I am writing to express a point of view, which may be widely held but which I have not yet seen voiced, perhaps because those who have it may feel isolated.
I care about our education, teachers, schools and infrastructure. I also know that this all takes money. I have supported debt exclusion overrides before (2013). However, I was disappointed with the accountability that followed. The schools did get built but so did a number of other projects that had not been discussed or approved. Were those overrides necessary? The schools were held hostage then and it worked, so it seems like our city is trying to do it again.
Newton has demonstrated, for decades, a spending philosophy of paying for “nice to haves” first and requiring overrides to pay for essentials. I see this as a petulant resistance against Prop 2.5 which was passed over 40 years ago. Other communities work with it. Why can’t we?
I was once lectured by a colleague on the Board that of COURSE we cut money from schools, snow plowing and road maintenance first because no voters would allow those to fail. This is a drastically different financial management philosophy from what I follow.
I follow the “do what you have to do so you can do what you want to do,” philosophy. It works.
The philosophy of “get your want-to-haves first else you may never get a chance to get them,” relies on others to keep the essentials from failing. It’s a dangerous, short-sighted, and self-fulfilling prophecy.
I won’t approve an operating override until the City prioritizes essential infrastructure and fundamental city needs before nice to haves.
I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind, just letting those who share my thinking know that they are not alone.
Greer Tan Swiston