against this behavior with the same enthusiasm they have shown towards attacking the town managers. If they don’t then there is no credibility in their platform.
Anonymous, BillT has spoken out and continues to speak out. I attended the VFW on Wed. night when he spoke. Perhaps you need to take off your blinders. I hope you're not one of our town leaders because it sounds to me that your focus is very narrow!
BillT wants responsible leaders who are accountable to the taxpayers. I'm for that!
He's open minded and willing to listen to ALL citizens, even you, I would imagine. He speaks common sense and has no political agenda.
Kim , not to worry. Come April 2 BillT will be able to get things to happen very quickly. What do you figure 3-4 weeks and he'll manage to make all things right with the world? Tear up contracts, re-write personnel policies (since you are obviously not happy with the volunteeres trying their best to make this happen), get rid of overpaid employees and administrators and replace them with those who will gladly take up the helm of this sinking ship for much lower compensation, sign up a bunch of volunteers to pick up the slack created by no animal control department, help out the 2 people left to run our 1 remaining soon to be de-certified library, repair our cruisers for the police department, pitch in to patch our roads or better yet fire the heads of these departments and let the workers left figure out what needs doing. Once we get rid of the youth advocate position and save that money he'll I'm sure figure out ways to make sure the troubled youths are kept in check.
So I dont think the NO signs will make much of a differnece in the vote, the damage has already been done, but I'm not worried, BillT will fix it, he's got all the answers just needs a chance to get in there to set things straight.
Anonymous, It's people like you who keep this town stuck in neutral. Would you care for some cheese with that whine??
Regarding the override no signs that have been put out during this campaign. The CFRG does not endorse them. The CFRG position is to endorse questions 1 and 7. We do not endorse questions 2-6. That is the group's position as voted on. Individuals both on and off the CFRG member list have every right to express their personal opinion including the right to post override no signs, S.O.S. signs, MacLean signs,Trimble signs,and others. I personally will be voting for Bill Trimble. In the school committee race, I have not made up my mind but am leaning towards possibly supporting Joanne Moniz and Joan Britto. I definitely will not support the candidacy of Phil Lenz. I wish Chris Perreira well and thank him for his past service on the school committee.
Barry, why do you support Joanne Moniz and Joan Britto? Is this more a vote against Phil Lenz than support for the other two?
Since CFRG literature lists campaign to defeat July override as an accomplishment (red signs having been used to do so), I doubt you will be able to effectively disaassociate from them this time around. Maybe it would have been better to collect the CFRG no signs to avoid the implication of being misrepresented by others. Something tells me you'll be pointing the finger at those who assume they're CFRG signs.
I think it's unfortunate that the Russell's Mills Grange is allowing a political-activist group to use the Grange to sponsor their group's event. The community would have been much better served if it were the Grange sponsoring the event. If that had been the case, I'm sure other candidates and residents would have viewed it as unbiased and been willing to attend. I'm disappointed in the Grange for having crossed a political line.
All you with the Save Our Schools (SOS) signs will also be responsible for the town side employees who get laid off if the government question fails. Maybe the Coalition should collect the SOS signs so that they are not implicated in defeating the town question and causing people to lose their jobs. Or maybe people should just get a clue and realize that people in town and even within groups have a wide range of views on most issues.
What a strange response.
The SOS aren't and never were Coalition signs.
Barry - what has Phill Lenz ever done to you that you so arrogantly say I will never vote for Phil Lenz. I'm not sure I have ever met a person who has given more than this man of his time, knowledge and talents to the school system. He has been to virtually every single school committee meeting in recent years,has volunteered countless hours on the schools building committee and knows the building needs,has along with his wife Jill raised thousands of doolars for an accessible playground at the DeMello school, is well versed in the school budget, state/school spending issues, student needs, has made his positions on all school items well known on his web site and thru multiple appearances. You could not ask for a better candidate for this position.
A Barry Walker anti endorsement of a school committee candidate such as what is writeen above means Mr Lenz automatically gets my vote!
Nevertheless, the Coalition is associated with those signs since they supported the last override attempt and will have to be held accountable if the town side override fails.
I think it is unfortunate the you do not believe in the right of your friends, neighbors, coworkers and family menbers to freely associate with whoever they choose and to organize as they see fit. Read the First Amendment to the US Constitution sometime. I think it is unfortunate that you seek to take rights away from those who disagree with you. Do you think that the PTO members who meet and organize in the public schools have no right to speak out on issues? Will you call for the schools to expel the PTO members who campaign for school overrides? Liz Olympio, Greg Jones, and Phil Lenz get the bum's rush at the next meeting then. Your attitude goes against the founding principles of this country. Why would any candidate not appear in public before a group of voters? Because some in the audience might disagree? This meeting is open to the public, all the public. There will be no loyalty oaths required. Go ahead, sit at home, stew in your own self pity, and whine about how the community would be better served. Don't even think about going out, standing up like a free citizen, and asking questions of those who seek to represent you.
