>>"... at which point, a woman in the same group let loose the common riffs: if you hate the town, leave it."

With each passing year many taxpayers are taking her up on her offer -- not only leaving town, but leaving the state.

They are only buying time, and in doing so locking-in fiscal collapse. There's a cosmic justice, and they're going to get theirs in the form of permanent layoffs / reductions in force, pension cutbacks (if not defaults) and their children, no longer being able to attach themselves to a public sector job for life (as among other things the unions will eventually agree to major concessions applying only to "new hires") being economically exiled to better-run states as they'll be forced to make their way in the private sector, just like the rest of us ... no doubt leading to some interesting and awkward conversations around the Thanksgiving dinner table.

Who would deny that thanks to the union-Democrat hegemony, Rhode Island's future resembles Detroit?

" if you hate the town, leave it, etc."

... um, ma'am, if Justin and his ilk leave the town, who will pay the wages of your family member or friend who is employed by the town?

Government employee unionists and Democrats are fascists. There is no other explanation for this story.

Unfortunately, a lot of folks are upside down on their mortgages, haven't gotten any increase in their paycheck/SS check, have to pay their own health benefits, have trouble paying their bills and can't afford to move out of this town.
The amount of disrespect shown to the Moderator and Budget committee members was an absolute disgrace. I was disgusted by the wave around the gym by the “red” shirts. How childish can you get? What kind of example are you to your children on conducting yourself in a civilized manner? This is how you carry on at a serious meeting that affects the people of this town.
I’ll be there next week. I will work hard all week to get other serious minded, fiscally responsible people to attend next Saturday.

I think it is very important for Justin to really understand. You turn off a lot of potential allies with your extreme partisian talk. I am a democrat\independant. My whole family, & some friends, all democrats, went today to vote for no more increase in the budget. It is not the time. I believe consessions need to be made by all departments.

Justin your could be much more effective if you were not so hateful & just plain wrong. It is all parties who want a releif from this economic time. I GUARETEE YOU, you would be wildly ore successful if you weren't so close minded. I am a parent who truelly believes it is overdue that these local union protectd jobs need a major overhall. I mean an ending.

Justin, you need to encompass all people. You do a disservice to your own cause & party, as well as others who also have benn searching for ways to meake a change.

Speaking of disservice, if "democrat" was educated in the Tiverton public schools, he/she should go back and punch the English teacher squarely in the face.

Justin, many people here in Tiverton find that the TCC is not really interested in transparency as much as they are in getting things done the way that they want things done. Look at the whole budget committee presentation. Not really allowing questions to be asked and having a budget created by one person who refuses to speak to the press seems a bit shady to me. The same could be said for last years budget vote which stank of inside dealing by the TCC members. Then we have a town moderator who foolishly states that he will need to consult with TCC member Rob Coulter about the meeting and the agenda. Like it or not the group has become very polarizing, TCC member Caron did praise people for having "the courage" to talk about closing a school and then you guys say that could never happen. Finally Justin, you must realize that your own presence as the TCC webmaster has caused people to stay away from the group. You can call your website non-partisan and non-aligned with any party but I think you can see how silly that is. Maybe some of us "townies" (your term Justin) are a little more clear headed than you give us credit for. We are not all unionist and democrats but just people who care about the town and don't enjoy being talked to and scolded by the heads of the TCC as if we are to stupid to know whats is best for us.

democrat:

It was literally the Democratic Town Committee that cooked up and implemented the scheme that we witnessed at the FTM. I should have been clearer about that, and I'll modify the post.

Regarding my supposed hatefulness, I'll need you to be more specific. I don't hate even the architects of this scheme, and I'm eager to be cordial, even friendly, with them whenever we interact.

Trip,

For clarification: I used the term "townie" to describe Mike Carreiro, a man who states his name and address, as required, at town meetings and then his year of graduation from Tiverton high school. Two out of three times I've heard him speak at public meetings, he's referred to the retirees in the gated communities as "a cancer on this town." If the term "townie" does not apply to that guy — whose wife is a teacher, by the way, so he's got a direct financial stake in sucking revenue out of the town's accounts — then I don't know when it would. If you're not like that, then the term does not apply to you.

As for the rest of your comment, well, look, we're not a horde. We're not a disciplined military insurgency. We're just a bunch of folks who've never done anything like this, for the most part. Yeah, we've got a range of backgrounds, tempers, and motivations. That's to be expected in a grassroots organization.

As for whether I, personally, turn people off, I do my best to be affable, but I believe what I believe, and I say so. I'm certainly not partisan, just straightforward.

And by the way, the Budget Committee's actions were never discussed at any TCC meetings, and I, for one, knew nothing about them. My understanding, though, is that Cynthia Nebergall undertook to find cuts that would get the budget below the tax cap, presented those cuts to the committee, they were discussed, and then the committee voted. I don't see anything at all shady in that.

Justin, I would not say that it is you personally who turn people off but your politics at time are divisive. I find it hard to fathom that you do not think yourself to be partisan. I do not know you personally but what I have seen at meetings and read here and heard on the radio do show you to be straightforward but also partisan. I would say that you seem to be an honest, caring person, beyond what I know of your public persona I would not try to form a judgement on you. Things are getting ugly here in Tiverton, with both sides using talking points and name calling to paint the other as evil. You call people who oppose you, Unionists and others with TCC ties go far beyond that. Just look back to the now defunct comments section from the East Bay papers if you want to see ugly.

I'm ideological, not partisan. That's why I not-infrequently wind up with Republicans and TCC members who won't talk to me...

And I only call people who oppose me "unionists" when they're, well, unionists. I think the gang of red shirts (literally!) at the FTM suggests the appropriateness of using an aggregate term for the bunch.

As for the Eastbay comments section, I saw that coming. It's why I stopped participating in discussions, there, some months ago and advised everybody else to do the same. (Not that everybody listens.)

In fact, I'd put forward the stark difference of Anchor Rising's comment sections as evidence of the inaccuracy of painting me as an irrational partisan.

