One of the problems with having three government employees as our selectmen is their tendency to be big spenders. And, sure enough, their proposed budget this year shows some large increases.
First, they want to give everyone a raise. While state and local governments have been laying off employees and flat lining salaries, Egremont's selectmen are suggesting another salary increase this year.
How about $63,000 for a computer network? While an effort is being made to get that number down, I'd like to see a better effort. And pardon me if I'm skeptical about the expertise of our selectboard to get the right system at the right cost. If the selectboard stayed out of it completely, I'd have more confidence.
How many fire engines do we need? There's a proposal to spend $400,000 on another one. And I'm told it doesn't have up-to-date technology. One that does would actually cost a lot less, so why aren't we thoroughly exploring that? Or doing without?
The jury is still out (in more ways than one) on the police department. But in Reena's absence, our "acting chief" has proposed a budget almost 20% higher than the one that she had submitted earlier this year. We don't need a Cadillac police department. I remember when we had a one-man police department, and I'm not convinced that our big crew has produced a decrease in crime.
Finally, last year the new police station was approved - after the voters had turned it down twice - when the "edifice complex" crowd stacked a special town meeting. But they swore the cost would NEVER exceed the amount approved. So far the station has come in without huge cost overruns, but now there's a proposal to spend $13,000 to demolish the annex to provide parking space. (People can't walk the 100 feet or so from the existing parking lot?) That's just an end run around the approved amount. Don't buy it.
Then there's the water department.
So what can you do about these things? Come to the town meeting, stand up, say something and vote no.
News about Egremont and what's going on there, with a particular focus on local government activities. Your comments on postings are strongly encouraged. This blog is intended to be a forum for ideas and thoughts from everyone.
Posts
Followers
About Me
- Richard Allen
- I'm a retired New York City lawyer who tries to look to the future with an eye on the past, to apply cold hard reasoning to public issues and to stay true to the basic libertarian philosophy: If something doesn't affect my health or safety, don't legislate it; leave me alone and I'll leave you alone.
7 comments:
Kevin,I am hoping that you will become informed regarding the proposed purchase of the replacement fire truck before misinforming the voters. Your comments indicate to me that you need to do some homework. Jim Golden
Hi, Jim, this is Richard Allen, not Kevin. If my information isn't correct, in what way is it incorrect? That's what the voters want to know.
Jim, Thank you; and you’re absolutely right! I do have to get more information regarding the replacement fire truck. We as a town need to be informed about the different options available. It's not about saving money it's about saving lives.
I am not misinforming anyone as these are not my comments. I don’t know what gave you the idea that I was against the choice of fire truck; I haven’t made a decision as to what would be best because I don’t know. I directed people to Richards’s site because he has the same goal as you and I, to inform the voters.
You know what best serves the town as far as fire equipment and you should share that information. Regardless of the cost, we as a town need the best equipment at the best price. To just say that it is misinformation does not help us to understand what the correct information is.
I would like it if you and other people in the know at the firehouse would share the information. The democratic system works best with a well informed populous. Please give us the information we need. KevinZurrin
Our truck committee has been meeting since September 2012 to design the planned replacement of our 1989 Pumper/Tanker. The capital plan anticipates the replacement of EFD fire apparatus after 20 years of service. We have successfully extended the life of Tanker 5 to include a few extra years of service.
Each piece of apparatus is designed specifically for its job. This truck is being designed as a pretty basic Pumper/Tanker. That is its job. I'm not sure what Richard Allen's comment regarding cheaper more up-to-date technology means. This truck, as designed, will have all of the latest technologies to do its job, be safe and serve the town for its planned service life. The committee has met with three manufacturers, numerous times, to determine if they could build the truck designed and to help us arrive at a working budget number.
Chief Turner appeared at two Selectmen's meetings in March. Chief Turner and some members of the truck committee met with the Selectmen on Monday March 25 to provide requested additional information. We were there to answer any and all questions from the Selectmen and the meeting body. Chief Turner made a presentation. Questions were asked by the Selectmen and answered. I don't recall any questions being asked by the meeting body. We were on the agenda.
I expect that the next step in the process will be a meeting with the finance committee. They will ask their questions and make their recommendation to the voters.
If approved at Town Meeting the specifications will be published and any and all manufacturers interested will bid.
The process allows ample opportunity for the voters to make an informed decision at town meeting.
I am not a spokesman for EFD. I don't want to be perceived as a spokesman for EFD. I do not plan to make any more submissions to this blog on this subject. I am an active member who respects deeply our membership 's devotion to service and doggedly defends them. That is what prompted my initial submission to this blog. I have confidence that a group of dedicated, experienced Egremont firefighters have worked diligently to design a truck to replace Tanker 5.
I also doggedly defend this blogs right to ask questions. Thank you.
Jim Golden
Thanks, Jim.
Jim
Bravo, well said. You may not be the spokesman for the EFD but you should be. This is what the people need to hear. We all know that the EFD is out there 24/7 protecting us and I’m sorry we sometimes take that for granted. I know that as much as people in the department have issues with me and my opinions; there isn’t one of them who wouldn’t carry me out of a burning building on their back. I trust you and I believe what you are saying. If you reduce it to its simplest form we are only spending about five cents per day on this truck. What has been missing is the presentation you just gave. If you share this at the town meeting I don’t see why anyone would vote it down. But you did need to say this and I’m glad you did.
KevinZurrin
I agree with Kevin. But I'm still not convinced that (a) we need another fire truck or (b) this is the best one to get.
Post a Comment