PRESERVE TIVERTON: VOTE TO "APPROVE" QUESTION 1 (LIBRARY), "REJECT" QUESTION 2 (FTR)

The November 8 special election will be a pivotal one for Tiverton. The stakes are clear, and the differences are stark.

On one side are proponents of the FTR proposal, who advocate that politicians should be able to veto voters’ decisions on budgets and taxes, and favor lower taxes without saying what they would cut to achieve it. On the other are those who cherish the rights of voters to decide without threat of being overruled by politicians, and resent a small special interest group trying to change our form of government to an FTR plan designed to favor their political agenda.

FTR advocates claim it will increase participation, but the evidence from other towns that changed to a referendum show little or no increase. In fact, the confusion of this FTR process and the elimination of the right to vote “no” if all proposals are bad could lower participation. Regardless of the process or the turnout, the guiding principle should be that the majority of voters decide. The FTR subverts the process by allowing the losing side to prevail by giving just two Town Councilors the ability to veto voters’ decisions.

Ask FTR proponents this question: why would allowing two politicians to veto voters be good for Tiverton? When they say “tax-cap protection”, what they’re talking about is protection for them against the will of the majority. This FTR is in their best interest, not yours. If they can veto voters and force cuts to services, the first targets will be the schools and the library (ask FTR proponents if they support the library bond).

Don’t be fooled by the spin that a vote against the FTR is a vote to keep the Financial Town Meeting indefinitely. Many of us remain dedicated to finding a workable FTM replacement, and a Charter Commission will be soon be elected. That group, representing all voters, can develop a strong FTM alternative that respects voters’ rights and can win wide support. Does it make sense to replace a flawed FTM with a more flawed FTR?

Even the FTR’s author, Jeff Caron, acknowledges that the plan has flaws that he says can be “tweaked” after it’s passed. Shouldn’t a plan to alter our form of government be “tweaked” before being put before voters? Sadly, it was rushed to suit a political agenda. Beyond the clearly negative aspects of the FTR, how many unknown consequences will there be?

Unlike at the proposed FTR, the majority of voters will decide the fate of our library and our right to decide our budget and taxes, free from the veto of two Councilors. If you support our library, and cherish your voting rights, get out and vote to defend these things from those eager to take them away. Defend your rights and invest in our community by approving question 1 (library bond), and rejecting question 2 (FTR proposal).

Brian Medeiros
Tiverton, RI