Justin the other budget members clearly say in the article and letters that they have written that no discussion of the budget was allowed. Nebergrall stated that she does not talk to the press but if you are in the public eye and presenting a budget,especially one this important, I think you owe it to the people to answer some questions from the press. The people who voted for the budget were all TCC members. Those who voted against are not. It seems that the TCC members of our town government have more of a concern about the TCC agenda than the will of the people of the entire town. You believe that those against you are in conspiracy with the unions and so on and so forth, but the TCC motives and actions are above reproach. OPerhaps your motives and actions are but I don't think some members of your group are as honest and upstanding as you would hope. I however would like to thank you for cleaning the gym, I would never have given you any crap for doing the public a service like that.

I would not call you irrational but partisan I will stick with. Don't forget last years yellow cards at the meeting, same deal as the read shirts. Why is alright for one side to organize but not another?

I think the comments from other Budget Committee members have expanded beyond accuracy. My understanding of their complaint is that previous committees have taken every line item up, engaged in on-the-spot discussion, and come up with a number (surely, folks sometimes had secret lists in mind as they argued and voted). This time, one member presented a complete list for discussion. The committee moved quickly because the votes were in favor, but I don't believe discussion was prevented or stopped. (One of those votes, by the way, was by a non-TCC member who voted with the other side last year.)

I don't know how you can glean from my statements, above, that I believe everything everybody in TCC does to be beyond reproach.

And I didn't say that the red shirts weren't "alright." I said that it's not reasonable to object to a collective term for people who show their unity by wearing red shirts to a town meeting.

Trip and Democrat:

Can we return to substance here? In Rhode Island, teacher pay is in the top 20%, property taxes are among the highest in the country and student achievement is in the bottom 20% nationally. Are you advocating for a continued exacerbation of these unacceptable conditions in Tiverton?

If yes, why? If yes, who do you envision will pay for all of this spending if the town drives people away or into fiscal instability with yet another year of property tax hikes (and a potentially astronomical one at that)?

Monique, you can and do have that disscusion in many places This discussion, that you are trying to control is about the incivility of the town meeting. I think that Justin and I were having an important conversation about the TCC and its opponents.Many people in Tiverton do not feel the same way that the group does, as evidenced by the turn out and rancor of the meeting. Many people including myself find their claim of transparency and non-partisanship to be somewhat dubious given the website and the attacks made by members of the group using the TCC name in the press and blogs(not this one). Not to mention some of the tactic and actions they have used since inception.If you want to talk about school reform and changes to education go right ahead, but please don't try to tell others what is of substance and worthy of being talked about.

Tiverton's FTM was a shameful exercise in the democratic process! The total lack of civility and mutual respect is yet another indication of the slow demise of democracy in this country!

While I was unable to attend the meeting, I have heard that the mean spiritedness and bad behavior came from both sides. I am smart enough to realize that bad behavior and rudeness take place on both side of the aisle. As I said before one only need to have red the Eastbay comments section to see nasty small minded words from all sides of this argument. I have been trying very hard to rise above that sort of stuff but sometimes anger gets the better of us.

Justin: while this is a small point, it may be indicitive of a bigger issue of how people percieve you as a hypocrite. You make reference to the red shirts and allude to some kind of point that isn't worth really getting into, BUT, why don't you mention that the TCC members were wearing their very nice logo'd shirts (yellow), and were asked to bring their postcard (yellow) with them to the meeting. What was the point of bringing the card?? Was it to raise it during the votes?? A sea of yellow was the vision I guess. Also, someone mentioned that this post/blog is TCC free, it is not. And Monique, your "sirs" and "ma'ams" are rather condensending. And finally, thanks for cleaning up Justin. The comment you recieved IS sadly union mentality, but this story isn't about that per se. Just be honest Justin and stop the silly TCC spin. I do believe that groups like the TCC have value, but when you only state part of the story, are one-sided, and either lie, or truly don't know the facts, the credibility and value is washed away.

And, just so you know Justin, the man who wanted to skip ahead is not part of the machine. He shows up EVERY YEAR and makes a motion for a vote right after the resolutions. The problem here was that the resolutions was eating up so much time (from both sides), that he just wanted to get the budget done. Since you've only been to 2 or 3 meetings, you wouldn't realize that he has been doing that for 20+ years. Another assumption you've made to build your conspiracy case.

Trip,

As objectively as I can assess the situation (and I'm sure belief will fall along predictable lines), from where I sat the undue hostility (as opposed to expected tempers from the microphones in the heat of debate) was almost entirely one sided. Certainly not anywhere near parity.

TheTruth,

Again, you're misconstruing my mention of the red shirts. You're also misrepresenting the yellow shirts. Only a few core TCC people wore them, mostly Dave Nelson, with the intention that they'd be visible to anybody who wanted to vote with them. The cards were the same idea (although I've always shied from the "hold the card up" idea).

The motion to move ahead and move the budget may have been made by somebody outside of "the machine," but the machine certainly didn't shy away from the move. And it was entirely a machine move to stop debate on the largest expenditure in the budget, which was the single most objectionable thing to happen during the meeting.

Justin, ever hear the old saying "you can't fight city hall"?

Well, guess what? It's true! I can make a very educated prediction - because not only did my family try to do the same thing, but I know at least a dozen others who burned themselves out doing it....

The Prediction is this: You will never accomplish your goals, and you will get burned out in the attempt, probably harming the mental and/or physical health of yourself and your family.

But here is the good (or slightly better) news.....

Much of the change you seek will happen anyway - with or without you - simply forced by economic times and by less partisan (read: more reasonable) people.

Change always happens slower that most of us predict. As you can see from the comment above, many staunch democrats and independents want to save money and balance budgets just as much or more than you do. But the "system" has a mind of it's own and will crunch you up and spit you out.

Still, I under the pull of trying. We did it ourselves for years....I ran the "anti" blog in our mid-sized town of GOP-high spending stalwarts, and ended up helping elect a couple Dems so the council was at least 3-2. The Dems voted against some big bonds which needed a super majority, and therefore "saved" the taxpayers money.....but just a year or two later, when the GOP retained one of the other seats, they not only spent what they had missed, but about 4X that!

