Sunday, March 21, 2010

Override is not the answer! (neither is WAR)

Springfield Sunday Republican reports

So yeah, this concerns me a tad: the highest read edition of the 3rd largest newspaper in Massachusetts publishes this routine overview article. Concerns me only because the uninformed voter may read it and think--because of outgoing Amherst School Committee Chair Andy Churchill comments--that the override is now down to $1.12 million, which of course it is not.

What town officials claim is that if unexpected tooth fairy revenues come in--as they always do--they will do as they did in the 2004 Override scenario and not tax to the full extent of the levy in the first year.. However after that one year they will tax to the full extent of the $1.68 MILLION Override amount PLUS THE 2.5% ALLOWED BY LAW.
##########################################
Original Post 1:00 PM

So I rolled through town center at around 12:30 PM and the anti-war folks, who have been on that corner every Sunday for 30+ years, outnumbered the "Vote Yes" people--mainly Ricky Boy Hood family and tenderfoot Field Marshal Clare Bertrand--three to one.

You know the drill: click photo to enlarge. The exceedingly small contingent of "Vote Yes" drones are, fittingly, on the extreme left.

22 comments:

uninformed local said...

A tip for anyone who walks past these or other downtown protestors/petition pushers/sign holders and does not feel like getting confrontational...if they approach you, just ask for directions to the Emily Dickinson House and that will short circuit the spiel. (Doesn't work if they know you of course.)

aqualung said...

that guy i affectionately call aqualung...balding with long hair

Anonymous said...

Translation: LarryK's not sure he's going to win

Anonymous said...

translation: not enough people to make an anti override contingent. oh right- pubic safety concerns are preventing the no more override side from standing on a sidewalk with signs. I forgot.

LarryK4 said...

What difference does it make if I'm sure or unsure? As Doris Day so once famously belted out: "Que Sera, Sera--whatever will be will be."

The fact of the matter is THIS Override is going to lose--as well it should.

But the other 'fact of the matter' is these "true believers" have also packed Town Meeting with their drones so it will be coming back soon enough for another go.

And next time they will be smart enough (in an Elementary School sort of way) to make it a "menu Override."

LarryK4 said...

Actually Cowardly Nitwit Anon 5:12 PM, I'm now told by a reliable source (and yeah, I should have remembered this) that Public Safety--one cop and two firefighters--are no longer on the cut list.

Sooooo... if the Override passes or not, NO difference.

Anonymous said...

Geeze Larry, that really destroys the Shaffer holding public safety hostage theory so popular on this blog doesn't it? But I'm sure you'll remind us of a lot of other reasons to remain distrustful.

LarryK4 said...

Well I think he learned his lesson from the last time I (or I should say Stan Gawle) kicked his butt on this issue.

Although he did throw in the $50,000 in street lights snuffing, so maybe he needs another lesson.

Actually Cowardly Nitwit Anon 5:12 said...

Larry, you dope, I'm not saying public safety concerns (like police and fire), I was referring to your bogus rationale for NO no-more-overriders in the center of town because they were afraid of what...? distracting drivers into accidents? remember? you were so concerned about the number of accidents that might be caused by people holding signs that you deferred that activity this year.

Like trying to keep tracks of lies, it must be hard to remember all of your excuses for not having a presence.

LarryK4 said...

No, actually it's not. Nice thing about a having a core.

I went through town center a few times today, and I would not call your presence a "presence."

Actually Cowardly Nitwit Anon 5:12 said...

you give me a lot of credit. more than I deserve. ("your" presence)

at least the pro-overriders could attract some people who were willing to stand up for what they believe in.

LarryK4 said...

Ummm...yeah.

Ricky Boy Hood, his family and you. Yikes.

Anonymous said...

I see little cracks starting to show in the confidence here from the Town Bully.

The spin here on Wednesday morning will be something to behold, like "I knew it all along".

Count the number of properties in town with multiple "No More Override" signs. In other words, they had more signs than places to put them.

LarryK4 said...

Yeah, all three of them.

As real estate agents are overly fond of saying, "Location, location, location."

Anonymous said...

Time for some sweeping generalities.

First, there's a huge difference in how electronically savvy the "Yes" and "No" sides are. "Yes" is headed by a former VP of worldwide marketing (Tierkel). He's used mailing lists to trumpet his cause and bring traffic multiple sites. Localocracy is a big one, and it was not coincidentally launched just before the override push (Tierkel is an advisor to that site). The dominance of the pro-overide side there is supposed to reflect community sentiment. In fact, I think, it more reflects a bias in Tierkel's mailing list, heavy on parents and other people likely to support an override. And it also reflects the awkwardness one inevitably feels in this town when daring to ask where all the money is going. Laugh if you want, but in Amherst, openly voicing an anti-override opinion is likely to gain you some scorn from parents and others honestly convinced that more money crucial for the well-being of the children.

The "No More Overrides" side doesn't even have a URL or contact info on their signs-- in one way, very sensible, because they're meant to be used over and over! But I had to dig even to find out where I could get a sign, and the last I looked, that basic info isn't even posted on the "No More Overrides" (very Web 1.0) website!

Fewer signs, nobody waving black and yellow on the corner doesn't necessarily mean a lack of support. It may just be a reluctance to get verbal abuse and scorn. But these reluctant folks still may vote "No."

It's going to be close. But with layoffs looming everywhere, including at Amherst's biggest employer, I wouldn't bet against the "No" side just yet. Too many town salaries over $100K for people not to notice.

LarryK4 said...

Yeah, something like that.

Ed said...

But with layoffs looming everywhere, including at Amherst's biggest employer

My information is good and these are going to be SIGNIFICANT layoffs....

The likes of which Amherst has never seen before....

Cap'n Trick Hood said...

"I will be voting yes. As a potential School Committee member, I want as much money as possible to work with as we work to improve our schools."



FAIL

Anonymous said...

So I wonder, how many of Mr. Kelley's "tools" (as Larry likes to call folks who clamber on board someone else's coattails) actually put themselves out there to serve in volunteer positions in the town? Or do they just like to sit back and take mean spirited pot shots at folks who are actually trying to make a contribution? Speak up, I'd like to hear from you.

FAIL

LarryK4 said...

Why would anyone "speak up" to respond to a Cowardly Anon Nitwit?

Anonymous said...

Slam

Anonymous said...

The "tools" are anonymous too Larry, so they shouldn't mind speaking up now, should they? Or am I wrong about that? Will I be able to find Cap'n Trick in the phone book? Or maybe on the Town Meeting member list? Or in the contact info for members of one of our town boards or committees? Just wondering what his contributions to the town might be other than Chief Petty Officer in Charge of Ridicule (with an emphasis on petty).