New TRR Editorial

Well, Good Morning Jennifer,
Here are a few of my thoughts on your latest editorial:
* "...dedicated to the community member's perspective." HOW TRUE! You have "member's" as singular (though I'm sure now you'll change it because you do read this site) and what you print does represent YOUR perspective, and NOT the entire community's.
* "...present the community's thoughts, feelings, and perspectives." This is NOT TRUE. What you present is YOUR view. You DO NOT speak for me, nor do you speak for many others. I don't want you to in any way think you represent me. Own what you say.
* "The Rumford Reporter is a tool that can be used as a form of checks and balances." I'm still laughing. Do you really believe that? Your "reporting" is completely biased and in no way fair and "balanced".
* "The Rumford Reporter wants to help give our citizens a voice." Well, that's NOT TRUE. You won't print anything that goes against your own view. Instead, you secretly make up letters to the "editor" and sign them with fictitious names (R Ortez).

Jennifer, you have the absolute right to express your thoughts, feelings, and perspectives. You DO NOT have the right to represent those thoughts, feelings, and perspectives as those of this community. The Rumford Reporter (YOU) has spawned more negativity and discord in this community than anything else. You have strewn much vile, injurious and libelous garbage with your "fair and balanced reporting." I can't believe that you might actually think you represent the community. I am astounded by your hubris.
Egomania is NOT representation of the people.

bug
ps As a voting member of this community, I want you to remove my RVFP posting from your site. You essentially stole it from here. That is not good "editorial" policy.

One more issue to address:

You wrote:
"In the past, in an Annual Town Meeting format, it was easy for a budget to get passed that in effect raised our taxes because the town employees or those with a vested interest in a higher budget ensured that the meeting hall was full of those who would support those agendas."

All town meetings are announced and publicized. Anyone is free to attend, and in a democracy, anyone is free to express their views and invite their friends and supporters to do so as well.

Bug,
While it is true that anyone can attend a town meeting, it is also true that many chose not to because they were afraid of retribution if they voted the "wrong way". I know it sounds like school-age nonsense, but that is the way things have gone in the past. Businessmen who expressed opinions or voted against a budget found fewer visits to their shops. This is why the secret ballot method works for Rumford.

Kevin,
I agree with you on the issue of secret ballots. I was refuting JSN's insinuation that the town meetings were unjustly packed with supporters of a particular agenda. Sorry if I misled anyone.

Bug, I know that filling the hall with supporters is a common tactic and we see lots of that in Rumford from any side. You only have to look at the seating...it's divided down the middle like guests at a wedding: Bride's side - Groom's side. Or maybe it's Hatfields and McCoys.

On a side note, there are studies on which quadrant people occupy in a room. For example, up front and right are usually considered guardians of the ideals and active volunteer/contributors...most of the people sitting on the left are there to challenge the standard. How close or far one is from the front determines level of engagement. Not making a judgment, just saying that's how it typically shakes out. For instance, in church your biggest contributors typically sit up front on the right. It's not a hard and fast rule but rather a general indicator.

It's really fascinating. Watch people when they are sitting on all sides of a table in a meeting. The "power" positions are not at the head and foot of the table as one might think - they are side center. (If they are wearing combat fatigues you know you're really in trouble...lol...) Interesting to watch those dynamics and where people place themselves. People who sit immediately to the right or left of the meeting leader at such a table are considered followers who tend to agree with and support the meeting leader...if you are making a presentation, it's good to know where your biggest challenge is going to come from and where your support will be.

I support the secret ballot format.

I lived and worked in a town where the school budget was approved via an annual district-wide budget meeting. Citizens of the towns making up the SAD met in the high school auditorium and expressed their support (or lack of support) for the budget with a show of hands. Typically, the budget was approved after some discussion, which at times was intimidating, heated and personal. There were years when the budget was not approved. One year, angry citizens organized, filled the auditorium, and cut the budget by twelve per cent.

Those annually opposed to the SAD budget and the district-wide budget meeting format, made the same charge as The Rumford Reporter.

The Rumford Reporter wrote:it was easy for a budget to get passed that in effect raised our taxes because the town employees or those with a vested interest in a higher budget ensured that the meeting hall was full of those who would support those agendas

The “opposition” successfully lobbied to move our SAD to the referendum format thinking that more people would be free to vote their conscience and limit spending.

That’s not what happened.

Since our SAD moved to the referendum format (over tens years now), citizen participation has quadrupled and each budget has been overwhelmingly approved by the voters.

Perhaps those who oppose the budget need to do a better job of educating the public about their reasons.

Their reasons are simple and have been made clear. They don't want to pay ANY taxes and all public employees are "on the dole". I'm not exaggerating. This has been said at budget meetings. At least with the referendum format, no one will have to listen to it anymore.