One firm point of reality is as the fact there is no such thing as the average voter any longer.
On the local level that concept is in essence non-existent.
Save me any thoughts to the average voter being concerned about taxes. The very same voter who complains about taxes is going to fight you tooth and nail if lower taxes means losing what he or she wants in services or level of services.
Every individual wants the best public safety, but not at a higher cost. Many want better schools, but not with an increased budget. the only thing any majority seems to want in unison is their cake and being able to eat it too.
As an aside, it is in many ways a sad commentary that I use "Many want better schools" rather than "Every individual". but to deal with that would mean to veer completely off course.
The constant refrain, which has been getting louder and louder as each day as turned in weeks and months, years and decades, is "Add this, do that, save this, but lower my taxes.".
The saving grace behind Prop. 2 1/2 for the tax payer is the fact that it limits the amount of the burden you can load of onto the backs of taxpayer. The bane of that proposition is that it fosters a mentality that you will spend that 2 1/2 each and every year. The only way to stop it is to jettison an amount of the load you carry.
There is absolutely a cumulative effect to lowering taxes, or even simply not increasing them. Something eventually has to give. Deep down you know that. Deep down you have to acknowledge that. Deep down you have to be willing to accept that.
But I digress a bit ... the point for today is the "average person" concept has simply disappeared in many ways when trying to use that person as a standard of measurement for making any decision.
Save me any thoughts to the average voter being concerned about taxes. The very same voter who complains about taxes is going to fight you tooth and nail if lower taxes means losing what he or she wants in services or level of services.
Every individual wants the best public safety, but not at a higher cost. Many want better schools, but not with an increased budget. the only thing any majority seems to want in unison is their cake and being able to eat it too.
As an aside, it is in many ways a sad commentary that I use "Many want better schools" rather than "Every individual". but to deal with that would mean to veer completely off course.
The constant refrain, which has been getting louder and louder as each day as turned in weeks and months, years and decades, is "Add this, do that, save this, but lower my taxes.".
The saving grace behind Prop. 2 1/2 for the tax payer is the fact that it limits the amount of the burden you can load of onto the backs of taxpayer. The bane of that proposition is that it fosters a mentality that you will spend that 2 1/2 each and every year. The only way to stop it is to jettison an amount of the load you carry.
There is absolutely a cumulative effect to lowering taxes, or even simply not increasing them. Something eventually has to give. Deep down you know that. Deep down you have to acknowledge that. Deep down you have to be willing to accept that.
But I digress a bit ... the point for today is the "average person" concept has simply disappeared in many ways when trying to use that person as a standard of measurement for making any decision.
When you now measure a heavy turnout in the low 30% range, how can you even assume that the voters turning out equate to the "average"? Seriously?
To even get into that staggering 30% range you need an extremely "hot" issue. The only real certainty insuch a turnout is the "hot" issue result for the "hot" issue is a better than average indication of what people feel on one issue.
Most of the time you are lucky to get a one in five turnout (20% for the math challenged) on the local level.
The initial impact of any controversy usually gets people up in arms. This is reality. This is shown time and again. A packed meeting room however does not provide any proof of public sentiment on any particular issue. Indeed recent elections have shown that; and, even that turnout is often closely divided. Those people stay motivated and up in arms so long as they have reason to believe they can influence an outcome. If the tide changes, which we have seen, what happens?
What about signed petitions? While I am sure all you faithful readers are principled enough not to simply sign a petition you have not read, if we are being honest we would have to admit we certainly know people who have signed such things simply because they do not want to offend, don't have the time to banter with the signature seeker, or a host of other reasons.
The number of e-mails and telephone calls on receives also are not proof of public sentiment. The same are simply proof of that one member of the public's sentiment. Let us also face the fact that in today's world, such things are often the result of an organized "campaign".
The lack of opposing views being submitted can just as easily be attributed to the fact that people in general have reached the point of jumping to foregone conclusions, i.e. the fix is in so why bother. It might also just be that those who remain silent assume you are going to do the job you were elected to do and not simply kowtow to a squeaky wheel.
The lack of opposing views being submitted can just as easily be attributed to the fact that people in general have reached the point of jumping to foregone conclusions, i.e. the fix is in so why bother. It might also just be that those who remain silent assume you are going to do the job you were elected to do and not simply kowtow to a squeaky wheel.
Granted an official may at times be doing both. The difficulty is of course knowing when doing both is the right thing to do.
Put things in this perspective. If people showing up at meetings, opposing something or proposing something and are the only ones you hear from, or constitute say a 3 to 1 ratio on an issue, and that is what you should base your decision on, including the e-mails and phone calls, how do you explain the outcome of say the debt exclusion vote for the new Wood School two years ago +/-?
On the local level, we are still fortunate enough to at least have a 50/50 shot at decisions being made for the right reasons. Granted you might disagree with that ratio, and I am inclined to believe I am being overly optimistic myself, however when compared to higher levels of government where decisions are seemingly all geared toward the goal of re-election, you have to admit that it is a tad better locally.
Anyway ...
Selectmen meet tonight. Half the agenda seems compromised of matters best described as "deja vu all over again". Interesting items relative to medicinal marijuana. New company proposing something and update from first company to propose something.
It is what it is. In today's times, just seems it always is a never ending story about the wrong things.
Enough for today.
Be safe.
I commend everyone who speaks out for a cause they believe in. There have been times that a decision has been made in my mind. Then, upon hearing further discussion, I don't necessarily change my mind, but at least reconsider why I think the way I do. The back and forth doesn't have to come down to ugly name-calling, but the continued flow of factual information and ideas is welcome. One thing remains true, regardless of the outrage or banter on any issue, the few who make it to the polls will control the outcome. Very sad it's usually less than 30%.
ReplyDelete