This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

Last Week's Foxboro Reporter

Town Hall Politics

I was both pleased and stunned by last week’s edition of the Foxboro Reporter (05/19/11).  Bob Hickey’s column was a home run; and Randy Scollin’s (our Finance Director) letter an example of verbosity gone awry for a single item rebuttal.  Some of the reports on the Town Meeting are also missing some fullness of fact.

Bob’s column highlighting the scare tactics, the inability of Town Meeting to represent other than the single article syndrome, not because it is wrong, but that the public’s disconnect with THEIR local affairs is major.  Taxes, FOCSA, Van-Go politics, coercion, co-option, etc., has dominated the process.  I agree entirely with his premise.  We will continue to find loop-holes, and fee raisings, and the meals tax revenues removed from the OPEB and road repair to meet the annual 3%+ COLA “adjustment”.  Bravo, Bob!  We appear destined to continue to search and find any new fee or tax to meet the increase in level services. The word ‘austerity’ doesn’t exist in Town Hall; it only exists elsewhere, throughout the town!

At the other end of the spectrum is Randy’s letter to the Editor ... merely open the web to http://www.standardandpoors.com - go to ratings - look up Foxborough Twn, MA, and you will see the maturity date starting Dec. 2019 and on for future Bonds, and the rating is BBB/; i.e., bonds issued currently are at BBB as of the published rating date of 22 Dec 2010, not the AA+ claimed by Randy.  The AA+ rating is noted as of a rating date of 24 Aug 2009 for the Bonds issued at that time and up to the 22 Dec 2010 rating date!  Just go to the web, it is there.  Neil was correct based on the published data. 

Find out what's happening in Foxboroughwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

The zero/3% police contract issue is in fact 1% and 4%!  Paicos admitted the 1% but this didn’t alter the presentation!  He said this increase was for senior officers only, and doesn’t change the ZERO/3%.  And Randy added “just over half of the officers” were on Max; the fact is that 26 of the 29 employees are on Max, not just over half!  This cost of ZERO is in fact, roughly $16,000, and carrying this over to the second year, the real cost instead of $65,000 is actually more than $82,000.  ZERO/3% becomes 1%/4%!, in excess of $100,000!  Let’s not forget that they also received a gross 3% increase each year for Fiscal Years ‘08. ‘09 and ‘10!  The ZERO/ZERO for two years for the rest of us has no meaning or merit in Town Hall.

What other employee group other than the highway can get this amount?  They also got the 1% for fiscal ‘11.  So lets push the ZERO/3% to fiscal ‘12 and ‘13, not ‘11 and ‘12.  And lets correct the Police debacle as well!  And let’s not ever forget that the foxes are now running the chicken coop ... We had three employees negotiating an employee contract with the employees!  What a world we are now in!  The prior by-law noting the negotiating authority was the Personnel Wage Board stated emphatically, that “any member appointed shall not be an employee of the Town, in any status, ...” I have asked publically, and statutorily for the record of the Selectmen’s vote on the ZERO/3% directive publically divulged by the Town Manager.  It is locked up!  We cannot discover the date, who made the recommendation, or the motion, or even the vote!  If, as will be claimed, the Manager can indeed do this per his statute, with three Town employees, rather than the existing Board, this must be stopped.  Did the Selectmen vote to approve this make-up ... when and by what vote?  The prior by-law served us well and it’s intent was clear.  I guess that along with FOCSA, this Board, too, is redundant!

Find out what's happening in Foxboroughwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?