Several comments have stated that the 2007 Department of Revenue (DOR) report found that Dartmouth was among the best run towns in the Commonwealth. That statement is a bit of a stretch of the findings. The full report can be read at this link,
http://www.town.dartmouth.ma.us/Pages/DartmouthMA_BComm/Finance/DartmouthJuly07.pdf
What the 2007 DOR report showed was a failure of leadership in the town. Without a doubt, the people who were running the day to day operations were doing what they were tasked to do, that was not the problem. The problem was that the town leadership, Select Board and Executive Administrator, had not planned for the continuing budget shortfalls that were occurring and had no plan to correct the problem beyond a massive override request.
True: the report did not find that the town was badly run. it states, "
Conclusion – Our review found that routine financial practices reflect department heads’ careful attention to legal requirements and internal controls. We believe that sufficient checks and balances are in place to ensure that town assets are protected from both human and process errors. Of acute concern for Dartmouth, as is the case in most Massachusetts towns, is the lack of structural balance and sustainability in revenue and expenditure trends. To further complicate matters, the use of the fall town meeting to supplement the budget places an expectation on the select board, executive administrator and director of budget and finance that budget fixes will be found to accommodate departmental spending.
At the time, Dartmouth voters were being asked for an $8.5 million override. The DOR report details how we got there,
Exhausting Certified Free Cash – At a 2006 fall town meeting, Dartmouth appropriated all of its available free cash ($1.7 million) to balance the FY2007 budget which had been approved in the prior spring. It had also created more revenue for operations by dramatically increasing its FY2007 local receipts estimate. In the past, when actual local receipts exceeded intentionally low estimates, the surplus flowed to free cash. Now, with no unexpended free cash to carry forward and lower expectations that local receipts will exceed high estimates in FY2007, the town should not anticipate the availability of certified free cash to supplement the FY2008 budget at a 2007 fall town meeting. It is our understanding that actual local receipts collected during FY2007 are projected to meet the aggressive target that had been set. However, surplus revenue, and consequently free cash, will be less than in the past and may require downward adjustment to revenue estimates for FY2008.
Essentially, the town had burned through its reserves in order to keep things running. When the reserves were gone, the whole process came to a screeching halt.
I believe this was done on the mistaken belief that ...
... the situation was temporary and if the town could get through a few lean years, everything would return to normal.
The DOR pointed out in their report this was not the case. The shortfalls were permanent and increasing. The DOR said this to the town's leadership,
While each of our recommendations will improve operations, there are several related topics that deserve special attention from policy-makers and management alike. Specifically, they are Recommendations 1-4 (Present Multi-Year Financial Forecast, Avoid Use of One-Time Revenue for Current Year Operations, Develop New Reserve Policy and Conduct Quarterly Budget Projections, respectively). Implicit in these individual recommendations is the larger concept of financial planning. A town-wide financial plan is the integration of multi-year revenue projections, adopted polices (such as reserve policies), and analyses of organizational goals and their long-term impact on expenditures. The purpose of this plan is to call attention to the community’s fiscal condition and the alternatives available to manage it. Whatever form such a plan takes, it should contain the following core elements:
1. Multi-year outlook (3-5 fiscal years)
2. Inventory of revenue sources and projected increases/decreases
3. Expenditure projections that reflect labor, expenses and planned service levels
4. Impact of financial goals/policies are assigned a specific dollar value
5. Integration of infrastructure investment based on approved capital plan
6. Current-year revenue and expenditure monitoring
7. Presentation format that facilitates meaningful communication to the public
The DOR recommendation was to get a fiscal plan, monitor how you are doing with the plan, and communicate that to the public. All things that were NOT being done by the Select Board and administration up to that point. Notice the DOR did not find fault with the planning because there was NO PLANNING. That was the fatal flaw, the failure to use forecasting to respond to the fiscal conditions that the town was facing. It was not a failure to execute a plan, it was a failure to have one. The town's leadership was to blame for that.
