While we wait to begin the budget meetings and the selection process of the next town administrator, I have read some interesting articles in the last week. The first article was interesting and was about Councilor Coyle wanting to bring up the subject of an amendment to our charter.
Kevin's point being that he believes that because of the three components to the charter commissions failed revision was because it had three parts to it
1) The bonding part, which would of been subject to voter approval of bonds more than $1M ( i rounded here)
2) The budget at its bottom line with NO adjustments for obligated costs.
3) Change of election day from March to May
According to this article, Mr Coyle suspects that the budget portion had doomed this revision and he maybe right. Why the commissioners choose to include #2 and #3 without any public input is the real question. In fact many stated that the commissioners originally put this question on the ballot for the bonding question only. This has been denied by some members, however it is interesting that now Mr Coyle wants a second bite of the apple.
Only one commissioner voted only on bonding issue as promised and it was Mr Carney. In a previous discussion with Mr Coyle, I thought he was not in favor of the budget portion but later changed his mind to agree with the rest of the commissioners ( except Carney ).
However, The citizens of Derry have spoken and they want to continue with their form of government we have in place.
Also this week, I find out via newspaper that we have about 35 applicants so far for the town administrators job. That's a Good Thing!!! Can't wait to get that process rolling forward as well.
And Last, The DEDC along with other various organizations are holding a summit meeting on the topic of Economic Development on Friday March 30th at DMC. I'll be there to see all the happenings.
Have any thoughts? hit the comment button and share your views!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Kevin Coyle is over-reaching in suggesting the vote margin is reason for another try at it.
I've heard around town that more than a handful "school friendly" people were confused --- THEIR issues suggested to them to vote "yes" on ALL of the questions. This might explain why THE 3 MOST PROMINENT VOICES FOR THE CHARTER CHANGE LOST BY SIGNIFICANT MARGINS, yet the Charter vote was closer.
The best that Kevin could hope for is a very close win on a Charter vote next year. Shouldn't changing our form of government be a unified effort? The U.S. Constitution and the N.H. State Constitution both set the bar much higher than a 50% public vote...FOR GOOD REASON!
Perhaps Paul Hopfgarten, who as a REP is on the ELECTION LAW Committee, will correct this flaw in our election laws!!!
Does Kevin really want to continue to divide Derry? His persistance reminds me of Napolean at Waterloo.
Nonetheless, be assured that there is absolutely no public appetite for another debate on this!
Dear BC - Kevin Coyle & his group of cohorts have decided that "Derry" is a divided community? How is this possible? We all pay the same taxes, have no vote on anything, continue to see TC meetings, which are useless, our taxes continue to go up every year without any involvement from the taxpayers. So, to determine that this town is divided is a "croc". Have Mr. Coyle explain his comments!
If Councilor Coyle follows the rules and is able to muster the necessary support to get a vote to change the charter with regard to bonding, I have no objection. It's his time.
I don't think amending the town's charter is comparable to the requirements needed to amend the state of US constitutions. For example, the US Constitution required ratification by 9 of 13 colonies. Therefore, it makes sense to require more than a 50% vote because the original ratification requirement was higher than 50%. However, in Derry's case the original charter only required a 50% vote, so amendments to it should only require 50%.
Post a Comment