Moultonborough town meeting
Unfortunately I could not attend the town meeting. Does anyone know if the community center got voted down. I believe that was Article 6. Thank you. In the future I really wish just put these on the ballot for when we vote on the Tuesday prior, instead having to go to a meeting. Seems like it would much easier.
|
Yes article 6 was defeated 352/269.
|
cant understand why the selectmen can't take no for an answer. This bill keeps getting defeated and they keep bringing it back. Not sure also why they didn't offer a much cheaper alternative since if you read selectmen's minutes there were cheaper alternatives.
|
Quote:
My guess would be that this will be on the ballot again. But more than likely presented with elements of dire consequences if it does not pass it will cost more later, or a *grant (see definition of Grant) will be offered to defray costs if we do it now/ this time and make you feel your getting free long term money. *Grant: Usually seed monies presented to promote a project to get a program of the ground. Very often presented by folks that have a vested monetary background interest in the project. Often presented as Free monies and actually it is. However when the long term costs for staffing, maintenance, upgrades, new programs, and the list goes on & on comes to light. The free monies at the beginning pale in comparison to the long term costs. |
Article 6 was poorly conceived, drafted and presented by Selectmen who were in favor of it and by those who supported it. Despite a public (dis??)information campaign, including the sudden offer of child care at Town Meeting and a shuttle bus, the bond article did not get the required 2/3 vote, garnering 57%. There was a motion for reconsideration, which reconsideration, if passed, could not take place for at least 7 days. However, it was pointed out to those moving for reconsideration that since Article 6 was so poorly drafted, it called for the location of the community center to be determined in accordance with Articles 7 (Lions Club) or 8 (Taylor House). However, since Article 6 was defeated, Articles 7 and 8 were moot and never brought to the floor. Thus, if the motion for reconsideration were to pass and at the meeting to reconsider Article 6, Article 6 were to in fact pass by the required 2/3 vote, then what? A bond with no way or location to spend the money or perhaps just trust the Selectmen? Needless to say, the motion to reconsider was easily defeated. So what next? Who knows. There is a new member on the Board of Selectmen who defeated an incumbent Selectman who was very much in favor of Article 6 so we shall see. However, it should be noted that the community center proponents seemed pleased that for once, the proposal did get a majority vote, just not the required 2/3. They will be back and those of us who oppose the massive 6 plus million dollar recreation center Taj Mahal or community center and gym at the Taylor House will just as surely be back advocating for a community center at the Lions Club which will far less expensive and more responsive to the true needs of the Town. At the 2016 Town Meeting where a similar proposal failed even to get a majority vote, the proponents complained that the meeting was “hijacked” because there was a vote to call the question. There is an older thread, now closed, on this interesting topic from 2016. Draw your own conclusions. See https://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums...ad.php?t=20330
|
Quote:
|
What I cannot figure out, is if these people want the community center so badly, why don't they start some kind of fund or trust. They can begin raising some money. Ultimately it will cost the town in yearly upkeep and staff. I personally would not object to that, I don't think that would blow the budget out of the water. If the money could be raised to pay for the construction of the building and not have any bond to deal with. You would not have any objections from me. My understanding in Tuftonboro, they are doing their library addition. They had raised some money towards it and in fact I had heard they had a single donation of $500,000. It passed their town meeting and they got the go ahead. That may be a better way to go.
|
I would agree or offer a cheaper alternative. Putting forward as an only choice a nearly $7m choice was not wise
|
Vote these obstinate selectmen out of office. This repetitive nonsense will never stop until you get rid of this arrogance.
|
Quote:
It would be nice if an unbiased group could be established to do a true needs analysis study. This approach is unlikely since the gym people would want such a group made up of people who are predisposed to having a gym. There is a need for a better community center but the need for additional facilities such as gym requires further analysis. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
SB2 & spending
In the mid-90's when town started going to SB2, there was great fear from schools in particular, that budgets would be cut and the sky would fall. As it turned out, SB2 towns became the big spenders. This was especially so in towns/school districts where the boards learned to manipulate the default budget. After struggling for many years to make the default budget more transparent in SB2 towns, the best they could do was a requirement that the calculation of the default budget be read at the deliberative session. Unfortunately, they also decreed that Capital Reserve Fund additions had to be by separate warrant article, so the operating budget looks smaller until you add back the CRF.
For most towns, we know that Town Meeting and School District, where the big money is, will be in March, usually the second Tuesday for elections. Find out for your town, mark your calendar now and don't whine on the Forum that you had a conflict. Yes, I know some people have to work, and that's one reason SB2 was created. But, if you're an SB2 town, you still need to attend the deliberative session, probably on a Tuesday night. |
Not supporting SB2 does not mean wanting less people to vote.
It really means having informed people vote. SB2 diminishes the value and power of the deliberative session. Voters that go to the deliberative session hear the pros and cons regarding the articles up for vote. At the deliberative session they have the ability to make changes to whatever is being voted on. SB2 limits what can be changed at the deliberative session. To me it keeps the power in the hands of the involved and hopefully informed voters. Instead of having someone just voting yes or no on an article without fully understanding the impact of their vote. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
It just proves that some people like to complain about something they don't know anything about. I won't mention his name but it begins with "bigpatsfan".:D |
I would also point out that, while "being informed" sounds good, it is my right as a voter, if I don't want a community center no way no how, to vote against it without further ado. I doubt that many people attending the meeting have their minds changed about agenda driven topics.
Unfortunately, elected officials and groups with an agenda have well learned how to spin things to get what they want. It's like your kid explaining to you why they NEED a car. There's always a "good" reason. Arguments against it mysteriously never appear or are "reasonably" rebuked. And, like with your kid, "NO!" is interpreted as "not now" and invites retrying until you are worn down. |
What does SB-12 or SB 12 towns refer too?
|
I've seen towns pass some outrageous spending bills with a very simple tactic that would not happen with SB2
Authors of a bill stack the meeting with friends ,relatives and supporters The bill is delayed until very late at night until other townspeople have to leave because they are tired or have to work the next day Works every time. |
Quote:
|
SB 2, not SB 12
Quote:
The idea is to have more citizens take part in the decisions of town annual business. Communities who use this manner of elections are called SB2 towns. Dave |
Quote:
"RSA 40:13, Senate Bill 2, also known as SB2, (Official Ballot Referenda) is a form of town meeting that has two sessions. The first session (deliberative session) is for explanation, discussion, debate and amendments to the proposed operating budget and warrant articles. The second session (voting session) allows voters to cast an official ballot to pass/fail proposed articles." https://www.revenue.nh.gov/mun-prop/...assistance.htm |
Yes, the deliberative session is more restricted than traditional Town Meeting. You cannot amend an article to change its intent, e.g. adding the word "not". At Traditional Town Meeting, you can simply vote "No" and the issue is closed.
Most Moderators now announce at the beginning of a meeting, "The procedure is: We will not take up new business after 11:00 pm. A motion to reconsider must be made before we move on to the next item of business, etc. preventing the late night shenanigans of years ago. |
Wow... a personal attack right off the bat..... thanks Rusty.... also not sure what I was complaining about.
If my reasoning was incorrect then say why.. which is what TIS and jbolty did. I am not a fan of personal attacks. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:50 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.