Opinion

Will the opportunity to share your views be limited?

|John Salisbury|

The opportunity to vote on maintaining the current level of town services is limited by how the town warrant articles are written and approved by the New Gloucester Board of Selectmen. 

Monday evening, I attended the Zoom meeting of the board.  I would like to share a couple of thoughts about the issue of the proposed funding for the town community planning, library, code enforcement, recreation and public works programs. Like many others, I would like to see the current level of town services maintained.

At the select board meeting, the new town manager agreed to see if there is some way to find the financial resources to fund these programs at current levels. The board also voted to hold an informational meeting prior to ballot voting on the warrant articles July 14th instead of holding a town meeting. 

Should the town manager be unsuccessful in identifying how to fund the current level of services, or the board does not support her recommendations, here are my suggestions for a warrant article or articles. These suggestions will assure every New Gloucester voter the opportunity to vote on whether not to maintain the current level of town services.

First I would suggest the following warrant article or articles should be added by the NG Board of Selectmen to the town meeting warrant/ballot.

To see if the town will vote to fund any balance needed to retain the personnel services at current 2019-2020 levels for the library, planning, code enforcement program, the parks and recreation programs and public works, including similar pay adjustments being provided other employees, even if it requires a tax increase. (Note this warrant article could substitute a specific sum rather than “fund any balance needed.”)

The board of selectmen does not support this article.

The budget committee does not support this article.

Placing this article on the warrant will allow satisfaction on the part of both those support and oppose a tax increase. All of the voters, not just the select board and budget committee members, will have a direct say in the future direction of these town services.  If this warrant article is approved by the voters, it would supplement any funds appropriated in other articles that are approved on the warrant. 

An alternative to the article above would be to separate out each of the services in individual articles, i.e., library, code enforcement, planning, parks and recreation and public works.

My second suggestion relates to the Zoom informational (public) hearing that will be held. I think the informational hearing should be moderated by a neutral party, someone other than a member of the board of selectmen or the budget committee. The board of selectmen and the budget committee chairs should have the opportunity to speak first as each article is discussed so they can defend their recommendations. Then any citizens participating in the informational meeting should be allowed to speak. 

This procedure is very important. Although the informational meeting is not a town meeting, voters will have the same opportunity to be heard as they would have at a town meeting.They will then be more prepared to subsequently vote on the warrant articles by ballot on July 14th and have the satisfaction that their views have been heard. There will be no voting at the informational meeting even though everybody would have the opportunity to speak.

I appreciate your consideration of these views.

John
John Salisbury
417B Sabbathday Road
603-731-0638