Validation ballots draw officials’ ire
Bangor Daily News, March 6, 2008
(excerpt) The ballot for the Union 93 town of Blue Hill, for example, reads: "Do you favor the Blue Hill School Department budget for the upcoming school year that was adopted at the April 5 Town Meeting and that includes locally raised funds that exceed the required local contribution as described in the Essential Programs and Services Funding Act?"
The instructions to the voter, which are required to be included on the ballot, note that "A yes vote allows additional funds to be raised for K-12 public education" and that "a no vote means additional funds cannot be raised for K-12 public education."
That wording makes it sound as if voters are being asked to approve spending more local money than was approved at the town meeting, and that is not the case, Wittine said. The language seems designed to encourage residents to vote "no" on the validation question.
"If you read that question, how would you vote? You’d vote ‘no’ because you’d say that they want more local money and you’ve just approved spending local money at the town meeting," he said.
The language is designed to encourage defeat of the budget in the validation vote, said Robert Webster, superintendent of schools in Union 76.
(excerpt) The ballot for the Union 93 town of Blue Hill, for example, reads: "Do you favor the Blue Hill School Department budget for the upcoming school year that was adopted at the April 5 Town Meeting and that includes locally raised funds that exceed the required local contribution as described in the Essential Programs and Services Funding Act?"
The instructions to the voter, which are required to be included on the ballot, note that "A yes vote allows additional funds to be raised for K-12 public education" and that "a no vote means additional funds cannot be raised for K-12 public education."
That wording makes it sound as if voters are being asked to approve spending more local money than was approved at the town meeting, and that is not the case, Wittine said. The language seems designed to encourage residents to vote "no" on the validation question.
"If you read that question, how would you vote? You’d vote ‘no’ because you’d say that they want more local money and you’ve just approved spending local money at the town meeting," he said.
The language is designed to encourage defeat of the budget in the validation vote, said Robert Webster, superintendent of schools in Union 76.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home