.

Fiscal Responsibility Cuts Both Ways Against Both Political Parties

The biggest reason for tax increases in Barrington the last four years is owned by the Republicans, so some of the demands by them to reduce spending to save money ring a little hollow

Keep your eyes on the prize my father always said.

I was at my nephew’s wedding over Labor Day weekend up in New Hampshire near Dartmouth where both of my nephews went to school. That was odd because both the bride and groom came from the Midwest.

At the wedding I got to meet a lot of my sister’s friends from where she used to work. I faced this meeting with some trepidation.

My sister, you see, was a school nurse and finally the school nurse administrator for the city of Madison, Wisconsin. She is a long- standing union member and supporter.  

You may remember Madison, Wisconsin teachers from earlier this year, the angry
protesting teachers who had their union stripped away, which led to the
attempted recall of Gov. Walker. Teacher unions and what teacher’s pay is can be
a very sore subject with many of them. 

My sister, knowing many of my feelings from my writings here in town, made
sure not to seat us near any of these teachers. She need not have worried. I think
what was done to those teachers in Wisconsin was terrible.

When I spoke to those teachers, who after 30-35 years were making about $60,000 a year, with a pension that was less generous than ours, I told those teachers what Barrington teachers make and they were shocked!

Barrington teachers, I told them, make much more. I told them that 80% of our
teachers make in excess of $82,000 a year without the bonuses for coaching or
clubs etc. That many teachers make in excess of $90,000 per year when they
retire. To which I got the responses of “I lived in the wrong part of the
country” or “And they took OUR union rights away?”  

No my sister was wrong. I feel the Wisconsin teachers got the short end of the stick, and we all got along fine.

As of the time of my writing this, Chicago teachers are out on strike for over a week. The news if full of stories of how the AVERAGE Chicago teacher is paid $75,000 a year, making Chicago teachers among the highest paid teachers in the country.

Again remember in Barrington that 78%-80% of teachers are at the top step making a base of $82,000 plus extras to make more. If Chicago is among the highest paid teachers in the country, what does that
make Barrington teachers?

And I would not mind so much the pay if it were for outstanding teachers (of whom I have met many here in town) and not average teacher (of whom I have met quite a few here also). I would feel better if they were not all paid the same just for showing up.

I have been reading the comments in the Patch about Barrington politics, now that it is the political silly season. I have been reading how we subsidize affordable housing with our tax dollars again and again. This of course is true. And it is being used as a wedge issue to get a Republican majority in the council, portraying the current council as left wing big spenders.

The issue of fiscal Republicans being big on fiscal responsibility would be more believable and genuine if the same people were more concerned about all new expenses to the town. Take the new community center, which I
support by the way, costing $5 million dollars.

The Republicans do not complain as much about that. Is it because the community center committee is chaired by Town Council candidate Margret Kane? (She has said nothing that I have seen on either issue and this is not meant as a criticism of her, but the people who want party control of the Town Council at all costs on both sides)

And they are the people who criticized the new beach house, because of the cost of the maintainenance and up keep, but no word about the cost of the up keep of the community center. And the opposition of a municipal court when, as Dean Huff who everyone respects has structured it, cannot cost us any money but could make us money.

Republicans are opposing it because no one knows how much profit we will make? Or maybe the reason the Republicans oppose it is because it was proposed by a Democrat? I hate the silly season.

I happen to be for all of these things. I think the town should spend money to help its residents, in moderation. I believe that Barrington needs a community center and a better senior center. Compare ours to the one in Warren, you know that smaller poorer neighbor to the south. Our senior center facility is an embarrassment. Ours is a joke.

I believe in controlling its costs, which is exactly what Margret’s committee is doing. I believe that the bath house was a good addition to the town. I believe that the municipal court is a good idea, it is well thought out, and there must a profitable reason why most towns have one.  I fear,
as many do, that the judge would be a political appointment. That worries me.
But if we can make money and add a convenience to our residents, why not do it?
Fight the issue of who gets appointed and let the town take the money.

And I believe in affordable housing, in moderation, though for the life of me I can’t see why we need it. Why are we (the state) forcing the town to build more affordable housing when we have many units begging for tenants in
town already, except for those which are nearly free?

Also why is it when I drive by Sweetbriar ,every unit there has a nicer car than my daughter, who, like so many graduated college, moved back home is only working part time and can’t find a job in her field. Why are those heavily subsided units enabling them to afford a better car than her? If you can’t afford rent, why can you afford a nice car and the insurance that comes with it?

