Council agenda 11/14
It looks like tomorrow's Council may be a lively one. There seem to be a few items that will generate some discussion, including:
1) Acceptance of an $81,850 grant for a program (incl staff) to prevent underage drinking. I support accepting the money and seeing the benefits of the program. However, I expect there to be discussion on "what happens when the funding ends? Does the position then get funded through local taxes?" I think that's an appropriate discussion to have. But I also feel that underage drinking is a real problem and two years may help us make real headway with it.
2) Appropriation of $35,400 for three different school projects. I'm not sure if this will generate any discussion, but the money is coming from the Peck-Jones fund. And, if memory serves me, that money is the exclusive domain of the BOE... dating back decades... if not a century. I want to learn more, but am sure I'll be fine with this.
3) Legislative Package. This one is a doozy every year. My guess is that most discussion will be focused on CCMs suggested modifications to binding arbitration. Then state funding for elderly tax relief, and grants for both the wastewater treatment plant and barite mines will likely be discussed at length.
4) Purchase of electricity thru a consortium (CCM Energy). I don't think this will be a partisan discussion, but it will probably elicit questions. The Energy Commission has recommended this to the Council. I think it makes sense. Basically, we're buying our electricity in bulk and getting a discount as a result. (If you're curious how they make a profit on us, I believe it relates to the offpeak rates for streetlight electricity... that's where they make their money.)
Should be an interesting one tomorrow night!
Tim White
Town Council, 4th District
TimWhite98@yahoo.com
UPDATE: It’s also worth noting that the legislative package does not include the turf, the barn or any other projects that are clearly a lower priority than something such as the wastewater treatment plant.
2 comments:
I'll have to tune in to the TC meeting, but my thoughts on the grant to help prevent underage drinking are that it really can only be prevented by the parents and the kids themselves. I think many parents look the other way and some even provide alcohol for their kids. We have a DARE officer although he obviously hasn't helped reduce underage drinking. I don't know that throwing more money at the problem will fix it...and when the money runs out, I don't know that, as a taxpayer, I'd want to have to help foot the bill.
As for the Peck-Jones funds...the boe recently voted to accept the funds (I believe for three aquarium projects in the elementary schools), so I don't understand why the council needs to vote on anything. The funds are for the exclusive use of the boe. And if I recall, the money is actually interest earned on a trust of some sort.
I agree that underage drinking starts and ends in the home, but maybe other things can be done to help mitigate it. Trying this grant seems like a reasonable idea to me.
As for the Peck-Jones fund... that's kind of why I mentioned the age of the fund... I believe when it was created years ago, Council (selectboard) involvement was required. So our approval is necessary based on the funds bylaws... or something like that.
Post a Comment