Friday, May 4, 2012

2 nites of advisory meetings

I just wanted to let people know what had been happening at the last two nights of advisory meetings and a note that there is another one tonight which has been change to the High school Library.
First let me say the advisory board is doing the best they can with the limited information they are getting from the selectmens office and all the different drafts of the warrant articles with changes that the boards that submitted them didn't make  - although member Kate Fulton kept saying that "this is how the selectmen voted" I have attended every meeting and I don't recall any votes on changing the wording. No one seems to know who made the changes. No one from the selectmens was at the meeting last nite. And if you all remember the selectmen's meeting that the TM warrant was opened and voted on again - Mr Columbus didn't allow anyone to speak (except selectmen)
until the end of the meeting after all the agenda items had been voted on.(take note mcgann family)  Mr Bennett tried to address the fact that things had been changed but they pretty much overruled him - so much for a board working together (Mr Heaney)
One important article the Selectmen (not Bennett) submitted was to reverse the article that was voted unanimously  at the STM last fall for the ambulance dept to keep their reciepts seperate. the way it was suppose to be since 2006 but was never allowed.  Then they changed the articles that Tom Smith had subitted to be 2 1/2 overrides. this is not how it is suppos to be.
The budget articles (# 31 & 34)(both municipal and school) ask for the funding and the override in the same article and as Mr Bumpsy Dennis explained a Yes vote votes in the 2 1/2 override a NO vote - votes no budget at all not even minumum funding - Thank you Mr Dennis for explaining this this to us. To view the warrant for the Annual TM click here http://www.templeton1.org/docs/2012_Annual_Town_Meeting_Warrant.pdf
For the special TM articles click here http://www.templeton1.org/docs/5.15.12_Special_Town_Mtg_Warrant.pdfow

and a note to Ms McGann you stated that you make decisions as a team for the best of all taxpayers. well is not letting anyone (including other elected Board members - assessors, planning, sewer, etc.)ask questions or make statements at a selectmen's meeting - as Mr Columbus did on April 23rd.  the "best for the taxpayers? Is NOT giving out information to the other boards/depts in the best interest of the taxpayers  and "working together". Did you know that the selectmens office  refused to give Mr Bennett(a selectmen) and Dan Keeney Chairman/assessors the latest copy of the articles -
Chief Whittaker and Alan Mayo/Cemetery were not given the up dated dept budget numbers before their meeting with Advisory Board - actually the accountant stated that the "Green sheets" were not to be released to anyone - but thanks to a person (employee) who did get them and got them out to the dept they could and the advisory board. So much for open government. I want to make a note that in the three months that Mr Ritter was here and the few months that Jean F was acting TC - Depts and taxpayers alike had no problem getting info but now we are back to how it has been the last 7 years. Information should not be kept from   Julie had 2 meetings (both addressing only one thing -dismissal of CS) that on the advice of Town Council she did not allow people to speak.  Mr Columbus has NOT allowed people to speak on a lot more issues at selectmens meetings.
So in closing all I have to say is if you are not attending the selectmen meetings and the advisory board meetings you really do not know what is going on - or should I say you do not know how difficult it is to be a department/employee/taxpayer with the current Board of Selectmen (Jeff B excluded)

13 comments:

  1. Well said. Let's ask Bob Columbus if K & P advised him not to give the info. to all selectmen, and, if they also told him to stop people from speaking about anything that doesn't agree with his opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  2. thank you Mr. Columbus and your recall buddies who were going to move forward and change evrything back so it worked and was fair. Don't feel bad people, a selectman could not get an answer to how do you ask two things in one question and come up with one answer?? Where is this professional management Bob spoke of? We really do need a prop 2 1/2 override (tax increase) I know it sucks and is bad timing, but with some adjustments on town floor and a tax increase we just may be able to keep the boat afloat while we come up with some honest fixes to this mess. One thing is for sure, with or without a prop 2 1/2 override, the selectmen should lead the way and take no money for this year, set the example. but no, Bob and the gang say give us a tax increase and we can double our salary. A real plan from a man who says he will go after grants to help the town but the grant writing fees expense line is budgeted at zero, where will that money come from Bob and who will be writing these grants?