So keep on seeking fame and fortune as long as you enjoy it for sport and it is healthy for you. But the chances of you changing anything that is not changing anyway is about nil. Take it from one who knows.

I'm have many issues to address with you and the TCC. First your comment about " so that their newly frightened contingent (parents) wouldn't have a chance to hear contrary arguments, and vote for more money for themselves and their pet causes." the parents of this are intellegent enough to see what is going on and come and support their children and school and yes we wore red as a matter for fact I believe it was a parent who started with the wearing of red. You should be applauding the parents for being their to ensure their children are heard and represented. Funny that TCC acts as the know all and berates all the stand what they believe and assume we are uninformed. Where was the TCC when the new schools were being moved into and needed help? I was there as well as many parents and students helping during vacation time getting the school ready. I watched TCC members come in and walk the schools and critcize and never once opened a box help a teacher or pick up a book. Good for you Justing for finally helping by picking up trash of course you had people watching so had to make it look good. I have lived in this town for 8 years and have volunteered my time and gave back because I have 4 children and want them to know they have to give to get. I wore red on Saturday and will be there this coming Saturday in red again and hoping that all my friends show up with red to support their town and schools and YES my children are proud of me what embarrasses them are groups like yours that don't relay both sides and takes away from their future. Funny both this site and the TCC site both solicite donations yet they only want to give the school dept. $1.00.

I'm have many issues to address with you and the TCC. First your comment about " so that their newly frightened contingent (parents) wouldn't have a chance to hear contrary arguments, and vote for more money for themselves and their pet causes." the parents of this are intellegent enough to see what is going on and come and support their children and school and yes we wore red as a matter for fact I believe it was a parent who started with the wearing of red. You should be applauding the parents for being their to ensure their children are heard and represented. Funny that TCC acts as the know all and berates all the stand what they believe and assume we are uninformed. Where was the TCC when the new schools were being moved into and needed help? I was there as well as many parents and students helping during vacation time getting the school ready. I watched TCC members come in and walk the schools and critcize and never once opened a box help a teacher or pick up a book. Good for you Justing for finally helping by picking up trash of course you had people watching so had to make it look good. I have lived in this town for 8 years and have volunteered my time and gave back because I have 4 children and want them to know they have to give to get. I wore red on Saturday and will be there this coming Saturday in red again and hoping that all my friends show up with red to support their town and schools and YES my children are proud of me what embarrasses them are groups like yours that don't relay both sides and takes away from their future. Funny both this site and the TCC site both solicite donations yet they only want to give the school dept. $1.00.

"Monique, you can and do have that disscusion in many places This discussion, that you are trying to control is about the incivility of the town meeting"

You ascribe to me a great deal of power that I do not possess, Trip. I am not trying to control the discussion. I'm pointing out that, as the topic of your conversation thread with Justin will not be the subject of the vote at the reconvened FTM Saturday nor will it impact the financial future of Tiverton taxpayers (and, therefore, of the town of Tiverton), it is a secondary matter. Possibly interesting and certainly not to be silenced but definitely secondary to the larger matter at hand.

Michelle:

In Rhode Island, teacher pay is in the top 20%, property taxes are among the highest in the country and student achievement is in the bottom 20% nationally. Are you advocating for a continued exacerbation of these unacceptable conditions in Tiverton?

If yes, why? If yes, who do you envision will pay for all of this spending if the town drives people away or into fiscal instability with yet another year of property tax hikes (and a potentially astronomical one at that)?

Thank you in advance for any comment on these matters that you make.

Michelle,

I don't mean this with any malice: I've gone to just about every school committee meeting for the past, I don't know, two years, and the audience has often consisted of me and the reporter from the Newport Daily News. Sometimes union heads stop by. Sometimes a member or two from the Democratic Town Committee. The teachers mostly come when they want to pressure the school committee for more money.

One can safely say that most parents in town, while surely intelligent, are not as well informed as you insist.

I don't fault them for that. They really shouldn't have to pay as close attention as I do. That should be what we have elections and representatives are for. The budget process of public schools in Rhode Island is so complicated, with so many deliberate distractions — I'd say, illusions or tricks — that it takes hours of listening, reading, researching, and laying out of spreadsheets to get a handle on where the numbers are coming from. The parents of Tiverton are being played.

Did you notice that the school committee and union failed to reach agreement before the FTM? You know that $440,000 in supposed concessions that the school committee has budgeted as part of its money-saving plan? Not only is that not ensured in the least, but it's only a little more than half of the increased expenses that the school committee has budgeted for salaries and benefits. And don't forget that the union weaseled out of a larger copay last year, costing the district $120,000 for which it had budgeted.

Think about this: if there were really a treat that an entire school's worth of teachers would be laid off, don't you think the union would be anxious to agree to the 5 or 6% decrease in salaries/benefits that would be required to save that $1.2 million?

And that's not even getting into the $2 million in "restricted" aid that the district uses to free up other money for unrestricted purposes. The supposed $1.2 million shortfall is entirely the "restricted" aid that came out of nowhere from the federal government last year, and the school department wants to build it into the budget, so they're insisting that they need that much of an increase in local funding or they'll have to start closing schools and canceling every extracurricular and specialty program? That shouldn't even pass the smell test.

Think on this:

• School Committee Chairman Jan Bergandy has said that he has not cared to seek more in concessions than was necessary to get the district down to its own 4.5% cap.
• Bergandy and Superintendent Rearick personally told me, in the autumn, that they had no intention of being cautious about the federal windfall, in light of the hard times and anti-tax sentiment in town. I believe they said they'd "take their chances" at the FTM.
• And yet they've hinged the viability of the entire school district for which they have authority on a single, unpredictable vote at a town meeting which has typically swung on less than a couple dozen votes?

You buy that?

>>>student achievement is in the bottom 20% nationally.

Are you sure you are not picking and choosing the stats you want, and then using that as a Straw Man?

As a for instance, the Smartest State Rankings - 2007 - at:
http://www.morganquitno.com/edrank.htm

shows RI at #14 and with quite a high numerical rating. Many other surveys of this type rate RI either in the middle of the pack or above.