Posts
59 comments:
Would some of that fault lie with the FIN COM? Did the FIN COM approach other town leaders with a suggested plan? Do they do that NOW?
Under another post heading Anon 9:19 said : "Miller = Traffic enforcement camera's = $1.5 Million to the town each year and better safety"
Anyone running for public office and touting Traffic cameras as the solution to our problems should be aware that they are illegal in Mass. There is currently a bill in the House [ #3640, docket # 1564 filed 1/13/09 ] that has been bouncing around for years that would legalize this equipment .. to my knowledge it has not yet been passed. [ http://www.mass.gov/legis/hbillsrch.htm ]
While on the subject of 'statements', during the debate Mr. Miller said " .. You've been had. " following his assertion that parents paid Transportation and Athletic fees that went to build up the Stabilization fund .. tossing in Beach fees as well. This is, of course, nonsense.
As a Select Board member he should know that fees collected by the school department for athletics go into a school department revolving account specifically, and exclusively, for support of school athletic activities.
As a town meeting member himself he should have been aware that HE voted acceptance of Article #14 on Oct 16th, 2007, along with the rest of us. This article authorized, " ... the Dartmouth School District to collect and place into a School revolving fund all fees paid by residents for transport of children to Dartmouth Public Schools, and further to authorize the School District to expend said funds for the Educational Needs of the Students .... "
Under his ruinous spending policies, beach fees went higher and higher each year even as fewer and fewer people could afford to go the beach in their own town. Those fees have now been halved to levels not seen since the late 1990's.
If people are going to run for office and be in position to spend our money they darn well better know what they are talking about ...... It is just this sort of off-the-cuff incompetence that got us into trouble the first go around.
For heaven's sake let's not do it again.
Greg Lynam / Fin Com
Bill
Lets be truthful here, many of the financial problems, were a result from a small Town Meeting group, that had the "its for the kids" mentality. The finance committee would not recommend funding for a specific article, a motion from the floor would occur, and bang zoom the money was spent, against the finance committees recommendation. I fault irresponsible Town meeting members for not obeying the finance committees recommendations. I also think that the stone throwing from some finance committee members needs to be looked at, they blame past Boards and employees. They hold some causation when it comes to the financial mess the Town was in, they as a group were watching the purse strings. Remember also the only reason the Town has a surplus is because of the over rides, and the Pay as you throw, and the Lodging and meals Tax. If it were not for the TAXES we all now pay, we would be broke, because in the last three years Town spending has increased dramatically.
Greg Lynham tells the truth, even when the truth is unpopular. Voters need to carefully examine what he has to say about Miller's spending policies. He calls them "ruinous." Pay attention, folks. When he cwas on the Select Boards, Bumbling Bob was bad for our town. He remains bad for our town today.
Blaming a part-time volunteer board like the Finance Committee? Please! How about laying the blame smack where it belongs...on the full-time, highly paid administrators? All of THEM were appointed by Bob Miller and his drinking buddies.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO MR.LYNAM...THE FIN/COM SHOULD NOT BE INTERVENING IN POLITICS. THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO REMAIN NEUTRAL FOR THE SAKE OF ETHICS...WHICH IS WHY THEY ARE APPOINTED AND NOT ELECTED. THIS IS SO THEY ARE NOT PERSUEDED BY POLITICS.
MR. LYNAM YOUR LETTERS TO THE EDITOR AND COMMENTS ON THIS BLOG SHOULD BE UNDER THE PRESIPICE OF A RESIDENT OF THE TOWN AND NEVER INCLUDE YOUR STATURE AS A FIN COM MEMBER.
PLEASE FIN/COM REMAIN NEUTRAL!!!!
In answer to a previous question, it seems to me that the FinCom has been working hard to think long-term. Among other things, the FinCom developed a written policy for use of one-time (non-recurring) revenues. Other town leaders have signed off on this policy. You can review this policy by going to the FinCom's page on the town website:
http://www.town.dartmouth.ma.us/Pages/DartmouthMA_BComm/Finance/index
I am thankful for the work being done by the nine talented men and women who serve our town on this important nine-member board.