We are building more to make money for developers. That is not the reason or purpose of affordable housing and while I support the concept, the issue needs to be reworked.

But all of these issues are just smoke.  These are not the big issue in town. The total expenditures of all the issues above total only less than 1% of the budget in
any given year.

The teachers contract is 66% of our budget and four years ago it
was pushed through, by surprisingly, Republicans, not Democrats, earlier than
needed just before Republicans lost power.

The contract is up for renewal. Everyone in both parties should look at this hard. I believe, and I am on the record that all teachers should get raises, but if we do not get a handle on the structural increases in the budget, all of the above issues are moot.

The above issues being fought are just pennies. Remember at $60,000 annual salary, Wisconsin took away their union. At $70,000-75,000 Chicago is one of the highest paid in the country? And where does that put Barrington at $82,000+ per teacher base pay for 78% of teachers?

All sides should stop worrying about the pennies and worry about the dollars. They should keep their eyes on the prize.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Lorraine F September 20, 2012 at 07:50 PM
Thank you Joel, but that is not how the town council meeting went on this very issue. If Mr Huff has a proper business case, then he should post the case for residents to see and make comment during the hearing. Keep in mind that if he is using Bristol numbers as a comp, they have a pile of students that skew these numbers when measured against Barrington. The number of perpetrators in Barrington seems to be less, unless you count those sand castle or plastic bag violators. I'd like to see some posted numbers.
Manifold Witness September 21, 2012 at 12:12 PM
Ditto Lorraine F on Municipal Court-thanks, LF! The rest? Contradictory-silly: Blame (thank) Repulbicans that teachers are overpaid & teachers are paid just to show up but all teachers deserve a raise. Glean Republicans' position from Patch comments? Okay, but read ALL comments (too busy arguing with high schoolers?). We raise all issues, putting “false” to the silly contention that there were no hard questions about the rec center. But fair is fair, Joel. You’re on the Ad Hoc Tax Committee to ensure compliance with the BET settlement. Where are the revaluation standards? Speaking of silly & reading Patch comments, what is the status of your lawsuit? Did you sue yourself? Looks like the “real” Joel wrote the worst comment (it wasn’t removed.) Like you, we kept a copy. Town Council Dems m.o.? Refuse to provide the public with pro forma financials before they vote to spend. “Affordable” housing issue? It’s about how best to allocate scarce resources given tens of thousands vacant units here & statewide. Read Gary’s LTE & comments. Don’t worry about items that aren’t 1% of the budget? Joel, it’s time to be wise with pennies AND pounds. Small amounts add up quickly when there’s a mountain of them. “Silly season”? No. Time to care about everyone’s future - even Sweetbriar, Joel. Even if folks who need a hand to welcome them home in bad times do have a car that is nicer than your daughter’s.
Joel Hellmann September 21, 2012 at 01:54 PM
Manifold AKA Janice My suit is in the works we are in the process of identifying all involved (more than one). The Republicans passed the teachers’ contract. You can look that up like you look up everything else, and 66 % is more than 1 %. As an independent I hit Democrats when I think they are wrong and the Republicans are wrong. You like me when I agree with you and mock me when I disagree. Speaks very little of you, shows how small and petty you are when you don't respect the opinions of everyone else, and as I told Steve Primiano your comments really hurt the Republican candidates many of whom I will be voting for. Being mean is a turn off in elections to the general population. You are hurting the Republican cause. There are revaluation standards, right now thanks to the Ad hoc committee and especially to BET members Jop and Bob Manchester whom I have grown to respect very much ours are much better than most towns, maybe all towns in the state. They are still not perfect and the conclusion I had and most committee members had is they will never be perfect. too many variables. But 5 good people volunteered many hours to make them better. As to everyone's well being i live that everyday and while you have your opinion of everyone's future I have mine and I stand by how I have helped people In my life.
Manifold Witness September 21, 2012 at 03:10 PM