Yet you, Monique, seem to think you can convince people in a "smart state" that their kids are stupid and they are too!

Well, we are not! There are problems everywhere, but don't put RI in the same league with Alabama, Mississippi and Arizona, those states you so desire to make it like!

Come up with a reasonable argument based on ALL the facts, not some cherry picking, and people may start to listen.

Monique, the subject of my post and Justin's blog is not about teacher pay. It is about the meeting on Saturday and the acrimony that was palpable there. Teacher pay and everything you mentioned are important discussions but they are not the topic of this section. What we are all talking about is the way a meeting could turn so ugly.Your talking points don't really fit the topic in this case. The town is divided and as I said before many people distrust the TCC and have good reason to do so in my opinion.

You say that our topic of conversation will not be voted on or have impact, which could not be farther from the truth. I think many more people might be inclined to listen to the TCC if they were less divisive.The groups claims at transparency are just that, transparent. Many people can see right through that claim due to the groups actions and words.

I am one of the red shirts that were present at the FTM. I have lived in this town for 14 years and I have two kids: one is in the school system, the other will be entering next year. When I bought my house in 1996, my wife and I didn't have any kids, but because I was making a long-term investment in the town, I checked out the school systems thoroughly, to the point where I called the superintendent and asked several questions. I also stood proudly with the majority of the taxpayers in this town to approve the bond issue to prepare our schools and our students for the future, fully understanding the long-term financial commitment. I view these acts as "contracts" that I made with the town. I pay my taxes, you educate my kids (and perform other usual public services, but most of all, educate my kids!)

I don't know if the threats to close the schools are merely scare tactics any more than you do; regardless, if the school system is effectively level-funded for the second year in a row, I consider those contracts to be broken. Now, many of your supporters may have a different view of their "contract" with the town, and I won't quibble with their right to cherish a belief any more than you should quibble with mine.

This is just so you know where I'm coming from, and where other red shirt parents are coming from. Call me "scared" if you want. In my opinion, my desire to cherish my children and to protect their public education trumps your desire to save a few dollars a week on your taxes. Just saying.

Now that you know where I am coming from, I disavow any and all sympathy for the idiot who wasted an hour of my time with his ridiculous motion regarding the resignation of Mr. Smith. I'm sure that you are just as eager to disassociate yourself from members of "your side" who shouted down or interrupted speakers, or who mocked speakers from their position of authority at the "leadership table."

This was an extremely emotional meeting, with tempers high on each "side," and each side bears responsibility for Saturday's travesty. Mr. Katz, I compliment you for your calm and rational manner at the meeting. Sadly, you were in the minority, and I submit my own actions following the meeting as worthy of personal shame. To Mr. Smith, I apologize for joining the rabble surrounding you at the table following the meeting. My actions will be more controlled next week, and I hope that the meeting will proceed without the childish behavior that occurred on Saturday.

I think the following comment sums up very well the idealism which Justin so claims he represents:

“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.”
--------------------
I certainly could not say it myself in better words. There is nothing wrong with being frugal....but there IS A LOT WRONG with being selfish, and there is a difference between the two. Those who cannot tell the difference might call themselves, like Justin does, Ideologues.

Finally, before I go to bed (school night and all), I ask you to consider the following. Three dollars per week will buy you:

Coffee and a doughnut at DD
Ten cigarettes
A gallon of gas...

You get my point, and I get yours: where does it stop? For me, it doesn't stop at coffee and a doughnut, because three dollars will buy me, and the other red shirts, a continued quality education for our children.

You have made the claim that Tiverton schools offer a poor quality education, and in doing so you imply that this is something that concerns you. Will level-funding the schools for a second consecutive year improve their performance? I will be there on Saturday, but I won't be voting for a 20% increase in the school budget. I'll be voting for an average 10% increase over the last two years.

J.:

It would be one thing if that were the bargain being struck. But it's not.

Taxes have doubled in ten years. Teacher pay and benefits are way out of balance with the private sector, to the point that they're squeezing out programs and services. It just can't continue, not the least because there's no incentive for change that has nothing to do with money.

Let these tactics continue, and in ten years, you'll be paying more for even less.

And I'm not going to let the $3 per week thing slide. That's on a $200,000 house. The average house in Tiverton is $307,000. If you make the town's median income for a man ($41,000) and own an average house ($307,000), the school committee's request results in about a 1% reduction in your salary. That's assuming we get every penny of state and federal aid. The way the school committee has phrased its request, that same resident will be liable for over a 2% reduction in his income.

J.

I've taken a 14% reduction in pay in the past two years. My wife's place of employment closed, and she's earning significantly less, with greater costs, this year.

The school committee just approved a contract for administrators that holds their salaries level but gives them two more weeks of vacation. (That's about 5% less work on the year.) It shaves 15 minutes off their work days. It increases their co-payment from 15% to 18%, but moves them to a "high deductible" plan, probably evening things out. Wanna know what a high deductible means to school employees? $250.

J: The money is not going to your children.

Mr. Katz, I understand and agree to those financial terms to secure the education of my children in this town. You do not. Let's agree to disagree, but I believe in personal responsibility and I will never hide my beliefs and concerns behind a cloud of partisan disingenuous arguments. Let's agree to agree on that. Just saying.

Not good enough, J. It is, in fact, a disingenuous cloud to make such allegations without justifying them. Explain to me what is partisan and what is disingenuous in what I've said.

Look, I've been on these numbers for months... years, now. I'm laying it out as accurately and clearly as I can. I'm not hiding anything that I consider to be inconvenient.

I will submit to you that the stop sign on your particular idealogical road will be an exodus of wage earning, tax paying families from this town, the broad middle class that pays the vast majority of the taxes. If you think you see a lot of for sale signs now...

Reduced home values and a shrinking tax base will lead to a) reduced services or b) higher taxes.

I'm sorry to hear about your job situation. I have been lucky in that my wife and I have only had to accept salary freezes and longer hours. For the record, I'm all for putting the brakes on the deferred benefits packages that have crushed so many municipalities. But that is neither here nor there. You are fighting an ideological war, and my kids are not pawns.