    ReplyDelete
  3. how do we go about doing away with certain costs, like the unaffordable housing director salary, can we pick these things apart at the TM or would the whole article that has that included have to be turned down?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I just want to remind people, the few times that Bob let people speak it did not mean anything. He showed no regard for what we, or anyone said. He just turned around and went forward to what he had planned to do in the first place. Talking about sticking to the script. Well Mr McGann, I can't speak for Julie, but I know that she is a very intelligent woman. She has more brains in her little finger, than the "Recall three" all together. I will stand by her through thick and thin. The only woman to be on a town board was Gladys, that had the brains to do the job. Running the Town is a big business. With what is going on with the warrent, it is another big reason to tell Mrs .S. to go home and stay there. It is time to retire, It shows she can't do the job.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You know, it's really interesting how people change their minds based on one meeting, or one conversation or one incident. Let's hope that these people who heard about the one meeting in which public participation was not allowed under Julie are as quick to judge Mr. Columbus' performance. Attend a Columbus meeting and your mind will be made up for sure. There is not doubt that if people had an accurate sense of Julie's collective contributions versus Bob's collective record, this election would be a historic landslide. Don't assume Julie is "evil" if the only thing you've ever seen or heard is the September 26th 2011 meeting. Take a second, third, or fourth look and I guarantee you will learn a lot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is absolutely correct dce!! That is just ONE meeting that people are judging Julie on. Her conducting of that meeting in that manner was a necessity for that evening on advice from town counsel. She is a very fair, honest, intelligent woman who will work for you & with you on Any issue. She has been trying to stabilize the town with the limited means at her disposal. No where is there an "evil" bone in Julie's body. This is how the negative campaigning always goes. They try to paint a picture of the opposition in a skewed way that the general public, not really deeply involved, will grab onto & "tell all their friends". Yes, those who are viewing Julie in a bad light do need to take all those additional looks that dce suggests & see that she is working for the town & not against it, as the current majority of the board seem to be. You bet, do some more looking at how the meetings are run with this current chairman. I don't think Julie has ever needed a police escort to her car because she did the townspeople wrong. Why is it that the 3 stooges have had to ramp up this security. It's Not because the people have gone rogue. It is because the Board has gone rogue & the citizens are tired of being used & abused for the personal gain of a few. That is another negative false tactic that some have said that the Farrells are doing this for their own gain? Well, I challenge ANYONE to find us any evidence of the Farrell's wrongdoings & shafting the town!! One would be looking down the wrong path on that one. I think you might want to follow the other trail that leads to BC, JS, CS, & their gang. Then I believe, you would see where there might be some personal gaining!! That is my opinion from what I have witnessed & from who has "visited" me because they didn't like that I said we have to stop spending money on personal salaries, benefits, retirements at this time, as well as, curb other unnecessary costs in a critical time of job loss & hardship. I don't think any of the rest of us should be footing the bill for the town's retirements. They should have to set up their own 401Ks (and possibly health ins) like the rest of us, if you can even do that these days. I am not against fair pay & other benefits but when you are in economic crisis & decline you have to change your ways like we all have had to do. Many people have become "spoiled & feel entitled". We can't afford these ongoing overrides either. People are tapped out. At this rate we will no longer have any taxpayers to pay for all that is wanted & not actually needed at this time! I hope people who say that they have followed Templeton's saga really are looking at the whole picture & Not just one meeting. Thanks for considering my opinions & views. I hope many others continue to voice their's & try to help make fiscally responsible decisions by voting solidly on the real issues or we will never turn this town around.

      Delete
  6. To answer your question DO, yes you can change a line item by line item part of the article. Make a motion to amend the article, change whatever line item to any amount including zero and then vote on the amendment then vote on the amended motion, your amendments must be in writing and given to the moderator. It just is easier and simple if you take care of it before hand but Mr. Columbus and company are protecting friends. All other elected salaries except selectmen got cut to zero, besides town clerk. affordable housing stays the same, even the tree warden is getting 5 thousand dollars even when the mass general laws says you can pay him what you want like 5 hundred bucks. no disrespect to anyone but when the boat is sinking, you need buckets not oars.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Of major concern:
    The selectmen's balanced budget is based on assumptions. The figure is $4,597,673 is based on the ASSUMPTION that the prior article - article 30 will pass. Article 30 is the article to rescind the ambulance fund account...about $170,000. The balnanced budget is out of balance by $170,000.

    To add to the fun, the article for the town charges- article 31 is combined with a proposed 2 1/2 override with no dollar figure.

    Hopefully, this can be corrected before town meeting. Who wants to give odds on that one?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Much discussion about the wording of the town meeting articles. How much did the town pay K&P to review these articles? Why are these articles so poorly written? Who changed the wording of the articles?

    Does the advisory board have the ability to postpone TM? Apparently not!
    Joe Boyd - how can advisory board express to the town that these articles are wrong? Will you be astringent advocate for your recommendations? Pre-town meeting is where votes will be taken by e Advisory Board.

    Another good question-

    Article36-to raze Templeton Center School...article 48 to raise a sum of money for repairs and/or maintenance at Baldwinville Elementray and Templeton Center School

    Are we going to paint Templeton center before we raze it ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow, how bad is that!! Sounds about right with the decisions that have been made recently that make current Templeton "leadership" look like fools! Thanks for pointing all these things out, Julie...

      Delete
  9. Good point- how will the town pay for 252 Badlwinville Rd. There is no article to address repaying the 1.9 milllion short term loan of which over $600,000 has been expended. We were supposed to repay this loan with "savings" from moving into one town hall and not paying rent. We were supposed to repay this loan under the levy limit- which means we will need to cut from the operating budget. Or have another town meeting and request an override or debt exclusion to repay the loan for this boondoggle.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I just got back from the advisory bd meeting. The articles are a mess. I do not see how we can have a TM with them like this. I can't imagine the AB taking motions from the floor, to straighten this mess out In the business world someone would get fired for a mess like this.

      Delete
    2. Someone is going to be fired on Monday! And there should be more to come.

      Delete