We have great responsibility if Republicans, Democrats & the general population take Patch blogs seriously. We love you. Not only because it matters to you that we like you. The real Joel lays bare the written representations of the embodiment of a human spirit that keeps on trying. Please don’t be offended by critique. Research? The Ad Hoc Committee has reval standards? Which minutes? Most recent agenda? May 21, 2012. Hot topic ? “Alternative Approach to Property Tax Assessment” Harvey Waxman. Most recent minutes? May 7, 2012, 8:30AM. Excerpts: “4. Alternative Approach to Property Tax Assessment… Dr. Waxman was not able to make it... 5. Sales confirmation letters -…Bob Manchester made a motion that the committee would NOT recommend the use of sales confirmation letters. Joop Nagtegaal seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Joel Helmann thanked Michael Minardi for making sales confirmation letters from other RI communities available to the committee. 6. Sales data 2010-2011-Bob Manchester said he had not done anything with the data, but would do so soon. … The committee agreed …the subsequent list of culled data would be presented to realtors in town to get any comments about specific aspect of sales that might be noteworthy. …. It was agreed that both Coleman Realtors and Residential Properties would be approached once the list had been stripped of non arm’s length transactions.” Can we see the standards, please?
Gary Morse September 21, 2012 at 04:06 PM
Joel, On the revaluation standards work, there is still no comprehensive standards guide that covers all the various reductions that Mr Minardi grants (e.g. reductions for easement, odd shaped land, etc). A case in point is the Carlottii lawsuit against the town which is ongoing largely because there is no sufficient standard to cover the irregularities of assessing land. Also, if there were a comprehensive standards guide, it would have been posted on the town website (one of the agreed upon issues to be worked). It's not there because this remains a work in progress. I will agree that there are some standards, but I disagree that the settlement agreement from the BET lawsuit to create a comprehensive standards guide specific to Barrington has been satisfied.
Joel Hellmann September 21, 2012 at 06:22 PM
On the standards, there have been work over and over again. There is no set list for Mr. Minardi exemptions. The law states that the standard is that any town assessor has some latitute on this. The appeals board also and more so followed no standards. What we did was review all the information and try our best to point it all in the right direction. But what every expert said from the appraisors to the BET reccommended experts to every town official, is there is a degree of subjectivity and it cannot be eliminated. We met with Dr. Waxman and while his proposal while interesting would have in the current market raised the taxes of anyone living in Barrington for the last 5 years 30%, while reducing by similar anyone new moving into town. I would love there to be ab abswer a stanard that works for all but there isn't what is right for one person is not right and fair for another. That is what I came away with. We all worked hard to make it better, but all of us including the BET members know it just is not as simple as we would all like it to be. Of course this has nothing to do with this blog but what the hey...
Gary Morse September 21, 2012 at 08:33 PM
Joel, The assessor has virtually no discretion in assessing. He can make decisions on things like whether he will do a 90% valuation vs a 100%, but he is required by law to make a comprehensive standards document that assures a "full and fair" valuation. Also, the BET court settlement stated that standards specific to Barrington are required. The reason I point this out is that this issue is beginning to surface again as to why the work is not yet completed. It was never the Ad Hoc Committee's job to do the work to create a standards document, just oversee the process. The lawsuit is not over until a standards document is completed specific to Barrington.
Joel Hellmann September 22, 2012 at 01:04 AM
Gary, I was not party to the lawsuit, and son't know the details of it. I joined the committe to help make it all as fair as possible, and I believe the issues were more comprehensive than just a list of standards. In fact a list specific to Barrington in many cases would be contrary to state law. But In the law suit the committe was formed with 2 BET members and we voted unanimously to make the BET members, the ones who were party to the suit, The officers of the committe. Bob Manchester, who I feel did and is doing a fine job, deterimes the agenda and topics with imput from us and calls the meetings. If there is more to be specifics that need to be done to satisfy the law suit then ask Bob to call a meeting and it will get accomplished. The lawsuit is well represented on the committe, and if you feel this strongly then get your representitives, the members BET put on the committe to adress it. I'll show up. I always do.
Gary Morse September 22, 2012 at 10:29 AM
Joel, As in many issues facing this town council, the completion of the lawsuit and the written standards document specific to Barrington remains undone. The requirement for a written standards document specific to Barrington is a duty owed to residents by the town assessor. The ad hoc taxation committee is not supposed to be responsible for pushing this forward. It is akin to a student being responsible for a teachers work plan. The issue on the table is that it remains incomplete, the lawsuit remains open, and the duty to push this forward remains with the town, not the ad hoc taxation committee.
Bristol County Anonymous September 22, 2012 at 02:27 PM