No, no, no. You said I was being disingenuous. Tell me how, or admit that you believe that because people with a direct financial interest in having you vote their way have asserted it to be the case.

I am fighting an ideological war, but it's one with the practical goal of improving education and opportunity. (You don't think the unions are ideological?)

J., that's another set of numbers that I've been looking at for years: The working and middle classes have been fleeing Rhode Island for much of this decade, and it was most definitely not because people like me are gaining ground standing up to public sector unions. It's because there's no opportunity here. The game is rigged.

I don't want your kids as pawns. The opposite is true. I want your kids to stop being pawns for people who retire in their late '40s with pensions above the median salary for the state and then run for seats on school committees and in the General Assembly in order to keep the scheme going.

You can't buy your way out of this spiral. We've got to arrest it from the bottom up. If we start now, your kids will graduate from a much better school system into a state with much greater opportunity for the upwardly mobile.

Side note: It's such a strange aspect of this debate that well-intentioned and clearly intelligent people will assume that folks like me are being deceitful for the sake of self interest and a few hundred dollars, while folks with tens of thousands of dollars in pay and perks on the line are being entirely forthright. That folks like me with strong beliefs and an independent streak are irrationally ideological while folks like School Committee member Carol Herrmann's husband, Nick Tsiongas — who literally advocates for socialized healthcare — are objective advocates for other people's children.

Strange.

The partisan part is easy. You have stated your case in opposition of the proposed school committee budget clearly. You are in favor of holding the line on taxes, and the majority of your beliefs align with those of the TCC. I didn't think I needed to state the obvious.

You are disingenuous because you have yet to lay any of the blame for Saturday's fiasco at the feet of those who agree with your partisan position. You criticize Deb Palasch (sp) for her sloppy command of the facts, but you have not made one mention of Mr. Smith's utterly inept and borderline biased "command" of the meeting. Nor have you criticized any other TCC partisan who behaved poorly. I said earlier that I believe in personal responsibility. That should include the willingness to critique and even rebuke people when they fail or behave badly--even when they happen to agree with your position.

I think I have taken your measure. Now prove me right.

Side note: I agree with your fight against the unions. The FTM and the future of the town's educational system is the wrong battlefield.

> It is, in fact, a disingenuous cloud to make such allegations without justifying them

Then perhaps, Justin, instead of quoting the salary figure that ONE MAN earns on average, you should tell us the average household income - since it is a household that pays taxes, not a man.

Family Median income is approx 60K and will probably be higher once the 2010 census comes out.

Also, property taxes are deductible, so you don't lose the net amount.

Can you do the honest calculations, Justin?

I can only think that you are either deliberately trying to mislead the readers....OR....that you don't know yourself about household family income.

Which is it?

To the above, Justin, let me add that very obvious - that folks with the more expensive houses tend to MAKE MORE MONEY and therefore "lose" an even smaller percentage of their income to that tax increase.

If your made-up "man" who had a family and makes only 40K, but lives in a 300+K house, was real....the tax increase would be the least of his financial problems!

I know - that seems obvious - but maybe not to you.

>I've taken a 14% reduction in pay in the past two years

Justin, if you put 1/4 the time you are putting into this...into real work that would make money for you and your family....you'd see a heck of a lot more than than 14 percent made up!

Take my word for it - I did it, and it worked.

Frankly, I've been skeptical of Smith from the beginning. Unfortunately, so few people are willing to step forward for this sort of abuse that he emerged and won the position before anybody'd had a chance to know who he was. All most of us knew was that his opposition (Mike Burk) was among the most heated and vitriolic opponents of TCC. The behind the scenes fact of the matter is that Smith gave a bizarre interview with the Sakonnet Times (with all of the Rob Coulter references), but after that, Town Solicitor Andy Teitz warned him that he wouldn't defend him against lawsuits if he didn't follow his advice. As far as I know, TCC has had very little communication with Smith since then.

Sure he bobbled a lot of language on Saturday, but for goodness sake, look at the environment. Within minutes, he had folks calling for his resignation. He never had a chance to get that meeting under control, and he never claimed to be an old hand at mob management. Under the circumstances, I think he did reasonably well, considering that even Teitz looked frazzled.

Hopefully this Saturday, Smith will read every movement verbatim. Stick to the Yeas and Nays script. And simply manage the meeting.

Objectively speaking, though, Smith is not nearly on my side to the extent that Pallasch is on the other side. I'd be very surprised if he made any rulings in contradiction of Teitz, and I'd put Teitz firmly on the other side. Regarding TCC misbehavior at the meeting, I guess you'll have to be more specific. Jay Lambert got a little heated, but your side was just about to shut down all discussion of the single largest issue facing the town in any given year. Think of that: shut down debate! And I know Jeff regrets the violin thing. There are personal rivalries going back years, on both sides, that I don't fully comprehend. Nor do I want to comprehend them.

Beyond that, as I said above, there's a reason partisan Republicans and other TCC members go through long spells of not speaking to me.

As for the FTM as battlefield: It's the only battlefield, and they made it so. And if something else becomes the battlefield — say I run for School Committee — they'll threaten your children and get you to vote against me.

The median household income in Tiverton is closer to $50,000. But as usual, Stuart, your smug arguments are logically in-apropos. The parallel that I was drawing was to a 5% reduction in a teacher's salary. It makes no sense to count the income of one spouse when speaking of reducing the labor line of the school budget but to count the income of both spouses when speaking of the effect on a voter.

Yeah, right, Stuart. It's completely inappropriate of me to imagine the person with a median income living in an average house. You want it both ways: imagining two incomes to calculate the percentage of income represented by a tax increase, but only one income to afford the house.

If one spouse loses a percentage income because the schools decrease pay, that cost is borne over two incomes; if one spouse loses a percentage income because of increased taxes; that cost is borne over two incomes. In either case, two incomes can contribute to the mortgage.

But the fact that I find myself trying to conduct a conversation with you is evidence that I should shut down the computer and go to bed. Goodnight.

