It often starts with a pebble

Well, it seems, like an eternity since the keys have been tapped for another page. It might have never occurred but for two related things.

The first being the STM last night. The second being a comment made last night on what was I believe the last post.

The writer felt he or she lives in a village of idiots. Presumably because of the outcome of the vote to sell the old Oxford School. However accurate that opinion is of course depends on your position on the outcome.

I for one have no difficulty in saying I would be one of the village idiots based on the way I voted.

I will admit the proposal is not the ideal version of what should have been done, or at least my ideal version. I will go on to add that my ideal version would have been would in fact have been the wrecking ball the commentator mentioned. A wrecking ball for everything on site by the way. While I am at it, that wrecking ball can then be moved to the center to take care of the two other "problem" buildings in town.

Now feeling a bit better with that somewhat cathartic dose of rant, I would add that some would find that solution just as idiotic. 

However you feel about the winning vote, it happened. Its over. The deal progresses.  If you need something to still hold on to, it ain't over until the developer gets the tax credits.  So, there is still a chance we end up retaining that bit of history.

The most surprising aspect of the vote, was just how little opposition there was. Don't get me wrong, the vote was not close. The debate most expected just never happened. 

But if that vote was idiotic, it was no less so than the other two articles voted on. 

Next up was to install sewer to the little building. The one that should have had it a long time ago. The one we own.  It is that one little detail, that "we" own it, that let that one go without a comment. There could be pages of comment on that one, but to what point. I would just need to do a subsequent blog to get the cathartic relief needed after getting worked up.

As to the other article, I extend my personal apologies to each and every citizen who has petitioned for roadwork during the years of my past tenure. I will go so far as to recommend to anyone and everyone who wishes to have roadwork done that they petition, and show up at town meeting to be able to make their plea for their article. 

Furthermore, if at first you don't succeed, wait for the next special town meeting. Sure you have to get moire signatures to get on the article, but ...

a. A majority of the selectmen will more likely vote to yield to you rather than make a recommendation like they should; and,

b. STM is always an easier sell for articles outside the budget; and,

c. Once TM members hear how much cash is in the kitty, you pitch becomes even easier.

In the relative scheme of life, it isn't someone petitioning for something they feel they are entitled to that disturbs me.  It isn't the vote that bothers me, nor the outcome. It is the rationale.

When you hear a selectmen make the statement that perhaps going forward we not do this, but in this cause well ...

When you hear arguments about paving a road because of past service or pulling on the compelling reasons ...

When you factor in how many roads do not get recommended, how many people who have adhered to the process, have accepted it, and have essentially be told they are the idiots for not pulling such an end run.

Budget discipline and more importantly budget planning, requires first and foremost discipline. $28k +/- may seem like nothing more than a pebble added to the top of a $50 Mil + budget, but many an avalanche has started when that pebble slips down a slope.

Having just spent the $25K on the sewer thingy didn't help any mind you.  But ... there was the luck of the draw so to speak.

A bit dramatic, maybe. From my perspective there was nothing far or honest to the public at large here. That is unless we now are consistent in applying the same standard to the public at large.

As far as I am concerned. everyone is entitled to the same consideration going forward. Any and all arguments about following recommendations as to which roads should get done are off the table. Ditto for staying within the "budget". 

That applies to any article by the way, not just roadwork.

Go for it folks. Do not be intimidated by arguments against from your officials. The BPW is more than willing to accept the largess of a STM as we heard.

You certainly have one less against vote going forward. Despite any assertion that yesterday perhaps should be an exception to the rule, there is no exception going forward for this TM member. 

Everyone single petitioner is entitled to the exact same consideration. If the budget doesn't apply less than two months after May, this commentator cannot see why we should be constrained to adhere to the recommendations in May.

Heck about the only thing you should be worried about is where the article comes up in the draw. 

Least you think this rant is a bit too extreme, or even contradictory to prior principles, I have always adhered to the principal what you do for one you do for all. In my book that is what fairness and honesty entail.

So with all that being said, it is time to end it.  The vote is in the books. The precedent has been set, and this TM member intends to follow that precedent going forward. 

This village idiot is signing off.