Anonymous,
Are YOU to decide who others can endorse or vote for? Phil Lenz is just another puppet for the school administration, that is one reason not to vote for him. Some people disagree with his opinions on school items, there's another reason not to vote for him. Phil Lenz does not listen to all the community, only the override moms, there is a third reason not to vote for him. We need leaders on the school committee, not someone who will be lead around by the nose. That's four reasons not to vote for him. And on and on.
I would like to get the chance to hear Phil L. speak. How he is different from Joanne and Joan? I wish Phil L. would come to the Grange so that people could make an informed decision. The little I know of Phil, he seems like a nice guy. Candidates should be available to all towns people if they want to represent the town of Dartmouth S. C. After all, who is he going to represent?
Bill I find it appalling how you allow such negative and nasty postings about people on your blog. You will never receive my vote for to provide a vehicle for people to discuss issues is one thing but to allow such cruel things to be said about others is sad.
Yes, isn't it amazing that Bill T lets people continue to post nasty things about himself, Barry W., Diane G. and a group (CFRG) who only wishes for responsible, accountable government! He is truly a man who is patient and willing to hear from ALL.
You've got my vote Bill!!!!
Now, now, can't we all just get along!!
Start with what we have in common....we all love Dartmouth. How can we make Dartmouth healthy again? Brainstorming is a good way to solve a problem. People look at problems in many different ways. We need to throw out some ideas and talk about them.
Some will be more popular than others. In the end, we all want Dartmouth to be healthy and fiscally sound. I'm voting yes on some of the questions because I want to give my town time to make some changes. Let's be part of the solution, not the problem!
So it sounds like some of the candidates have declined the invitation to attend the CFRG candidate night? Barry did these candidates give you a reason for not attending?
Maybe they don't want to answer any of the tough questions.
As far as our present SB chair, she probably doesn't want to talk about the contracts she signed. I think she has a responsibility to the voters to answer any and all questions. She needs to answer question about the last three years, but it appears that she only wants to talk to her supporters. How sad!
to 'will be asking tough questions'
Those same 'tough questions' can be asked at the Rotary forum as well no different than asking them elsewhere. What's the big deal?
Its not just moms voting for the override. fathers have kids too and guess what? This father is voting for the override. Even going to vote for the police override becasue unlike another CFRG supporter suggested this week it is possible to vote for the police and the schools and everything else and still have money left over from a $300 bill. The writer's suggestion to vote for the police so the Cushman/Gidley kids will have someone to assist them should harm come to them was one of the most ludicrous letters to the editors I have ever read - well aside from the 'no override supporters on thhe fin com one' and yet it seems to reflect the level of thinking of many CFRG folks unfortunately.
Police or schools one or the other cant have both blah blah blah. Cushman/Gidley parents wont be thinking about their kids crappy education if their kid is injured and there's no police to save them. This is the high road the CFRG takes when making their flimsy case.
If the CFRG has no credibility and the majority of the town doesn't agree with them and wants to support the entire override, then what's the problem? What are you so worried about?
to 'no problem'
The mis statements that the cfrg spreads, from inaccurate accounting of separation benefits to misrepresentations about school populations (think back to last fall - 1045 kids in one building becomes an average of 400 because according to cfrg the building has 2 principals and the population was incorrectly stated by Mr Walker as 900) are easy headlines that are difficult to erase from people's minds. Willfull misprepresentations should be refuted whenever they occur. CFRG has the easy message and BillT's reluctance to correct these mis representations tars him as much as the cfrg. So, yes anytime these types of misrepresentations are made public it is cause for concern.
Let's talk about misrepresentations. Remember when the school administration came out with the $750k number that was to be saved by closing two elementaries? It then changed to $860k, then againt to $950k. Now the number to re-open them is in the neighborhood of $400k. Give me a break. Shawn Macdonald and company will tell the public anything to get what they want.
to 'slippery numbers'
You must have missed the half dozen or so recent public forums that described why the cost to re-open both schools has been reduced. I know you dont have to go to forums beacuse you have all the answers.
Well the reason it is cheaper is becaue compromises were made in an effort get the costs as low as possible to make this space available for use. There will be 1 principal to run both schools instead of 1 principal in each school, there will be 1 less janitor than before if I remember correctly, there will be less monitors than before as well as a few other positions that will not be re-hired. These items have shaved significant costs from the budget and reflect the kind of 'out of the box' thinking that so many people have been demanding. So no there is no slippery number manipulation going on, just a lot of thought and planning going into a plan that tries to make use of available space necessary to move our school community forward in the most economical way possible.
There are several more public forums and school tours next week for those that would like to have any and all questions answered in person. Learn the facts and decide for yourself.
To the anonymous comment that I fail to correct misrepresentations here, I submit that this is an open forum and if you want to refute something, have at it.
Saying CFRG!, CFRG! is not a presentation of evidence and convinces no one of anything except perhaps that some here have some paranoid tendencies. I am one of many contributors to the discussions here. I don't edit the comments or try to argue everything that is brought forward. You are free dispute with each other if you wish. My preference would be for a more mature and reasoned discussion but people contribute what they can I suppose.