J. You say that paying an extra $150 is a contract that you're willing to accept. Ok, but that's not exactly how the system works. That sounds a little too trusting of them system that is in place. It works a little more like this:

School Committee: "We want to increase your taxes by $150 a year."

J.: "Yes! I'm proud to pay that money for my children! Yes, I will pay that $150 this year!"

...skip ahead a year...or even a few months when the school budget runs short...

School Committee: "We want to raise your taxes by $185 this year."

J.: "Yes! I'm proud to pay more for the sake of my children and a better education."

Skip ahead, some meetings with school committees and their unions as they discuss the upcoming contract where parents have stated they're willing to pay more for the sake of their kids.

School Committee: "We're raising taxes by $250 this year"

J.: "Ok, I'll pay that."

Then...

School Committee: "We're raising your taxes by $300 this year."

J.: "Ok, wait, hold on, I said I'd pay more each year, $150 was fine, I was even fine with $185, but now this is getting a little silly. Where is this money going? My kids are getting the same education as 5 years ago, yet my taxes have skyrocketed. Let's try to get this under control."

School Committee: "We want to raise your taxes by just $4 a week."

J."Ok, this is silly, another $300? My kids aren't even in the school system anymore. Why should I pay this? The committee needs to get their costs back under control. Actually, you know what, I have no need to live in this town anymore, I'm outta here."

Basically, where is the line? When is it "enough"? Clearly people who think like you do haven't hit that line yet. Some have. The problem is they take advantage of people who think like you and will take more and more and more, until even you say "Enough!"

>>>It's completely inappropriate of me to imagine the person with a median income living in an average house.

Which is what you didn't do? You instead said they live in a 300K plus house! "Average" does not usually take apartments, living in your parents house, inherited wealth, and MANY MANY other things into consideration.

Do the numbers.....a person making 40K brings home about 30K. That's 600 a week. You really and honestly think that someone with kids in school can live in a 300K+ house on 600 a week?

Please join the real world.

But let me do an "average" calculation which may be more to your situation. Let me guess that you have two kids in school. That cost about $14,000 a year.

But, you pay only $4,000 per year in property tax!

Who pays the rest? That's right, my friend - I do. I have no kids in school and pay 6K per year in RI.

Your neighbors chip in too. You know, the ones who you are arguing with.

How can you possibly judge someone like this:
"Nick Tsiongas — who literally advocates for socialized healthcare"

And yet collect or think it is OK to collect "socialized education" from your neighbors and friends?

Is it different when the money comes your way?

Ok, so you want vouchers. Let's say you pay a total of 4K in property taxes, 3K of which go to schools. How much do you want the vouchers to be? I guess you can see where I am going - you are guilty of socialist behavior and income redistribution.

Justin, since I assume you can lay out hip rafters, I KNOW you know better than the numbers you are throwing out - and that monique throws out - about the bottom of the pack in education, etc.....and about the "average" household family income.

Why not make a rational argument using real numbers? Sure, there is always that one case you can point to, but we don't make laws and budgets based on that.

BTW, as with many others here I am extremely fiscally conservative. It just happens that I try not be extremely hypocritical along with that.

Not sure why I'm bothering, but...

Stuart,

I'm not writing a research paper, here. These are quick examples for the purpose of debate in a blog comment section. So perhaps the average homeowner only sees a 0.75% reduction in real income based on the tax increase. Does that make a difference?

At any rate, I'm way too busy to play ping-pong with you.

Yes, Justin, it DOES make a difference in the context of this debate.

You also then have to weigh that .75% drop against other factors, such as their salary increases. Yes, the same teachers who get an increase then have a higher "average" salary!

So, if I get an increase of 3% in my wages and my school costs me .75% more, I am still UP 2.25%.

You are the one trying to make the few dollars into a "heavy" issue. Therefore, it would seem, the burden of proof rests on you to prove the hardship.

Again, I am right with you on pension reform, fiscal conservatism and anything that can be done to have more responsible and sane government and financial oversight. And, yes, there is such a think as death by 1,000 cuts.

As to "why you bother", perhaps it's because I am making relevant points. When one is discussing big picture stuff, they cannot point to the one hardship case and say "see, I told you it was bad". No policy is perfect for everyone living under it. I could start a whole blog dedicated to how much I am paying for your kids to go to school....but the bigger picture is that is part of my Social(ism) Contract that I buy into an as American and resident of the state.

Don't you find that attitude refreshing? That someone else is willing to help you by redistributing their income to you and your kids, sight unseen? Should I be angry about that? How about if you don't believe in birth control and send 5 kids to school at a total cost of 40K per year? Should I be angry about that?

Patrick, excellent description of the evolution of education funding in this state. Rhode Islanders have been very generous in this area, as demonstrated by our national ranking (high) in the categories of property taxes and teacher pay.

Justin is the TCC website an example of transparency. One writer on that site speaks of a 22% increase as if it is written in stone. You on the other hand mention it as only a possibility. What is it? You also write of scare tactics but isn't that what the group is doing itself. Using numbers to try to scare residents to your own side of things?

Justin is the TCC website an example of transparency. One writer on that site speaks of a 22% increase as if it is written in stone. You on the other hand mention it as only a possibility. What is it? You also write of scare tactics but isn't that what the group is doing itself. Using numbers to try to scare residents to your own side of things?

Trip,

I can't imagine the TCC or Justin getting many converts if the page said

"Hey, you might end up spending .50% or .75% more for your school".

They have to act like the sky is falling to be able to sway those who can't do math over to their way of thinking.

Mind you, there is nothing wrong with fiscal responsibility. But there IS something wrong when you have to vastly exaggerate to make a point.

"Justin is the TCC website an example of transparency. One writer on that site speaks of a 22% increase as if it is written in stone. You on the other hand mention it as only a possibility. What is it?"

First of all, Trip, you mischaracterize the situation. This is not a matter of transparency but simply of potential error.

More importantly, you are once again focusing on a distinctly secondary issue and missing the more important point: a 22% tax hike for Tiverton tax payers is a distinct possibility. I'm starting to wonder whether you have been deliberately attempt to distract from this frightening development.

