This past Tuesday’s Board of Finance meeting was rather dull with only a handful of residents attending and NO selectmen.

There were only two real issues discussed-  recommending the budget that was presented at the April 22nd public hearing to go to the annual town meeting, and a timetable and method for developing a Proposition 46 policy. Unfortunately we don’t have video of the meeting but I’ll try to hit the “high” points.

On the budget recommendation, the only question was when Russ Dowd asked if there was any further information from the town attorney on the issues that had been referred back to him.  Dave Hosmer informed the board that there had been a conference call with the first selectman and the town attorney and that they had approval to go forward with the budget.  I found this quite interesting considering that several items in the Proposition 46 calculation are at odds with the town attorney’s opinion letter of March 5th – he has been informed that his name has been used to legitimize the budget proposal and of the conflicts.

On the policy item, a number of approaches were discussed including use of the town attorney and town auditor, the use of a BOF subcommittee or the whole board to draft proposals.  The likely lack of consensus on anything to do with this issue within the board itself was also brought up.  Cost and time were also major concerns and giving the town auditor and town attorney a budget and asking them to do it was suggested.   It was curious to note that the most obvious, and likely least costly, approach of simply bringing in the town attorney and auditor and sitting down with a small subcommittee in a conference room for two or three hours and drafting a strawman was not on the table.    There seems to be a real fear of actually talking with the town attorney.  Could it be they are afraid of what they might be told? 

During citizen’s participation I read a statement, See it -HERE-  to the board for the record stating that based on the legal opinions from May 4th, 1993 and March 5th, 2008, the budget being put forth is NOT in compliance with Proposition 46 and therefore can not be legally adopted.

While the next big steps for the taxpayers are the town meeting on May 22nd and then the referendum currently planned for June 3rd, where this budget will hopefully be turned down, we are continuing to pursue other approaches to dealing with the Proposition 46 violations that will hopefully lead to a legally valid budget.

Dave Richardson