Bob Miller for selectman. You are so pathetic. You claim to be running to unseat Joe Michaud because you feel the selectmen should have appointed a police chief from inside the police department. How pathetic you are..seven years ago you were one of the selectmen who voted to hire a chief from outside but the dead beat outsiders where as bad as the insiders. You claim your running because you didn't like what they did to Mike Gagne, but your one of the selectmen who told Mike that if you had the votes you would fire him. How could you dip your fingers into the Water/sewer enterprise and remove funding to support other town budgets. That was illegal as hell. Why did you can a good man like David Vincent from the crapo hill landfill district?? Why did you can David Vincent from the B.O.P.W. and appoint Richard "golf ball Medeiros" to replace him on the two district?? If I didn't know better, I'd say you've been reading too many Stephen King books. Now you want to become a selectman....your pathetic.
Right on the money Mr Lynam. !
I take what you say with a grain of salt Greg. As an appointed member of a board using your position to back a particular candidate is wrong.
I support you all day long as Greg Lynam (private citizen) supporting whomever you choose, but when you put the weight of your office behind it I think it is back door politics and possibly illegal.
How can it be "back door politics" if Mr. Lynam is putting it right out there??
"Back door" politics is precisely what Mr. Miller et al were conducting when they granted the town employee the "protection" that was requested. Did any of the public know THAT at the time? Thank goodness it was exposed for what it was.
If you read support letters, it is not only Mr. Lynam that comments on candidates or writes in support of someone over another. Other people who serve on boards/committees have and do do so, as well. Is that "illegal" also?
Did you ever stop and think that maybe the contract back door deal might be considered or even be illegal, either under MGL or our town charter? I am not saying it is or isn't, but I would think THAT little transaction would be far more "illegal" than any comments Mr. Lynam has ever made.
I suppose you approve of that, though? It's perfectly okay to cheat the public. isn't it? Even better if they don't know about it.
Again, thank goodness those morally illegal, morally irresponsible, and morally unethical contracts were exposed.
To Anon 5:13
Your criticism is a fair one, but I felt a decision had to be made.
Because of my unique position on the Fin Com I am in possession of a perspective that most voters are not.
The responsibility of the Fin Com is to make recommendations to Town Meeting members based on the knowledge and perspectives we have by virtue of the investigations we do.
So the question for me became : Should I keep this perspective to myself and let people vote without knowing the facts ? ....
... or should I make a recommendation based on the facts and perspectives I have gained by my research and experiences ?
I choose the latter.
I do realize that by doing so I am inviting criticism but the alternative is to do and say nothing and by doing so possibly allow the town to slip backwards towards the very policies and tactics that caused the tax and service fee increases Anon 8:44 referred to.
Remaining silent would be far easier and personally better for me but I felt it would be irresponsible to sit idly by and not correct the mis-impressions and misinformation that could damage our town and limit its future.
I make no apology for giving voters facts on which to base their decisions - that's what we are here for.
Greg Lynam
Mt Lynam is an unpaid employee...the BOS is also unpaid. Mr Lynam's opinions are just that, his opinion. However he bases his opinions on facts, not BS. His comments are not illegal, nor violate any laws. He isnt slandering anyone.
Vincent from the crapo hill landfill district?? Why did you can David Vincent from the B.O.P.W.
Remeber the OLD DPW board they HIRED a OUTSIDE GUY, who SUED the TOWN for BIG BUCKS. This guys house hold furniture was moved from out of State using Town trucks, and Employees on OVERTIME!! All with Dave's approval
This is the same outsider who did not know the Town and every snow storm when he was in charge the ROADS did not get PLOWED!! Same guy that was in charge when the BLIZZARD hit a few years ago, and everybody was snow bound. Something to be said from hiring from within.
Would it be any different if the entire FinCom agreed with Greg? I'll bet they do.
