Clearing up misconceptions in Templeton

Clearing up misconceptions in Templeton

To The Editor: 3/28/2014
Robert C Mitchell
Templeton

To The Editor:

I would appreciate a minute of your reader’s time to clear up some misconceptions and misinformation in your March 14 article,  “Crowded race forms in Templeton.” 

First, your readers should know I was not a selectman for several years and don’t believe I was selectman for even a couple of years, thanks to the recall folks.

Also, a little background information on the recall would have been beneficial for readers. A good question to pose to the community would be ... how many of the recall folks still think it was a good idea? It seems when folks found out it wasn’t about letting the people speak at all, but a very costly attempt to reinstate cronyism and overpriced legal advice their support disappeared.

It seems to me we now have very good legal advice at a reasonable cost, a Board of Selectmen where an FOIA request isn’t a requirement for information, and are working towards a town administrator position. All things I supported before the very costly recall.


I would also like to point out that had Mr. Bennett not recently resigned and remained in the race, I may have withdrawn, as I believe his commitment to transparency in our local government was just what this town needed.

It is also imperative that voters understand this is not a rematch between me and Mrs. Diane Brooks. It is a race for two positions with the two candidates that garner the most votes taking the positions. I certainly hope Mrs. Brooks does well. Although we do not agree on all the issues I believe in her sincerity and commitment to Templeton.

With four candidates taking out papers, it appears odd that only Mr. Columbus was afforded the opportunity to comment. While Mr. Columbus believes that his many “years, talents and experience” on the school committee make him a viable candidate for selectman — I disagree.

It is the fiasco with last year’s school budget, and the ludicrous proposal for a wood chip boiler at the school, that will have me voting for a change at the school committee.

For those uncertain about the wood chip boiler, I can only hope you will check on this states past performance with the state forests (‘google’ Massachusetts chainsaw massacre) and then consider the fact that there is little or no regulation for private land owner clear cutting.

Concerned citizens that are not at least a little skeptical about the projected savings for this project might also google, “reasons for not installing a wood chip boiler”.

With wood chip burners already at Mount Wachusett Community College and other locations, I am convinced we have enough capacity to deal with the local need for debris disposal and selective logging operations and do not see the increased cost for chips trucked from miles away in the projected savings.

My question to citizens attending the Special Town Meeting on March 29 is this. What happens to the forests and the supply and demand formula when other school districts decide a wood chip boiler is a good idea?

For those that wonder where I stand on a new elementary school, I will admit there is a need, however, it grieves me to see more money spent on a feasibility study by engineers that can make almost anything work on paper.

I personally believe a probability study by the bookies in Vegas would be a better indicator of whether to proceed or not. While I will vote for the feasibility study at town meeting, as a citizen I can only wish there was a finance study done first that might indicate whether the cost (tax increase) of financing was in a range acceptable to the majority of the towns citizens.

Without those numbers being right, there is little chance that I or many other citizens are going to vote for the building when it goes to the polls — which leaves me looking for bookie contacts in Vegas.

Then again, they probably wouldn’t come up with odds without those numbers either.

Robert C Mitchell
Templeton