PAC it in, we are moving forward

I shied away from replying to any comments yesterday.  There were several that caught my attention.  As I have said repeatedly though, read it once, twice three times, before you hit that button.  Only once did any urging to respond make past a second reading, and the others didn't even make it to the keyboard.

Thanks to everyone who kept the comments within the four corners.  There were a few toes on the border, but no one went out of bounds.

I believe I promised some chatter on the PAC matter (Political Action Committee if you didn't know). Some may find it hard to believe, but I am not a big fan of PACs.  Legally, I think the Citizens United decision (and there was another from a Court of Appeals shortly thereafter) is correct under the law. It is however one of those loopholes we'll say that result in some weird stuff.

But I digress somewhat.  My PAC discussion is on the local level.  We have two in Fairhaven that were formed under the premise for long term political action, but who is kidding who.  They both were formed because the law required it for two groups to raise and spend money to influence the election.

I have reviewed the pre-election financial reports required to be filed by both local PACs.  I am definitely going to be reviewing the post election reports after the next required filing.

Both locals raised similar amounts as of the end date on the pre-election filed reports (one reported $1,075.00, the other $1,209.00).  One had donations from money donations and sales of paraphernalia, with the bulk of it being reported under $50.00 per, with four donors in excess of $50.00, and one over $100.00 which was the largest individual contribution at $110.00.  The other had money donations from nine individuals, with two listed under $50.00, the remaining seven in excess of $50.00, three of which were donations of $100.00; and, one being the largest individual donation at $500.00.

Anticipating some questions I will note that yes I had this info prior to the election.  I made a decision not to list it prior to the election. No I am not going to explain that decision.  Yes it is still relevant when one considers the stated purposes for both PACs going forward. 

Before I get into full discussion mode on the PAC concept, I really do want to see the next reports from each.  Could be that certain things change that will in fact impact initial impressions from what are essentially initial reports.  Put another way, at this point, I have walked into the room with a can of paint and a brush. I have taken a look around, and am thinking a second view of the room on a later date will be appropriate so as to make sure the paint is applied correctly, and to be double sure I don't paint myself into a corner.

Well worth waiting for a second look though.

Moving forward ...

Step one ... absolutely the B of H needs to address issues.  In a proper manner, in accordance with the law and regulations and pursuant to proper procedure.  

Step two ... stop the absolutes.  There are a whole bunch of them on both sides. 

Other steps ... we need to get moving, quickly, on a whole bunch of things.  D.O.R. certification for numbers should be coming within the next month or less.  Maximum spending ability should quickly follow.  Right on the heels of that, the town needs to determine what it proposes to spend.  

Leave sources of income out of any comment related to the last paragraph above. The immediate problem is next fiscal year.  When the issue of projections get raised, fine.  The same will be.  I am simply talking about the here and now and what is available presently.

After figuring what you have and what you feel safe in spending, then the budgets need to be done, submitted and reviewed earlier rather than later. The submissions need to be correct the first time around.  

Financial reality is a must.  There are many worthy that would merit funding in a free flowing revenue system.  Worthy cannot replace necessity.  Of course necessity is very seldom agreed upon.  

Another please here, you want to discuss reducing budgets fine. You want to discuss opinions on how money gets spent once voted on, make sure it involves something we have control over.  The same go hand in hand.  

Anyway, I am out of time for today.  To either your great relief or extremely disappointment, tomorrow may be an off day.  I won't know if I have an extremely early start tomorrow until later this afternoon.  If I do have one though, no A.M. blog.

Be safe.