Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Winnipesaukee Forums > General Discussion
Home Forums Gallery Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Links Calendar Register FAQDonate Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-17-2019, 08:03 AM   #1
C-Bass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 57
Thanks: 1
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Default 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.
C-Bass is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to C-Bass For This Useful Post:
wildwind (04-20-2019)
Old 03-17-2019, 08:56 AM   #2
DEJ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 328
Thanks: 242
Thanked 179 Times in 80 Posts
Default

Yes article 6 was defeated 352/269.
DEJ is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DEJ For This Useful Post:
C-Bass (03-17-2019), phoenix (03-17-2019), whalebackpoint'r (03-17-2019)
Old 03-17-2019, 12:26 PM   #3
phoenix
Senior Member
 
phoenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: phoenix and moultonboro
Posts: 1,122
Thanks: 14
Thanked 144 Times in 104 Posts
Default

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.
__________________
it's tough to make predictions specially about the future
phoenix is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to phoenix For This Useful Post:
ACME on the Broads (03-17-2019)
Old 03-17-2019, 01:09 PM   #4
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 698
Thanks: 433
Thanked 275 Times in 155 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenix View Post
cant understand why the selectmen can't take no for an answer.
Because you need new selectmen.

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.
Top-Water is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2019, 01:44 PM   #5
winni83
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 213
Thanks: 15
Thanked 87 Times in 53 Posts
Default

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
winni83 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to winni83 For This Useful Post:
Rusty (03-17-2019), Sue Doe-Nym (03-18-2019)
Sponsored Links
Old 03-17-2019, 02:49 PM   #6
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,664
Thanks: 461
Thanked 825 Times in 574 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenix View Post
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.
That's what they do. Bring it up again and again and again until it passes.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2019, 07:16 PM   #7
C-Bass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 57
Thanks: 1
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Default

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.
C-Bass is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to C-Bass For This Useful Post:
Top-Water (03-17-2019)
Old 03-17-2019, 08:24 PM   #8
phoenix
Senior Member
 
phoenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: phoenix and moultonboro
Posts: 1,122
Thanks: 14
Thanked 144 Times in 104 Posts
Default

I would agree or offer a cheaper alternative. Putting forward as an only choice a nearly $7m choice was not wise
__________________
it's tough to make predictions specially about the future
phoenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2019, 08:38 PM   #9
Irish mist
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 633
Thanks: 87
Thanked 59 Times in 33 Posts
Default

Vote these obstinate selectmen out of office. This repetitive nonsense will never stop until you get rid of this arrogance.
Irish mist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2019, 02:59 PM   #10
Sue Doe-Nym
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 442
Thanks: 246
Thanked 117 Times in 75 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C-Bass View Post
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.
Unfortunately, in Moultonborough the Rec Dept can only think in terms of using OPM or taxpayer money. On various occasions the idea of raising money has been suggested and has always been turned down vehently by the gym proponents. The Nick in Wolfeboro was done with donations as was the new facility in Fryeburg and the Moultonborough Library had $700,000 raised by private donations. In spite of these facts, the gym advocates, especially the Rec Dept director, the just defeated selectman, and their backers are adamant that they are entitled to an expensive unjustified facility.

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.
Sue Doe-Nym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2019, 03:29 PM   #11
Lakes Region Guy
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 8
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C-Bass View Post
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.
If the town had passed SB2 a few years back you could have voted for this article on the ballot. At the town meeting there was a total of 621 votes cast. On the ballot on Tuesday there was a total of 1366 votes cast. Which one do you think is more representative of the towns people. I go with the 1366.
Lakes Region Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2019, 03:34 PM   #12
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 2,147
Thanks: 191
Thanked 1,374 Times in 554 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenix View Post
I would agree or offer a cheaper alternative. Putting forward as an only choice a nearly $7m choice was not wise
For that price you can have a community center that can double as a DPW building.
MAXUM is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MAXUM For This Useful Post:
garysanfran (03-18-2019)
Old 03-18-2019, 03:45 PM   #13
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,664
Thanks: 461
Thanked 825 Times in 574 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lakes Region Guy View Post
If the town had passed SB2 a few years back you could have voted for this article on the ballot. At the town meeting there was a total of 621 votes cast. On the ballot on Tuesday there was a total of 1366 votes cast. Which one do you think is more representative of the towns people. I go with the 1366.
Exactly!! Why anybody would vote down SB2 is beyond me. Obviously they WANT less people to vote.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2019, 05:28 PM   #14
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,790
Thanks: 534
Thanked 542 Times in 348 Posts
Default 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.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2019, 05:37 PM   #15
bigpatsfan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 84
Thanks: 21
Thanked 15 Times in 9 Posts
Default