Yeah I am sure that an outsider would never be able to comprehend the vast intricacies of our byzantine road network. I mean after all Dartmouth's roads are vastly different from all other roads and we don't have maps or experienced plow drivers so a supervisor from "away" could never understand how to plow our roads.We need to limit ALL hiring to only those currently employed in OUR town. Foreigners need not apply.
My issue wasn't Lynam's comments but the use of his title as a member of the committee in his comments.
Lynam the private citizen is one thing, Greg Lynam Fin/Com is another.
to 7:56 a.m. Ridiculous comment. How do you separate the two? Mr. Lynam is basing his opinions on his experience as a FinCom member who sees the intricacies of the budget and understands cause & effect. Would you rather he suggested people not vote for Mr. Miller because he just doesn't like him? Would that seem less political to you? I want town officials to come out and tell us when something or someone is not right. The last thing I want is for town hall to rally behind one another, pretend nothing is wrong and never let the public know about it. I am glad there are people like Mr. Lynam who are willing to speak their mind and inform the voters.
I am watching the ultimate ying and yang interview as Joe Michaud questions Scott Lake. Lake's only got hair on the top and Michaud only has hair on the sides. With their two heads together, it's a perfect head of hair.
I was watching those same interviews thinking this: "Joe Michaud is one helluva gentleman." This is the very same bunch that gave him a vote of no confidence a week ago. Despite that, Joe treated them all with the utmost respect. Just like he always does. Joe is a good man.
Did you see that pathetic Op-Ed piece from Bob Miller today? Sad. In a credibility battle between Bob Miller and Greg Lynam, Bob Miller loses every time.
It has been my observation that Mr. Miller does not like Mr. Lynam because Mr. Lynam has been doing his job in a professional and objective manner. I would remind readers of this blog that Mr. Miller's entire campaign has been based upon half-truths, deception, outright fiction and personal attacks. Anyone who supports him, in my opinion, is simply trying to take advantage of the taxpayer.
Millers Editorial was right on the money. Fact after fact with no speculation.
Yes, Joe Michaud is a real gentleman. Imagine sitting so politely through all of those interviews with the guys that are trying to cut his political throat.
Because he was not rude, in public, on TV, to three officers applying for a job that makes him a gentlemen? That's crazy. I've seen convicted criminals in court all dressed up be very polite but I would not call them gentlemen. What about when Michaud called three lieutenants "Deadwood" on TV. Then he lied about saying it in the news paper. Is that how a gentleman acts? A real gentlemen would have apologized for a careless statement not lied about it. No one has ever heard Joe apologize for anything. He's not a gentlemen he just puts on a good show.
The Chronicle reports that the Alternative Energy Committee will continue in the wake of Ron DiPippo's resignation. They will continue to look for energy saving projects. Next on the list of hopeful projects is to install solar panels on suitable public buildings. Ray and Saul plan to eliminate the expense of union workers by having Voke-Tech High School children do the work.
Wow, next thing you know, these two union busters will want to take advantage of the Sherrif's work release program. Quite a turn around in attitude from these two now that they are actually trying to make a project come to fruition.
To 7:55
Thanks for checking in Bob.
I have to comment on yet more nonsense in this mornings paper :
It was said concerning Mr. Michaud that he acted in, " blatant disregard for proper policy and procedure " in regard to Mr. Iacaponi's hiring for a couple days a week to help out in the Budget & Finance department until his replacement can be found and again in regard to $7,500 requested for the executive administrator search committee.
It would be perfectly proper for any citizen, whether a Dartmouth resident or not, to ask anyone we please if they might be interested in working a couple days a week to help us through this period. If the answer was yes then the proposal would be brought before the proper authority for consideration. That is exactly what Mr. Michaud did. The proper authority in this case is actually the executive administrator.
Under our General By-Laws, the Budget & Finance director falls under the authority of the EA. Section 4 [ page S-4 ] Sub-Section 4 gives the EA approval authority of employees in departments under his control. By contrast the Select Board is specifically prohibited by Town Charter Sec 3-2b from " become(ing) involved in the day-to-day administration of any town agency." As long as the salary line item approved by Town Meeting is not exceeded the EA is free to hire the resources he needs. The fact that he asked the Select Board is both an accommodation to his boss's and their desire to provide management with the resources needed at that critical time.
