Hamilton Town Meeting - The Yellow Sheet

On Saturday, October 17th, the Town of Hamilton will vote on numerous warrant articles at a Special Town Meeting, including a debt exclusion override. As they did at the spring Annual Town Meeting, Enough Is Enough (EiE) is distributing its Yellow Sheet with recommendations and a short explanation of why they are taking their positions for your consideration.

EiE is a tax watchdog group with many educated members, including Teachers, Architects, Planners, Real Estate Professionals, Active as well as Retired Business Leaders, Nurses, Members of Town Boards, Accountants, Engineers, Town Employees, Writers and Bloggers, Attorneys and others, as well as parents with school-age children. They collectively researched, met, and discussed the impact of the warrant articles in order to recommend to you what is on their Yellow Sheet. EiE's goal remains to balance an excellent education with the taxpayer's ability to pay and to support changes they feel are in the best interest of our communities.

EiE will continue to scrutinize and help stabilize the operating budgets of our towns and school district debt through recommendations on a Yellow Sheet of the warrant articles presented at all future Town Meetings. The $39 million that taxpayers have paid as a result of the previous 12 year’s overrides is a burden the group was formed to help alleviate.

Your attendance and votes at the October 17th Special Town Meeting are vitally important.

Below are the recommendations from EiE on the warrant articles they feel are most important to the taxpayers and citizens of Hamilton. Please refer to the Warrant book that you received from the town for the specifics of each article/motion.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

• Article 4-3 – Vote NO – This motion appears to be an attempt to draw attention away from the maintenance funding (already a line item every year in the school budget) that has been misappropriated or directed elsewhere each year. The school department does not need TWO maintenance accounts…they need to properly manage the existing account.
Read a Salem News letter detailing maintenance funding mismanagement: http://tinyurl.com/yf4dev2

• Article 4-4 – Vote YES – Extensive research has shown that many other communities - including Essex, Andover, North Andover, Middleton, Wakefield, North Reading, Stoneham, and Manchester, to name only a few – have enacted similar voting standards, particularly regarding motions requiring large expenditures or appropriations.

Read another blog supporting this measure: http://tinyurl.com/ydum5gp

• Article 5-2 – Vote NO – At least three other studies have taken place regarding this issue in the past six years. Two found no significant savings. The most recent study (2009) by the Department of Revenue (DOR) found savings that came primarily from a reduction in the number of police officers. It seems unnecessary to conduct yet another study and waste valuable time and talent on the issue.
Read a letter from Wenham Selectmen supporting our position: http://tinyurl.com/yl72pxo

Read a letter from a Wenham resident in the Salem News: http://tinyurl.com/ykf5q2b

Read an editorial by the Salem News supporting our position: http://tinyurl.com/yh4e8kg

• Article 5-7 – Vote YES – This is essentially the same motion that was overwhelmingly approved at last spring’s Town Meeting. Increasing the number of Selectmen will help distribute the work load and allow more time for strategic long term planning, policy decisions and revenue generation.

• Article 5-8 – Vote NO – Times are tough enough without burdening our local business owners with additional taxes. They are already experiencing reduced business and should not have to support yet another tax, aka: a cut in pay.
Read another Hamilton blog supporting our recommendation: http://tinyurl.com/ygt2dpz

• Special Town Meeting, Part II – Debt Exclusion Override for the Cutler School Boiler – EiE will make a recommendation at the Town Meeting.

At the time of publication of this blog two major questions regarding this motion by the schools remain unanswered: (1) Exactly how will the reimbursement portion ($652,206.00 from the MSBA) of the debt ($1,531,720.00) be credited to the taxpayers?...and (2) what will be the effect upon the property tax rate and for how long?

Unless and until these questions are answered, taxpayers are prevented from making a properly informed decision about whether to approve or deny the school's request.