Charter revision #8 reads, “Shall the Charter be amended to provide that if the number of electors present at the annual Town Meeting equals at least 4% of the registered town electors, then the annual Town Meeting may increase the Town Budget or Board of Education budget (C9-3B)?”
Ironic.
Those that have rejected some of the proposed charter revisions, specifically #1 and #2 (Town Manager and BOS to 5 members, respectively), have used a number of arguments repeatedly against these two proposals. Things like:
- that this is “bigger government”
- that this is a “sure and steady slide to a form of government that minimizes and limits the direct access, influence and power of Brookfield voters in determining the future direction of the Town.”
- that this is an “attempt to force through change which is good for the minority seeking to control the majority."
- that this will “limit or restrict community input and grant more authority to those that are elected or appointed.”
- that “The First Selectman should remain the person in charge, directly accountable to the voters for his/her actions."
- that “What we need is LESS government not MORE!!”
All of these are direct quotes from people here on The Patch. These folks, and many others, oppose these first two questions based on their stated rationale.
I don't agree, but OK, fine.
But why would many of them (and I believe all of them in some form have) reject(ed) proposal number 8???
This proposal gives MORE authority to the people of the Town.
As it stands now, if enough people in the Town come to the annual Town Meeting about the budget, they can move and vote to DECREASE the recommended budget proposal by line item that has been put forth by the Board of Finance (the proposed budget would still need to go to a Town referendum and be approved by the voters). The people have that power.
But what the people CAN’T do under the current charter is move and vote to INCREASE the budget line items in the proposal.
You – the voter, tax payer, and resident - can’t do that.
Only the BOF (the “government” in this case) has that power and you can’t do a thing about it once they decide.
Why then can’t enough people (the same amount that can LOWER a budget) require that a budget proposal be raised to the level that was proposed by the other Boards?
It should also be noted that there would be a limit on increases under this revision; budgets would only be able to go to the level voted on and approved by the BOE or BOS, so it's not the “wild west.” Increases would only go to the level approved by people elected to boards.
Also, these actions (increasing and decreasing) are for budget line items, not the general budget. The school budget is a single line item, so that's simple. But suppose the town side included funding for Cadigan Field and the BOF eliminated that. The motion to increase would need to be specific that funds would be restored for this purpose (restored to that line in the budget). Again, not the wild west.
Try this example:
Let’s say, you hear the Board of Selectmen and Board of Education go through their respective budget proposals. Let’s say, you think they are reasonable and you would vote to support them both.
But now those budgets go through the Board of Finance (as they should since the BOF is the Town’s fiscal authority). And let’s say that the BOF cut each budget or line items in, what appears to you to be, a reckless or short-sighted manner.
Guess what? You can’t do a thing to restore those budgets to their original proposed levels. You can show up and make public comment and try to persuade your elected BOF to change their position, but you have no ability to actually restore those levels. You may never get to vote on the original proposals by the BOS and BOE.
But you can reduce those levels at the annual Town Meeting.
How is that democratic???
Where is the protest over “big government” and the “nanny state” for this???
Why aren’t Brookfielders allowed and/or capable of increasing what they are allowed to decrease?
Proposition #8 gives the people that power and it should be confirmed at the polls on November 6.
Vote “YES” on charter revision #8.
People will make their own conclusions when they read this thread in its entirety and see that the same guy who began all the unfounded accusations deflected to a topic completely irrelevant and since the start could not provide a simple answer to the subject of the original post, not to mention the insults have now begun as well. The same guys who blatantly and publicly lied and therefore holds zero credibility, And let's not talk about the vast majority of the republicans in this town who have turned away from the BRTC simply because they don't agree with anything that this organization stands for anymore. Anyway, back to the original subject - Charter Revision.
I am done playing this little game of yours. Say what you want but I have more credibility, honor and morals in one finger than you, Ray and Jane put together. I have done more for this community and this country than you could ever hope to achieve and I did it for love of country, not self-interest. Now if you want to debate the issues, i.e. why Jane and Ray will not tell the parents how they got their email addresses or why they do not think parents have a right to know who they are obtaining their private email accounts I will discuss it. Once that is answered I will talk about the charter. If you want to continue to act like a child by calling names like a child I am done with you. Funny, to my face your all smiles and polite, but you talk like a tough guy when you’re behind a computer. Just like a child.
While I often find your posts to be based on speculation and/or unverifiable/questionable sources, picking on the Center School PTO is truly hitting rock bottom. As you should know, the PTO is a volunteer group of hardworking parents who support the school, the staff, and raise money privately to purchase a myriad of items for the school. Let me repeat, they raise money privately to purchase items for the school. This is a concept I am sure even you can appreciate. I find your inference about the CES PTO completely baseless and particularly disgraceful coming from an elected town official. Volunteer organizations in our town should be supported by our elected officials, not disparaged.
He is a United States Marine who was wounded in combat protecting America. He worked for the New York Police Department on the streets fighting gangs. He worked for the F.B.I fighting gangs and violence in this country. He is a decent, honest hardworking guy who gives 110 % in everything he does. He loves this town. He has coached many sports teams for Brookfield's youth. He is a loving husband and parent who always puts his family first. He is a good Catholic person who exemplifies what it means to be a Christian. If I am not mistaken he works for security protecting very important people in this country. I think that to denigrate the character of this fine American is beneath contempt. Semper Fi .... Chris Delia.......We are very lucky to have a man of your caliber in Brookfield.
Dr. Appleby, pick a side and stick with it. At least with Chris it's crystal clear.
This thread has gotten pretty far off track — can we call the slate even and start over talking about Charter Revision 8 or the others up for consideration Tuesday.
I hope people will vote YES on # 8 tomorrow.
Only two people showed up at the Veterans Memorial on Veterans day besides myself. Apparently, there was a ceremony of convienience some other day that fit into the First Selectman's schedule better. Besides it was cold and windy like most years. All the previous selectmen, who were veterans, were always there on that day because they understood.
For additional information please contact Bob Tonne of Custom Fundraising Solutions: btonnecfs@gmail.com