Anonymous, If you look at the CFRG report on school administrators that 400 number you refer to is not an average. Much like Ms. Macleen couldn't understand how sick leave benefits were given out(and she signs the contracts) you just don't understand the report. Perhaps the next thing you would like to debate is how Mike Gagne's number of accrued seperation benefits at the present time don't match our projections. It is easy to see why Mike didn't understand that one. Projections are used for planning!!!!!
to cfrg member
you are correct the report actually states the following
Enrollment by School
Typical Elementary School 420
There is no mention of the 1000+ Quinn school in the report. When questioned on this Mr Walker responded (incorrectly)that he "knew about the Quinn School, it has 900 kids so I divided that number by the 2 principals and came up with an average of 450."
When corrected about the actual 1000+ number Mr. Walker smiled and stated "I knew they'd be screaming about that one"
So cfrg member I do understand how to read the cfrg report. I also understand the cfrg could care not one whit about the actual number of kids at the Quinn School or any other school in the system or their spokesperson would not be so cavalier about how he dismisses over 250 kids to come to his foregone conclusion, or how he manipulates his math to come to his mythical 'Typical Elementary Enrollment Figures'
Thank you for making me re-visit this particularly telling example of how the cfrg manipulates data to their advantage. It only strenghtens my resolve.
BillT, I have admired how cool headed you've remained in meetings and in this blog - not an easy thing to do!- and I do think this is a good trait in one that would be a member of Dartmouth's leadership team - so for that my hat's off to you.
However, I have also become disillusioned to a great extent by your unwillingness take a stand when mis-information is allowed to go unrefuted by you as the creater of this blog. I would not expect you to jump on every item that might be over the line or even most of them but it seems to me you should have some role in correcting egregious misstatements of fact no matter which side of the discussion the statements may be coming from. I think its an essential quality of leadership to stand up for truth when one identifies falsehoods. I know you've said here it's not your role but I happen to think otherwise on matters of great importance to the town, many of which get discussed on this blog. Too much passion is not a good thing as we have witnessed however I think some passion for things one believes in is essential when it effects people's lives, livliehoods and the education of their children Part of that passion includes standing for the truth even if in some instances it does not support a particular ideology.
to'cfrg member' one other thought on the cfrg report. The report states 'Typical Elementary School Enrollment = 420'
If there are only 3 elementary schools in Dartmouth and Potter School has 489 students, DeMello 433 students, Quinn 1045 please tell me what a typical enrollment is in Dartmouth Elementary schools. What type of math is there that comes up with a typical enrollment of 420? That's some magic math if you can do it.
When over one half of our elementary students are in one building housing 1045 how does that fit into a typical enrollment scenario of 410 students. Let me help you. It does'nt.
Anonymous, Funny you put words into Mr Walker's mouth but didn't he post on this blog that he supports re-opening one elementary school? Sounds like he does want to address the Qinn School enrollment issue. It's a shame you don't recognize that.
to cfrg member,
I put no words into Mr Walkers mouth. He said them, I repeated them. You questioned my understanding of the cfrg report, I replied with the ver batum words from that very report. I asked you to make sense of the math the cfrg used to make their erroneous conclusions on tyical elementary school enrollment - you changed the subject. Go figure?
Since you're fond of changing the subject I will respond to your latest assertion. Opening one school will not solve the overcrowding that is pressent in the Quinn School and the Middle School, opening both buildings will and also will provide suffcient space the the additional teachers to teach thus reducing classroom size and our much higher than averag student/teacher ratio. The additional space will also allow us to have room for the computers that are also a part of this question.
Have you had a chance to figure out the math question yet?
Nothing is perfect..I have heard too many times statements like "I would vote for an override if it was $3.5 million", or "I would vote to open one school but not both", or "I would vote for textbooks but not restating positions"
Enough is enough. There can be no override that will please all people. Everyone will be able to find some area where they disagree but we must look at the override as a whole. We cannot pick it apart and vote departments down just because we disagree with a small portion.
I think we all agree that Dartmouth is in trouble. Without the passage of each and every one of the override questions, our town, and hence, its residents will suffer. If any of the upcoming override questions fail, the damage done to our town departments will take years to repair. It is necessary to vote yes on every override question on April 1st so that we can continue to operate.
The CFRG and BillT will then have my support to continue to work with the town to address more cost saving measures.
I have been attending SB, SC, FC, and Town Meetings for several years now. I have also read the DOR report and the recommendations by the BRTF. I have also listened to the suggestions made by the CFRG. None of these bodies have been able to find gross mismanagement. Furthermore, these bodies have all made suggestions to improve our town and its finances, but none of them has been able to find enough areas that need improvement in order to fix this financial crisis.
There have been enough "eyes" on Dartmouth to see that we need each and every one of these overrides in order to survive.
to 'cfrg member'
you work out that math problem we were discussing yet?
Post a Comment