If not, let's hear whether you support the option of a 22% tax hike and, if not, what you believe should be done to avert it.

Trip,

I'm not sure what "transparency" has to do with your question. On the site, Dave mentions the 22%, and I explain where it comes from. That Dave places his emphasis differently than I do doesn't mean there's deception going on.

Just look at Bergandy's number for local contributions. By law, the school committee can't request more than 4.5% of last year's local appropriation. Their request, however, is $27,000 or so high, and the reason is that they didn't get about $27,000 in state and federal aid. (That's general aid, by the way, they got millions more than that in "restricted" aid that frees up general revenue for other things.) In other words, from their point of view, if "total" number is part of the FTM vote, the town owes them that money. If the school committee and town council prevail in their requests, the tax levy will increase by a little over 9%, but the liability would be up to just over 23%, depending on the degree to which the state and federal governments follow through with the aid that the Tiverton Schools administration is predicting.

(N.B.: The 22% is if the Budget Committee prevails, rather than the Town Council, on the municipal budget.)

No Monique I am not missing anything. I am addressing in my discussion with Justin the way that local politics works from both sides. I find it very important that one group holds itself out as the truth tellers while villifying another. This I will say is being done by both sides in my opinion. Clearly you have an agenda and want to control the conversation.

The TCC speaks or scare tactics while clearly engaging in them as a group themselves.

Hmmm. One side emphasizes the outside boundary of the tax implications of a particular budget decision. One side tells parents that the school district will have to close a school and cancel everything beyond a very basic education to compensate for less of an increase than they'd like.

Yeah, just the same.

I'd note, too, that you began this inquiry noting the two different emphases on the TCC site itself. I've yet to hear a Democratic Town Committee person, or a union person, or a school administration person state their list of horribles as less than extremely likely.

I attended the financial town meeting for Tiverton on May 8th. I hoped to hear debate on the budget, particularly the controversial aspects of the funding for the schools, and then, after hearing each side, and while recognizing that partisan views would be expressed and perhaps the complete truth remain a bit or even very obscure, at least have the opportunity of actually voting on what we should do. I was, of course, like most, very disappointed. My disappointment can be attributed to three things.

Although perhaps well-intentioned, Mr. Smith, the moderator, clearly had no grasp of how to conduct a public meeting and a limited understanding of procedural issues. A sinister interpretation of his actions would suggest he was deliberately prolonging the meeting in the hope that next Saturday lower turnout on the part of voters would benefit one side or the other. The long gaps during which nothing was done and his frequent discussions with the chairman of the budget committee would lend some credence to such an interpretation, and would lead one to think this was subversion of democracy rather than democracy in action. A more charitable view would be that he was just in way over his head. In either case, he should resign. Unfortunately, there is no other timely mechanism available for his removal. It is clear, however, that we cannot afford another performance like that of last Saturday.

Secondly, rather than have a debate on the merits of the issues, most notably the school budget, there was almost incessant procedural maneuver cloaked in motions, appeals, amendments and moving the question and replete with citations of Roberts Rules of Order and the town charter. This did nothing but waste time. Everyone who attended the meeting knew we were there for really only one question: Should the school budget be $20 million as the budget committee recommends or $25 million as the school committee requests? We never really discussed why one view should prevail and the various implications of one amount over another. There was far more heat than light. If Tiverton Citizens for Change and the budget committee feel the budget committee’s recommendation should stand, they owe us all a reasonable presentation of the facts as they understand them. Similarly, if the supporters of the school committee feel otherwise, they should be prepared to do the same. Would it be unreasonable for each of the committees (budget and school) to make a 30 minute presentation explicating their positions? We have demonstrated our willingness to sit through a meeting where nothing was done. You have our attention. Please explain why we should vote one way or the other.

Finally, there was very poor communication between the auditorium and the gymnasium where the overflow crowd was accommodated adding more confusion to a situation which needed none. If the numbers attending this Saturday’s meeting are the same, there needs to be a clear mechanism for taking voice votes and hand counts in both rooms. That there was no real plan for coordinating this last Saturday was more than evident. Fortunately, it did not appear that any vote was close enough for the inexcusable lack of communication between the two rooms and to the podium to have made a difference, but the risk of disenfranchisement of those in the auditorium was real enough and cannot be allowed to occur again.

Through these many delays, the meeting went on for four hours and pretty much nothing was accomplished. I’m not sure which side it was, but I’m shrewd enough to realize that such an occurrence cannot possibly have been by accident. So, somebody got what they wanted on Saturday. What is also clear is that neither the majority of the electorate nor the children of Tiverton got either what they want or what they deserve. Are we really that similar to Congress? I don’t need to spend another Saturday at the high school, but am quite determined I will return on the 15th hoping that reason and civility will prevail

Jerry: EXCELLENT POINTS. I think that there should be presentations, but rules should be put into place because you then don't want a Q&A to open up, that could last forever!

Monique. There is no 22% increase, or even the possiblity of one. Justin uses Apples to Oranges and he knows it! He claims the school committee uses scare tatics, and they do, but so doesn't he and the TCC crowd, of which is is a key member.

Jeffery Caron shouts out that an increase is out of order. Umm, the people decide that Jeff, or are you trying to stop the residents from deciding what they want as a town?

4.5% cap is the law?? Not the complete law. The same statute allows for exceptions which the TCC doesn't like to let the residents know about. If there a substancial shortfall of revenue (1.4 Million in this case from the state in their broken promise), a city/town can get a waiver. Don't argue that the BC budget is less cuz so no waiver is needed, it's just a recommendation. The VOTERS/RESIDENTS have final say no matter how you guys try to spin it. Or are you trying to muffle them??? So much for looking out for the residents and transparentcy.

More spin please.....

As I've said: The amendments proposed by Deb Pallasch and School Committee Chairman Jan Bergandy would make the town liable for any shortfall in the predicted state and federal aid. This past year, it was only $27,000, but that's because the federal government stepped in with borrowed money.

Voters should judge for themselves how likely it is that the state and feds will pull back our aid, because we'd be responsible for every penny they cut with local money. The tax increase begins at 9% and could balloon to 23%.