Turning to the $7,500 for the executive search. The Reserve Fund is the sole purview of the Fin Com. We do not need the vote of any board or the signature of any department head. The transfers are based on the legal requirement that it be unforeseen or of an emergency nature. The sudden departure of our Chief Executive Officer certainly qualifies on both fronts.
On 12/10/2008 the then interim EA, Ed Iacaponi, approached the Fin Com to advise us that a search committee for a new EA was likely, and that the forward funding of $7,500 would avoid delay in negotiating a contract with a search firm if and when the Select Board made the decision to go forward. We were also advised that the final total would likely top $15K. In fact on 3/12/2008 an additional request for $8,500 was made, and it was granted.
The request, no matter from whom it originated, served to speed the search for a new EA at a time when we needed to take firm action quickly and surely.
There was no impropriety in either action and in fact the actions taken aided in a smooth transition in very difficult times.
Greg Lynam / Fin Com
Hey, Bob Miller is an honest man of great integrity. He was good for Dartmouth for 2 decades, and will be good for Dartmouth now.
APRIL FOOL!
Hey, Saul, you gonna write your name in against Michaud?
When will Saul Raposo learn that he doesn't understand the process of town government well enough to write op-ed letters. This guy just continues to make a total fool of himself. Obviously, he is not capable of feeling embarassed. Has he EVER attended a FinCom meeting? I doubt it.
I thought I had my mind made up to vote for keeping Town Meeting. This clown is giving me second thoughts.
Anyone running for public office and touting Traffic cameras as the solution to our problems.
They are only illegal if you issue a citation, not if you issue a Town By Law violation. Get your facts straight, before you open your YAP
Saul slanders Joe Michaud in the newspaper this morning. Michaud is an attorney. I think Michaud owes it to the community to sue Saul Raposo. This is not the first time this buffoon has slandered. Remember his op-ed about secret meetings? Michaud has the means to put a stop to this irresponsible behaviour. The community deserves accurate information about our elected officials. I have no problem with differing opinions but blatant slander is another story. Saul must be sued.
I noticed that the anti-Michaud Op Ed pieces don't even mention the name Miller. Wonder why...
I do need to make a couple small corrections / additions to my post of April 1, 2010 9:07 AM
A check of the S/B minutes of 12/10/2008 show that they voted 3-2 on that date to make a Reserve Fund Request for $7,500 for expenses in connection with a search for a new EA. That is the date of the request Fin Com received and acted on 12/18/08.
The follow-up request for an additional $8,500 was made on 3/12/09 ... [ typo ] not 2008.
Lastly, Ed was not yet interim EA as I had recalled. Mr .Gagne' was still EA at that point.
I apologize for the errors.
Greg Lynam / Fin Com
To Anon 4:57 PM
You said : " They are only illegal if you issue a citation, not if you issue a Town By Law violation. "
HOUSE No.3640 would specifically allow local By-Laws to apply where can not now.
This excerpt from the bill:
" ..... any city town or political subdivision may, upon the acceptance of this act, employ a traffic control signal violation monitoring system and electronic speed monitoring system may be both mobile and fixed along any portion of any ways within its control and may promulgate local measures imposing a penalty .. "
"Local measure", shall mean the ordinances, rules and regulations adopted by any city town ... establishing a schedule of fines (for) failure by the operator thereof to comply with the laws, codes, regulations, ordinances, rules and/or other forms of legislation governing the traffic control signals ... "
You can read the bill at the following URL: www.mass.gov/legis/bills/house/186/ht03pdf/ht03640.pdf
Greg Lynam
The town should have brought legal action against Miller for his back room deals which were one of the many things that Miller did in blatant violation of the town charter. With Raposo and Miller you have Moe and Curly. Any volunteers to play Larry? Want to step up John?