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.
bigpatsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2019, 05:51 PM   #16
Lakes Region Guy
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 8
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Descant View Post
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.
The deliberative session is held in February and is conducted similar to a town meeting. The articles are discussed and/or amended before they are voted on to go on the general ballot in March. As far as the default budget being manipulated by the governing board this is a fallacy by those who are against SB2. I'm not sure why the some towns people are against SB2 as it allows the handicap and shut ins to exercise their democratic voting right through an absentee ballot.
Lakes Region Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2019, 06:17 PM   #17
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,664
Thanks: 461
Thanked 825 Times in 574 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpatsfan View Post
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.
Not quite following you. SB2 diminishes the value and power of the deliberative session? How? SB2 limits what can be changed at the deliberative session? How? If you are an SB2 town, you have a deliberative session at which people that attend (usually very few) can amend any of the articles being voted on. Then on voting day, the public votes on what was finalized at the deliberative session. So I can't understand what you are trying to say.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2019, 06:44 PM   #18
jbolty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 401
Thanks: 96
Thanked 135 Times in 69 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpatsfan View Post
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.
At the same time the reason the heavily involved tend to be so is they are more likely pushing an agenda. What gets on the ballot and how it's worded are a huge factor in whether it gets passed or not.
jbolty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2019, 07:57 PM   #19
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
Not quite following you. SB2 diminishes the value and power of the deliberative session? How? SB2 limits what can be changed at the deliberative session? How? If you are an SB2 town, you have a deliberative session at which people that attend (usually very few) can amend any of the articles being voted on. Then on voting day, the public votes on what was finalized at the deliberative session. So I can't understand what you are trying to say.
Thanks tis, well said.
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".
__________________
It's never crowded along the extra mile.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Rusty For This Useful Post:
tis (03-19-2019)
Old 03-19-2019, 07:50 AM   #20
jeffk
Senior Member
 
jeffk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Center Harbor
Posts: 857
Thanks: 142
Thanked 222 Times in 133 Posts
Default

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.
jeffk is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to jeffk For This Useful Post:
tis (03-19-2019)
Old 03-19-2019, 07:56 AM   #21
C-Bass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 57
Thanks: 1
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Default

What does SB-12 or SB 12 towns refer too?
C-Bass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 08:35 AM   #22
SAMIAM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 2,433
Thanks: 143
Thanked 991 Times in 370 Posts
Default

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.
SAMIAM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 08:52 AM   #23
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,664
Thanks: 461
Thanked 825 Times in 574 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SAMIAM View Post
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.
It's true. And in Tuftonboro a few years ago, they voted something down, then after most of the people left, they brought it up again to reconsider. And of course it passed. That was one of the sneakiest ones I have heard of.
tis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 08:53 AM   #24
upthesaukee
Senior Member
 
upthesaukee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Alton Bay
Posts: 4,752
Blog Entries: 2
Thanks: 1,452
Thanked 1,452 Times in 792 Posts
Default SB 2, not SB 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by C-Bass View Post
What does SB-12 or SB 12 towns refer too?
Some years ago a bill was filed in the legislature as Senate Bill 2, SB 2, which in the simplest of forms allowed towns to change the manner of voting on the annual Town business meeting from Town Hall meeting where attendees debated articles and voted on them in person to a ballot on the articles at the same time as the election of officials. The finalization of articles takes place at deliberative sessions about a month before the town elections.

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
__________________
I Live Here... I am always UPTHESAUKEE !!!!
upthesaukee is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 09:07 AM   #25
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C-Bass View Post
What does SB-12 or SB 12 towns refer too?
It's SB2 and not SB12.

"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
__________________
It's never crowded along the extra mile.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 01:44 PM   #26
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,790
Thanks: 534
Thanked 542 Times in 348 Posts
Default

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.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2019, 09:17 AM   #27
bigpatsfan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 84
Thanks: 21
Thanked 15 Times in 9 Posts
Default

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.
bigpatsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2019, 09:40 AM   #28
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpatsfan View Post
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.
I apologize if you think I attacked you. Sometimes I should be less critical of other opinions and just let it go.
__________________
It's never crowded along the extra mile.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.31280 seconds