As for following the law: Put aside the Robert's Rules statement that a meeting cannot break the law. Last year, the Town Solicitor and the moderator at that meeting ruled that school budget amendments had to follow the law and provide at least the same funding as the year before.

This year, we have no waiver. The town government did not follow the process, and the FTM sets the levy. That is, once the FTM votes, the levy has been determined, and nobody farther along in the process has authority to change it. We do not have a waiver in hand, so the law prevents us from exceeding a 4.5% increase.

Of course, we saw last Saturday just how concerned advocates of large tax increases are about procedural fairness and the law.

So, Truth or Trip, in view of Rhode Island's very high property taxes, high ranking teacher pay and the compensation disparity in RI that favors the public sector over the private, tell us how much of a tax increase for Tiverton is acceptable to you.

Monique. My posts has nothing to do with what I think is acceptable. I think zero is acceptable. But it's not my decision alone. My main point is that Justin is not being honest and you're buying into his claim of 22% blindly. Justin, your 23% is crap. You're using last years local funding vs. this years local PLUS state monies. 23% comes if the schools get ZERO!! from the state/feds. Big scary number, but what are the chances that the town will recieve ZERO Justin???? And if you are honest, you would compare last years local with state/fed funding, then come up with a percentage. Stop the games! Explain all of this in your posts if you are so concerned with transparancy! Shame on you.

And the waiver CAN be recieved AFTER the meeting. Again, I alone have no power in what the final votes are, but at least I'm not lying about what can be done. God can be proud of me.

Monique, I am still not biting. My points on this issue are that local politics has become very ugly and demonizing on both sides of this issue. This commentary is not really about the tax amount, it is about a local group and the way the town meeting went down. You don't live in Tiverton as i do and you probably only here what the good things about the TCC. The truth is that here in this town many people do not trust the group just as many people don't trust the NEA or in Justin's case the town council. As far as closing the schools or a school, the first person to bring that up was budget chairman Jeff Caron who praised the idea. He is a TCC original and a vocal spokesperson. I have seen the meetings and I am smart enough to realize that both sides are culpable for the ugliness that took place. I don't see it through my unionist rose colored glasses but i think that some people lack the same clarity about the groups role in all the ugliness and stalling tactics.

My property taxes in RI are not really that bad - at least compared to what they were in other areas I have lived.

What would be an acceptable increase? That's pretty easy - one that did not really affect my quality of life and yet did not stop valuable programs like art and music, etc.

One which is within reason.

That's the thing about human beings. They can reason. We don't have to run around squawking about how the state is folding, the sky is falling and the union is dissolving. We can actually think for ourselves....well, at least those of us not on the "right" side of Hope can!

"It was literally the Democratic Town Committee that cooked up and implemented the scheme that we witnessed at the FTM. I should have been clearer about that, and I'll modify the post."

A total lie, Justin, or at best a delusion. If you had at least said it was the teacher's union and certain members of the school committee who rallied people you might be near the ballpark. But we know that Rovian tactic that if all else fails, paint your opponents as partisan and try to make it about Democrats/Liberals etc...etc. Yes, obviously Democrats usually support more funding to schools, we get it, such a shame. So do parents of kids who attend those schools. (Damn special interest groups!) But this is a sad attempt on your part to try and change the tide in your favor by saying it was part of an organized effort by a group that has a handful of members. I know this whole site is based on the premise of "Who will rid me of these meddlesome Democrats", but sometimes it's like reading a the blog of a paranoid madman.

Taxpayers/voters showed up in force, and they might not have voted your way. I know, what a disappointment after setting the tone in town for the last couple years. Thank God, Rob prepared Mike well for this unforseen tragedy, eh?

Justin do you care to comment on this articel and how the TCC is disenfranchising the voters with false numbers...

On one hand you speak of the teachers using scare tactics but isnt that exactly what the TCC is doing? If I am wrong I will concede the point.

http://www.eastbayri.com/detail/135813.html?content_source=&category_id=20&search_filter=&list_type=&order_by=&order_sort=&content_class=&sub_type=&town_id=

I understand that we are in tough times and I dont want to see my taxes go up just as you dont. But it seems a little hypocritical to me, perhaps I am missing something.

Sure thing, tivcitizen. See here.

tivcitizen: Justin will spin the story that was posted by the Town's Tax Assessor and anyone else who dares challenge them, trust me, I know. They (justin and tcc) will use smoke and mirrors and pull a razzle dazzle. But just read another story that has been posted where the State has said the FTM CAN vote over the cap (i'm not advocating that per se), but Jeff Caron at FTM 1 shouted out that a motion was out of order when it would place a dollar amount over the cap. And, he had the letter from the state beforehand. These guys are not interested in telling the whole truth.

Yeah, tivcitizen, trust the anonymous commenter over the guy who puts his name on everything he writes. Sounds reasonable.

Look, all of these arguments are deep in local and state law, most of it not yet adjudicated. In other words, there are at least two plausible positions on each.

On the tax cap, I agree with Jeff. By town charter, the FTM itself performs the act of levying the tax. It's a done deal once it's voted on. The Division of Municipal Finance can rubber stamp it, but the levy is set. Only a court could find it illegal.

And in this case, a court should, because the town did not procure a waiver (with a 4/5 town council vote) before hand.

The bottom line: there's a whole lot of background learning before one can really engage in this discussion. Note how superficial are the arguments of "thretruth" --- mainly personal attacks and unexplained assertions.

(NB, there were actually two, contradictory letters from the state before the FTM, and the one in which Ms. Greschner (a week on the job) said the town could certify a waiver after the fact contradicts the division's own regulations.

Is there a reason why the TFC meeting's venue cannot be changed? Could we meet one Saturday at school for discussion of issues; vote the following Saturday at school by paper ballot.

I felt very bad for the moderator, who was obviously a nice person, but knew zip about Roberts Rules. Who decided to allow this Peter Principle in action to continue.

Also, why is a teacher who lives in another town and does not have voting rights, allowed to speak at the meeting?

It's all over now but the shouting (when the tax bills come due).