Greg Lynam may be a lot of things. He's not a fool
Remember Saul's big campaign to get recall started in our town? Remember how he and Bob Carney stole the language word from word from the itty bitty town of Rochester? Remember how the whole stupid idea fell flat on its face?
9:52 a.m., Miller was just one of five involved in the contracts. Two Select Board members, two town leaders, one town employee.
The town should have brought legal action against Miller for his back room deals
Look get over it, the language in those contracts is no different than any other Municipal "managers" have in their collective bargaining agreements. This language was not pulled out of the sky, it was probably taken directly from another local "CONTRACT"
HOUSE No.3640 would specifically allow local By-Laws to apply where can not now.
I guess anonymous April 1, 2010 4:57 PM was correct, maybe you can not issue a citation, but can write a Town By Law violation from running a red light. I guess it could eventually be a revenue generator.
One only has to look at who and what Saul Raposo opposes and supports to analyze his judgement. He supported an $8.5 million override and he supported the recall attempt along with Carney.
Let's look at who he attacks and despises. Joe Michaud, Greg Lynam and Peter Friedman.
I would have to say his judgement is severely lacking.
Greg check all the minutes you want and try as hard as you can to exonerate Michaud but in reality all you are doing is looking like a fool. You Greg are a master with numbers but as far as thinking goes your a very dim bulb.
Having been pretty deeply involved in town government for awhile now, there is something that I can say without reservation. Anyone who knows anything about Greg Lynam knows that when someone else disputes Greg's facts, they will end up being wrong.
My advice to people like Saul Raposo would be: Before you write editorials that make you look foolish and even leave you vulnerable to law suits, give Greg a call to get the facts. He is the kind of person who believes deeply in government "of the people". He is also willing to take the time to help others understand how things work. I am grateful for the time he has taken to help me with questions.
And if you have a problem with Joe Michaud, give him a call too. My own relationship with Joe started with quite a spirited debate. We worked through those early differences of opinion and on tuesday I will not only be voting for him, I will be vigorously encouraging others to as well.
To Anon 6:50AM:
You said : "I guess anonymous April 1, 2010 4:57 PM was correct, maybe you can not issue a citation, but can write a Town By Law violation for running a red light."
No - not resulting from traffic camera data ... House Bill #3640 Presented by Kevin G. Honan is not yet law as far as I can tell.
It was referred to the Joint Committee of Transportation on 1/20/09. The Senate concurred and a public hearing date was set for 10/15/09 at 11AM in hearing room B1. There has been no further action taken that I can find. [ http://www.mass.gov/legis/legis.htm ] .
It is illegal to issue a citation or local by-law violation based on evidence collected from "traffic control signal violation monitoring system devices ". This bill, if passed into law, would change that but as of now the devices are not permitted to be used as proof of a traffic violation.
Greg Lynam
I, for one will be supporting Miller
To 8:37am, HI Diane glad to see your still in here.
"Miller was just one of five involved in the contracts. Two Select Board members, two town leaders, one town employee."
That somehow exonerates Miller from the back door deals? How desperate you are! No back room deals without Miller creating them and jamming them through. How about that for a reality check?
In today's OpEd, we find the S-T endorsing Mr. Michaud and Mr. Gracie for the SB. Good call for good reasons. Having watched in abject horror how previous SBs have run this town, I find the contrast of current SB refreshing, honest, open, dedicated and effective. Mr. Gracie will clearly provide more of all the above. I trust the voters will agree.
I think the question before Dartmouth voters this Tuesday with respect to Mr. Miller's election to the Select Board is whether or not Mr. Miller understood what he was doing when he participated in the contracts for life in 2006, and approved and signed off on them.
Did he understand the intent of the job-and-financial-protection-for-life (clause b) and the automatic contract renewal language?
Mr. Miller continues to deny they are lifetime contracts merely because the word "lifetime" is not used, and continues to quote from a heading on page 3 of the contracts, under "Renewal," rather than referencing the heading, "Compensation," Section 3 (b) on page 2, which clearly defines the parameters of the lifetime job and financial provision.