The Tax Reval Fiasco is an election Issue – June & Kate are responsible, and should be voted out. Lack of required tax standards resulted in the arbitrary reval and BET litigation. And remember the circus-like Board of Assessment hearings where millions of dollars of reductions were arbitrarily handed out with no standards? June watching from the audience? Mrs. Speakman ignored her constituents when they informed her of the missing standards BEFORE that reval even started. Mrs. Speakman could have simply instructed the Tax Assessor to take a couple of hours and draft up a standards document and post it on the Town web-site. Then everyone would have been treated fairly, objectively, uniformly and transparently. Instead of deferring to a “standards” committee, June should have simply instructed the tax assessor to simply do his job. Had Mrs. Speakman bothered to listen and act on the advice from her constituents at that time, there would have been no BET lawsuit. Instead, she glazed over, and then dismissively ended the conversation. The fact that property tax standards still have not been implemented after all these years, given that they are obviously required and needed; given that standards could be easily prepared in a couple of hours by the tax assessor; and considering that Mrs. Speakman was told about the problem years ago and yet has not fixed the situation; means that she is the problem. Please vote June and Kate out of office.
Manifold Witness September 22, 2012 at 06:01 PM
Remember the 2nd revaluation, BET? The 2nd revaluation was supposed to remedy the first, illegal revaluation. Remember that? The written standards weren't to be a hollow exercise for an Ad Hoc Tax Committee to play cat & mouse with Tax Assessor through a 2nd revaluation. The standards were supposed be used to guide that remedial revaluation. But the written standards are still not done – long after the 2nd supposedly-remedial reval was completed, appeals decided & at least one now in court. Many folks paid appraisers and then they paid again for updates to appraisals for the “remedial” revaluation. Appraisals that were not always properly considered by the Assessor or the Appeals Board. Now we learn from Joel Hellmann, Barrington Ad Hoc Tax Committee member: 1. There are still no written Barrington revaluation standards that comply with the BET settlement agreement. 2. Tax Assessor Mr. Minardi gives “exemptions” for which there is no “set list”. 3. The law that Joel says he relied upon (“The law states that the standard is that any town assessor has some latitute on this.”) isn’t a real law. 4. “The appeals board also and more so followed no standards.“ 5. Joel doesn’t know details of the lawsuit even though the Ad Hoc Tax Committee was specifically charged with certain duties “in accordance with the Consent Order and Settlement Agreement”. Ad Hoc Tax Committee- just more to depose?
Joel Hellmann September 22, 2012 at 07:00 PM
66% of the budget dwarfs ALL other issues. Gary your a statistics guy. You know that teachers have averaged a 6% raise over the last 30 years. That's THE issue. IT is the teachers contract. For you guys to dwell on this or other small stuff to attack the 2 councilors running for reelection while ignoring the the teacher's contract shows your main issue is just to throw the Democrats out and win. If you are really concerned about spending YOU MUST talk about how the teachers contract is structured. Not doing so is like talking about cutting the national budget without touching Defense or Medicare. It can't be done. what you are doing is just politics and makes you look foolish. You must go where the money is. And in Barrington that is the schools. But the schools are also the third rail of Barrington politics and politicians want to win so stay away.
Joel Hellmann September 22, 2012 at 07:00 PM
As to the assessor' latitude, it was clearly stated in the judges decision that in the law suit the Blacks, no less, brought to the committee. "The assessor is Right until proven Wrong" Look it up it is in the law suit the Blacks provided. If that is not the definition of some latitude i don't know what is. As to the law suit, no I never read it.I did not join a settle the law suit committee I joined and was brought in to help with the evaluating second reval, to make it fair not to please any one group in town. Which we did The committee work remarkably well together and if the committee was part of what was asked for in the settlement, I was certainly not told to specifically to satisfy any terms of the law suit, just to make the reval as fair and accurate as possible. BET members were put on the committee to facilitate that. I think we did good work. Complaints and appeals on the REVAL were down dramatically. Less than other towns have.
Joel Hellmann September 22, 2012 at 07:01 PM
The appeals board gave out the most arbitrary choices I had ever seen. We also went over what the standards were in the other towns. Barrington's were tighter in spite of more diverse property. it is just not perfect. Never will be. It is just perfect for people who like to complain about minutia that can't get much better. Well maybe better for them but not better for everyone. maybe better as a campaign issue. but like i said all this posturing hurts the Republican candidates including one who was a member of the committee. If you want to talk about the school budget I will be happy to. If you want to go on other issues do it without me. I am writing my next blog.
