FTR WOULD LET POLITICIANS OVERRULE VOTERS

On November 8, Tiverton voters decide on a change to the Town Charter, replacing the Financial Town Meeting (FTM) with a Financial Town Referendum (FTR) as the way Tiverton decides budgets and taxes. As someone with a long-time commitment to finding a workable replacement for the FTM, I am adamantly opposed to this FTR plan. Instead of a consensus improvement, this is a politically-motivated plan designed to give a political minority the ability to defeat the will of the majority. While the political-spin says the FTR would be more democratic, it would actually allow politicians to overrule voters’ decisions.

The most outrageous feature of this FTR plan is that it would allow any two Town Councilors to overrule the decisions of the majority of FTR voters. It was devised by TCC, the same small political group that’s supported lawsuits against the people of Tiverton to overturn majority decisions at recent FTM’s, as well as a failed ordinance allowing the Council to overrule voters. This is why they’re desperately attacking those who oppose this plan. Library supporters need to consider the absurdity of the FTR, under which two Councilors could negate voters’ responsible decision to provide funds to pay for the new library bond without drastic cuts to library, school and community services.

The FTR features countless absurdities. It allows an infinite number of alternative budget/tax proposals, even illegal ones, with just 50 signatures needed to put one on the ballot. Imagine walking into a voting-booth and having to pick from fifty (or more) complex plans for a $35 million budget! Unless you plan on spending weeks extensively studying all the plans, you’ll have no clue of each proposals’ consequences on taxes or services until it’s too late. And the "hearing" where plans will be discussed? Even with just 10 proposals, even with a 30-minute limit for each, you'll need five hours just to get partial information. And what if there are twenty proposals? So much for the convenience of the FTR.

Unlike the FTM, you can’t vote “no” if all proposals are bad. Unless a plan gets over 50% of the vote at the first referendum, voters will have to show up again, forced to vote for one of two plans rejected by over 50% of first-day voters! And if only one proposal is on the ballot, we’ll have an election with one option and no ability to reject it.

Our Charter requires election of a Charter Review Commission within two years. It will have the ability to create a workable, non-political FTM alternative that respects the will of the majority, and is an improvement over the FTM. This FTR is an untested experiment, a political move to override majority-rule as our guiding principle. We would never allow two Councilors to have the ability to overrule the majority decision of voters in this upcoming special election, so why would we allow it on budget votes? If you oppose giving two politicians a veto over your vote, and replacing the FTM with something far worse, vote to reject the FTR (Ballot Question 2). Get the facts: visit www.curbtiverton.blogspot.com or search CURB-Tiverton on Facebook.

Brian Medeiros
Tiverton, RI