Did he understand the ramifications to the Town AND its employees, and the consequences to the taxpayer of these lifetime contracts?
The Town would need to continue employing the eight individuals granted these contracts and at their same rate of pay and same benefits, irregardless of the Town's finances throughout the years, thus paying out money it might not be able to afford.
Other Town employees would have to lose their jobs in order to retain these eight individuals' jobs.
Future Select Boards were bound to uphold these contracts.
The Town could potentially be run by these eight individuals.
Taxpayers would be paying these individuals for as long as they wanted to remain working for the Town, again even if the Town, using taxpayer money, could not afford to do so.
Did he understand that his actions might be questionable in nature, and the issue of lifetime contracts possibly subject to legal scrutiny?
Dartmouth residents were outraged when news of these contracts was revealed. The Select Board following Mr. Miller's defeat in 2007 voted to eliminate future lifetime contracts. The issue did get to court. Lifetime contracts to Dartmouth employees no longer exist.
Mr. Miller is an intelligent man who has risen throughout his career and who is a long-time instructor at Fisher College. It is difficult to believe he did not understand the situation he decided to participate in, and the jeopardy it would place upon the Town and taxpayers.
On the other hand, it is difficult to imagine that we Dartmouth residents have "been had."
Barring a third explanation we are not privy to, essentially, we are left to conclude one or the other. Neither is favorable, unfortunately.
I listened to the two "debates" on Phil Paleologos's program on WBSM this morning. I am proud of the high quality of candidates, Mr. Michaud, Mr. Gracie, and Mr. McDonald. They all spoke well and sounded like reasonable people.
Mrs. Days is right. The contracts smell bad. Miller was part of them. He's gone from town government. He needs to stay gone.
April 4th, 9:09:
My post was far from meaning to exonerate Miller!! I wanted to remind people that there were four others involved in this scheme and they shouldn't be considered free from the onus of this deception. They are flying under the radar.
Believe me, I am glad these contracts got exposed for what they are and I'm glad we have the Freedom of Information Act and the public's right to know so that names can be named and people interested in what went down can get the facts. Click on "contracts" on the left side of Bill's page and check out "Never-ending Contracts" and the links Bill provides if you haven't already done so. Names, details, etc. It's not just Miller and that is what I meant.
In my above post, the two possible conclusions I reached with respect to Mr. Miller's participation in, approval of, and signing off on the contracts for life bothered and disappointed me. As I posted, without a third explanation, I wondered what other conclusions one could reach.
After much thought, perhaps I have come up with a third and maybe even a fourth conclusion.
In all fairness to Mr. Miller, I wanted to post these two thoughts as well.
What is the possibility that Mr. Miller understood what he was doing and did it anyway, believing it was the good thing to do and the “right” thing to do for these eight employees? Mr. Miller did state that he felt management should have the same rights as the unions gave.
Or, what is the possibility that Mr. Miller understood what he was doing and approved of, and signed off on, these eight contracts for life on impulse?
We have all done something on impulse at one time or another, and hoped for the best or felt that perhaps we should have given our decision more thought before acting on it. However, once done, it remained done, with no going back.
I felt I needed to add these two, as well. Voters can draw their own conclusions.
If anyone has posted these same conclusions before me, thank you.
I will be voting for Joe Michaud tomorrow. Please join me.
Bob Miller said, "I am what Dartmouth is." Help us all if we go back to the past and he is our future.
I just cast my vote for Bob!!! Joe must GOOOOOOOOOO
to Apr 5 8:33
My apologies for misunderstanding your intent. Frankly, I am sick and tired of the "no big deal" philosophy that has been rampant regarding the Miller gang misdeeds. Sort of like the Republican minority in Congress. Complete state of denial of fault for starting the longest wars in US history, allowing banks and other businesses to self-regulate causing economic disaster, and trying to "privatize" social security including investing in the stock market. Among other brain f***ts. Yikes!
Post a Comment