Manifold Witness September 22, 2012 at 08:23 PM
As a Tax official, Joel should have obtained sufficient education before accepting the duties. The Tax Committee should first have asked the Assessor to write down the standards & present them to the Committee for review. A simple and logical 1st step. The Committee apparently never did this. The Tax Committee could have apprised the Town Council that the Assessor refused to prepare the standards. Yesterday, Joel, you stated, "There are revaluation standards, right now thanks to the Ad hoc committee". You were asked to provide the standards. You had to admit you could not. You play fast & loose with your bogus “legal” advice. You say that “The standard is that any town assessor has some latitute on this”. You attempt to blame “the Blacks”. Please cite the case to which you allegedly refer and give us the date of the minutes where your Committee voted on allowing the phrase, “The standard is that any town assessor has some latitute on this” to stand in lieu of the required standards. You have been a Barrington Tax Official for some time. It is with great concern that we now learn of the extent of your erroneous view of the applicable legal standards, especially with respect to the tax assessor's duties regarding the ability to defend his methodology once challenged. Please read the case law. A Motion to Compel Execution of the BET Settlement Agreement should not be required to get the Barrington government to do its duty.
Gary Morse September 22, 2012 at 08:41 PM
Joel, The affordable housing issue is hardly small stuff! It is the defining issue for the future of our town. Councilors Speakman and Weymouth are proponents of this policy and thus an effort to change our government should not be categorized as an "attack". As to your other statement below, "The assessor is Right until proven Wrong", this is not exactly how it is read by the court. It is actually stated as: “[t]ax assessors are entitled to a presumption that they have performed their acts properly until the contrary is proven.” Harvard Pilgrim, 865 A.2d at 1035
Gary Morse September 23, 2012 at 10:05 AM
Joel, With all due respect, your own statement in this blog, "There are revaluation standards, right now thanks to the Ad hoc committee", had to be challenged given your position as a sitting member of the Ad Hoc Taxation Committee. I know first hand being a member of the BET steering committee that BET does not agree that the work is completed. The issue is that this was supposed to be finalized with a written document showing standards specific to Barrington. The Town Council agreed to this to end the BET lawsuit. Given the document does not exist, the lawsuit remains one more open issue for the town council. While I agree that blogs need to stay on subject, you are the author of this blog, and also a taxation committee member. Your own response was what brought me into the conversation.
Margaret Kane September 28, 2012 at 02:28 AM
Joel, The Community Center Task Force recognizes that the Town is facing fiscal challenges in the years ahead (e.g. ? a new middle school) and aims to raise as much money as possible from private sources before seeking bond funding. That is why the Town Council has approved the retention of fund raising counsel to conduct a feasibility study about the potential success of such a campaign among Barrington Residents. I recall your impassioned plea, not many months ago, for inclusion of your beloved youth theater program in plans for the Community Center. You know that the envisioned Center will serve virtually every person in the town from seniors to teens and all ages in between. I know your support for our effort is strong. So why are you trying to paint it as a REPUBLICAN issue? If ever there was a non-partisan project that warrants the broad support of residents, this is it. Margaret Kane Chair, Community Center Task Force Candidate, Barrington Town Council
Joel Hellmann September 28, 2012 at 01:51 PM
Margret. As i recall I was asked to come to the meeting, but yes, I believe in the center, and I admire the work you are doing. whatI I don't like is that some Republican boosters, who are rabid cost cutters only seem to mention it if it is a Democratic led proposal used to attack a Democrat. Again I support the center and the work you are doing. And I support many Republicans. But fiscal cuts both ways and for those non candidates who wish to paint that it is just the Democrats well that is wrong. Both sides have things that they want done and both sides have issues of merit. it seems that only the Democrats are being opposed by these very few vocal voices who want to cut spending. It goes both ways. Again as I said in the piece I support all of these measures
Manifold Witness September 28, 2012 at 04:15 PM
Thanks, Margaret. Don't worry - nobody takes him seriously now that we know he failed to do his duty on the Ad Hoc Tax Committee. And then lied. And then was caught in the lie. And then tried to blame others. And then ran away. Talk, talk, talking all the way, of course. Yeah. Nobody takes him seriously.
