"Communication breakdown?"
Regular readers know that when it comes to funding government during tough fiscal times, we favor spending reductions over tax increases. (Heck, we feel that way even when the economy’s good…) With the advent of the Official Ballot form of government– or, as it’s better known, "SB2"– voters in NH towns that have adopted it have more of a direct say in the final budget and get a direct up or down vote in all-day balloting that follows the deliberative session. With a larger percentage of voters participating, the special interests that formerly controlled the process (mostly the employees of the town and school) and the spending proposers must now work extra hard to make their case. In those fortunate towns that have chosen SB2, they must EARN the vote of the citizens on a particular spending issue or matter. Here in our little town in Central NH, the school budget got defeated by voters several years running until this year when the District finally proposed a smaller, more sensible spending plan, which earned overwhelming support.
Each spring, as sure as the trees bud, and the lawns turn from brown to green, we hear politicians and public employees whining and complaining about SB2. Whether it’s those seeking to block its adoption in yet more towns, or those upset at its results in the latest election held using the method, the refrain is always the same: the voters won’t make the "right" choices. (You know, by saying "yes" to everything government desires) Unfortunately, those that run things are in a position to do more than just complain…
An article appearing in this past Sunday’s Concord Monitor was a good example of this process. In the piece titled Towns Grapple With Default Budget Reality– Voters Caution Will Mean Fewer Services, we find that, reacting to "no" votes, those in charge will make those voters "pay" in other ways:
If you live in Allenstown, don’t plan on paying your property taxes on a Friday. Town hall will be closed. You can’t get a pistol permit after work, either, because the police department laid off the evening secretary. In Weare, some summer school classes will be gone and, when driving through Epsom, mind your undercarriage. Many of those flood-ravaged roads won’t be repaired.
These are just some of the consequences of voters’ unwillingness to approve budgets in their communities this spring. Now, more than a month after town meeting day, municipal leaders are struggling to make ends meet. In some cases, they’ve curtailed services and cut staff. In others, they’re delaying paving and eliminating overtime.
Town leaders blame crummy economic conditions, but they also point to SB2. The system allows residents to cast ballots on budgets rather than attend a traditional town meeting. Some cash-strapped officials say the system makes it simpler for voters to say "no."
The Allenstown Fire Chief makes no bones about how he feels, and what he’ll do to make sure citizens understand the error of their ways:
"I’m sympathetic to the voter, but people really do need to come to budget hearings," said Allenstown Fire Chief Everett Chaput. "The Senate made a big mistake when it invented SB2. I know there are people out there who will disagree with me, and I know it brings out more voters, but a blind vote is not helpful to anybody."
Because of his town’s default budget, Chaput says his department won’t be able to assist residents with non-emergency calls. In the past, firefighters have helped bail out flooded basements and mitigate other nuisances, but that won’t be the case this year.
[snip]
"Everything has gone through the roof. . . . It’s not like you keep saying ‘no’ and the fire department is going to stop asking. It’s not a want. It’s a need."
Isn’t it always? The Monitor story caught the attention of regular ‘Grok reader Ken St. Cyr who sends the following. Seems he doesn’t care for Chief Chaput’s attitude in this matter…
Allenstown Fire Chief Everett Chaput says
"The Senate made a big mistake when it invented SB2. I know there are people out there who will disagree with me, and I know it brings out more voters, but a blind vote is not helpful to anybody."
This statement implies that the voting public is! just not intelligent enough to make decisions concerning what goes on in their town. Maybe the Chief could identify the people who should not be allowed cast their "blind" vote next time.
He goes on to say that
"his department won’t be able to assist residents with non-emergency calls. In the past, firefighters have helped bail out flooded basements and mitigate other nuisances."
I agree with him on this one–I don’t believe that the people of a town should EVER have to pay to have the fire department respond to "nuisance" and non-emergency calls. I know this is great PR for the department, but maybe this time could be better used by finding ways to make the department more efficient when they DO have to respond to a real emergency. And I also know many will disagree with me. But I’m just a "blind" voter.
The Monitor article further reports that
"The difficult part with Senate Bill 2 is that there’s no way to communicate with people," said Allenstown Police Chief Shaun Mulholland. "People don’t go to the budget meetings. They don’t go to the deliberative session. It’s not like town meeting because you can’t get up and explain. People don’t know what they’re voting on."
I disagree. The best communication tool the town has is the tax bill that gets mailed to everyone twice a year. When your tax bill goes up 17% a year, believe me, you have been communicated with.
The Monitor piece also notes voters have nixed the budget in Weare nine times since the town adopted the SB2 system 12 years ago. And this is a bad thing? I’m sure the police, firefighters and teachers union members would love to go back to the good ol’ says of the town meeting and strong arm tactics and intimidation. No, the State Senate finally got one right.
Kenneth St. Cyr, Loudon, NH
A big hat-tip to Ken on this one. It’s nice to hear from regular folks out there that truly "get it" when it comes to this stuff.