After much hard work by the Boards of Education, Selectmen, Finance, and the Legislative Council, we are entering into deciding the outcome of our third referendum. The most important difference we see now though is that with the last vote of our cou
After much hard work by the Boards of Education, Selectmen, Finance, and the Legislative Council, we are entering into deciding the outcome of our third referendum. The most important difference we see now though is that with the last vote of our council we will add monies to a bottom line that was rejected by the people.
We have a monstrously deep, wide, and highly impacting economic contraction facing not only us locally but our state and federal systems. Surely this is the worst economic contraction since the Great Depression of the 1930s. We have a declining school population. We have high unemployment and high and continuing home foreclosures. We have reduced state aid. We have severe state deficits. We have decreased family incomes. We have escalating and very dangerous debt levels. We have two budget referenda where the people have rejected the proposed spending. Yet, in light of these severe problems we propose to spend even more next year than this year and raise taxes on our citizens by 2.5 percent. Rod Serling, where are you when we have so much raw material for you to reincarnate your wonderful series?
Economic contractions always have many dire consequences. Reduced revenues from all sources hurt all of us. But, my friends, we need to reduce our spending accordingly. This is the most significant problem we have in the current proposal because we are proposing to spend more than we are this year and this is impacting the raw nerve that is driving the rejections. In my letter of March 25 to all members of the council, I wrote, âIt is very sad indeed to say that our collective problemâ¦can be identified with one word: S-P-E-N-D-I-N-G.â
Additionally, we are treading on very dangerous ground when âyesâ means all is OK and ânoâ means add money. A No vote would have no meaning for those who want spending reduced. It seems that the benefit of a bifurcated â separate town and education â budget proposal with advisory questions should be a high priority of our next charter revision group. This potential lost meaning cannot be allowed to prevail.
For these reasons, this proposal must be rejected.
Paul J. Mangiafico
15 Kent Road, Newtown                                                May 30, 2010