Joel Hellmann September 28, 2012 at 05:52 PM
Manifold AKA Janice. It is your comments that hurt Margaret and other Republicans the most. As to taking me seriously. I am the best read blogger on the patch. I' m right here not trying to hide like you. But if you want to come after me, talk talk talk. well Perhaps a brief list of police reports that you have made might make a good blog. All public record. cats and such.
Manifold Witness September 28, 2012 at 07:58 PM
So no reval standards, yet? You are a public tax official and it is improper for you to try to deflect your responsibility. Please do your duty on the Ad Hoc Tax/Assessment Advisory Committee. What’s the status of the May 21, 2012 minutes? Your duties, among other things, were designed to ensure compliance with the BET Settlement Agreement. First you said you did your duty. Then it was revealed that that was a lie. Then you blamed others (but not yourself). Then you “ran away” from the blog where this matter was revealed. You seem to have no intention of doing your duty. You tell the public that they should contact the Committee Chairman if they want the Committee to do its duty. Because your Committee did not do its duty, the so-called “remedial” reval & appeals were done without the required standards. Now, the court is involved again. All very costly to the town (taxpayers) and to the individuals who have had to pay appraisers and attorneys. When you applied/agreed to sit on this committee, you agreed to assume certain duties on behalf of the people of Barrington. You let us down. Until you do your duty to the good people of Barrington, we cannot put any stock in another word you rewrite or your attempts to hold others accountable to you according to your inane & illogical rantings.
Joel Hellmann September 28, 2012 at 11:14 PM
I let you down/ Weren't you the one who went into town hall to complain that I was appointed, that I didn't belong on teh committe at all. How could i disapoint you if tehat was your expectation? Contact YOUR representatives on the committee. Oh wait they aren't listening to you! go figure
Lorraine F September 28, 2012 at 11:44 PM
Joel, Manifold, OK, I admit it, I've not heard of the Ad Hoc Tax/Assessment Advisory Committee. As a resident, am I supposed to be concerned? Is this even a "Fiscal Responsibility" issue or should we have a separate blog on this? And I still don't know what kind of perpetrators will be standing in our proposed Municipal Court (my question that started this blog).
Manifold Witness September 29, 2012 at 12:28 AM
Still no reval standards yet? My father, a famous anonymous poster himself, once told me, “Keep your eyes on the reval standards.” Recent Barrington Legal Expenses- “Tax Appeals – Answer complaints for tax appeals regarding DeFanti and Farrell; Attention to Gordon, Farrell and DeFanti tax appeals; Conference with P. DeAngelis regarding Zion, Cove Haven, Shopping Center and Country Club tax appeals and letter to RI Telecommunications; Review RIH opinion regarding 8% and correspond with B. DeWitt regarding 8% tax and RIH input; Extended conference regarding DeFanti and Carlotti appeals; Draft Answer regarding Shaw’s tax appeal; Memo to P. DeAngelis and M. Minardi regarding DeFanti and Carlotti tax appeals; Letter to Attorney M. Edwards regarding same; Very extended conference with Attorney E. Noonan regarding Gordon and Shopping Center appeals; Extended conference with Attorney B. Cox regarding Arcaro tax appeal; Review and respond to memo on quitclaim deeds for Joann in Assessor’s Department; Letter to D. Medeiros regarding Johnson bankruptcy; Attention to Thompson pleadings.” From Barrington Solicitor Michael Ursillo’s August 2012 Report to Barrington Town Council dated 9/10/12 for the Council’s 10/1/12 meeting.
Manifold Witness September 29, 2012 at 12:36 AM
Lorraine F - This is clearly a "Fiscal Responsibility" issue. The lack of reval standards is a serious issue that resulted in the BET lawsuit and still results in costly ongoing tax controversies (see below). The Ad Hoc Tax Committee should have done their duty. And we still don't know what they intend to do. To add insult to injury, Joel (a member of the Ad Hoc Tax Committee) doesn't seem to comprehend the import of the tax issues and his duties. And still no minutes for their last meeting back in May. As to the Municipal Court issues - it's on the Town Council Agenda for 10/1/12. Maybe the Council will share pro forma financials with the public.
susan amendolara October 02, 2012 at 01:27 AM
this is interesting.
susan amendolara October 02, 2012 at 01:30 AM
The best read blogger on the patch! This reminds me of Jerry Springer.
Pledgling October 09, 2012 at 01:06 AM
Maybe you should leave Manifold alone--since that person is the ONLY one who helps innocent, poor people in this town. And did you not yourself THREATEN Manifold in 2010? I think you did. .
Pledgling October 09, 2012 at 01:11 AM
By the way, Manifold is the most honest person that you will meet in your life. Honest as the day is long--or night--whatever. My mother always told me to befriend people who are better than myself. Maybe you should take my mother's advice. You are lucky to even have a conversation with Manifold, believe me.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something