I started watching late, perhaps someone can fill me in, but it sounds like there is a report that says Westfield is a big loser of a project, that no developer wants to do it because it wouldn't turn a profit for them and Wareham politics are so nasty that no one wants to have the town as a business partner.

We all said this from the beginning.  How many tax dollars were flushed down the toilet on something we knew would be a loser from the beginning?

Check back and watch the meeting tomorrow. It was "lively".

On Westfield.. Schneider and Begley sounded like they plan on changing what was agreed upon at Town Meeting. Dropping the number of units down (from 280) to about 50 or 60... (There goes the "closing the 40b gap" reason..) They also sounded like they want to take away the requirements for the Developer to deal with the ball fields..and the Town would have to give more money up front too. Ellen said something to the effect that it's the BoS job to tell Andrews what to put out in a new RFP. So, that's the way Schneider and Begley "play"..when projects they've politically supported die on the vine..they change the rules. I'm going on memory at this point and will look forward to reviewing the tape when it's done. The BoS can't supercede the decisions made at Town Meeting...except maybe in Wareham.. Where anything goes.

FYI... A "workshop" on Westfield was scheduled for Saturday.. January 14th.

Last edited by Dave DiPietro (2011-12-06 21:19:54)

FYI.. The Video (and audio) troubles at the very beginning of the meeting was a WCTV "issue". (Do not adjust your sets)..it clears up after about a minute and a half. It's been happening at the beginning of the last few meetings.. Let's hope WCTV gets it straightened out.. Don't let it dissuade you from checking out this meeting.. (trust me) it's "chock full o' nuts"!!!

Another FYI... In case you want to jump to a few of the "feistier" portions of the meeting...

The hearing on 118 Sandwich Rd. begins @ 0:15:30
The discussion about Westfield begins @ 1:41:00
The discussion about the School buses/School Cmte. @ 2:51:00

Auto-edited on 2020-08-11 to update URLs

Last edited by Dave DiPietro (2011-12-08 09:42:00)

BoSGood afternoon!

good thing that we don't have any not-a-lawyer types on this website  -  they seem to be all over other websites.

Anyway, I find it interesting the focal points of the BoS meeting Tuesday. Human conflict over the Sandwich Rd situation - yeah, OK. Ongoing pissing contest, Town v. schools, re busses - yeah,OK. Westfield (!) - yeah, OK. But, in the middle of all that, did anyone catch the BoS v. BoA (represented by Chrmn Curry, aka
SCurry-less)?

The three items which received attention are interesting, to be sure. But, the exchange between the two boards involved a discussion which affects as many as 16,000 taxpayers in the Town. Yet, it has been ignored. Not any more.

Mr. Holmes seemed to have a handle on the situation, while SCurry-less did a dance that was worthy of the Nutcracker Suite. Mr. Holmes noted that Vision Appraisal had been brought in in March to address the work required to meet the DOR's requirements in a certification (revaluation) year, with a drop-dead completion date of December 1. The job is NOT done. One hopes that the contract has penalty clauses.

And why was it necessary to pay an outside firm to do the work of the Assessors' office? Because the Town's administration could not, or would not, properly staff the office of the Board of Assessors. A very strange approach, given that anyone who can read a memo had to know that Fiscal Year 2012 was a certification year.

That begs the question: Mr. Holmes, why did you not turn to your Town Adminstrator and demand a cogent, coherent explantion for his abject failure in this instance?

Secondly, Mr. Holmes alluded to the problems on the financial side of the equation involved at arriving at a tax rate for the Town for FY2012. Then, he quickly veered away from that hot potato.  An opportunity lost.

So, a second question Mr. Holmes: what is the status of the audits (mentioned by Holmes), as well as ALL of the elements which either precede or become part of the tax rate calculation? Such as: free cash as of July 1, 2011, the Schedule A, the enterprise fund (a prior battleground with the Bureau of Accounts), the CPC funds, transfers, etc. And, how about new growth?

In sum, you need two things approved by the Department of Revenue in order to calculate a tax rate. We heard Tuesday that the valuation side is in a time pickle, if the goal is a tax bill mailed by December 31. But we did NOT hear about the financial stuff, which MUST be resolved for the DOR to approve a tax rate. And yet, the BoA wants the BoS to have a tax classification hearing next week. With what? Guesses? Speculation? Are they going to sacrifice a chicken and read the entrails?

Tell me why this stuff is less important than a fight in the hallway? There are 16,000 +/- taxable accounts.