Letter To The Editor: Opinion, Info On Granby's Proposed Charter Revisions

The following is a Letter to the Editor submitted by Heather Monty to Granby-East Granby Patch. The opinions expressed below do not represent the viewpoint of Granby-East Granby Patch, which does not advocate for or against any political position or opinion.

Want your Letter to the Editor considered for publication? Send it to perry.robbin@patch.com.

Avoid Post-Traumatic Voter Stress Disorder (PTVSD) - Understanding the Proposed Charter Revisions

A good friend of mine once told me that the most important political decisions are made at home. Nothing affects us more than the choices we make locally. On November 6, Granby voters will go to the polls to vote for President, but also to decide how we vote on our town budget and changes that affect how the Boards conduct important business.

In September, The Granby Drummer published a legal notice and proposed revisions to the Granby Town Charter. The legal notice included two questions for voters to answer on the upcoming ballot addressing the Charter revisions. Reading the changes can be confusing because it combines the current language with the proposed changes. In part of the Charter, whole paragraphs in Chapters are slashed and some are slashed and double lined. In addition, there is no ‘explanation’ for the Proposed Changes.

At the latest Board of Selectmen’s meeting, I asked the Board about providing a summary of the changes along with an explanation. Selectman Adams stated that a summary did exist, however neither he nor any other Board member offered any further information. Independent of the Board, I discovered that the Charter Commission’s final report was submitted to the Board of Selectmen, and it included an introductory four-page summary. This was posted on the Town of Granby’s main page earlier, but it is no longer available. It is not clear why it is no longer there.

The question has come up, “Is Question #2 dependent on Question #1?” The answer is No. It is important to understand that each question is independent of the other. Therefore, for example, if you would like to vote No on question #1, and Yes on Q#2, that is perfectly fine, and vice versa. Below is an attempt to explain each of the two questions.

Question #1 - Some of the changes are simple language and/or grammar updates and amount to nothing more than capitalization of words. Some of the changes promote harmony with the state charter and will be incorporated regardless. However, some changes are potentially more important. Most notably for the changes applicable to Question #1 are the changes made in Chapter 10, Section 10-6, Expenditures and Accounting, (f), “…the proposed change is intended to provide flexibility in the funding process when the town is confronted with an emergency.” Essentially, should the Town Manager, presently Bill Smith, declare an emergency, and the declaration be agreed by two-thirds vote by the Boards of Finance and Selectmen, then an additional expenditure of up to (3) percent of the current tax levy can be spent, presumably on the ‘emergency’.

The documented tax levy on the Granby budget for 2012-2013 is $30,600,332 or 77.3% of all the revenue collected for the expenses of the town. Therefore, for 2012-2013, this ‘emergency’ provision allows town officials to spend roughly $1,000,000 without town citizen involvement. I have not heard the background or basis for this provision, and question permitting the spending of, say one million dollars, without citizen involvement. Further, what is not provided in this item is a definition of what constitutes an emergency. Seems it could rather arbitrarily be invoked with no boundaries (no definition). Also, there appears to be no limit on frequency of use, so again, there are no boundaries applied to its use! So, that one million dollars referred to earlier could actually be much more.

Question #2 – The changes applicable to Question 2 applies to the way our town approves the Budget. It changes from a Town Meeting format with only those in attendance voting on the budget, back to a normal/automatic Referendum wherein all citizens vote via normal process like any other election of ballot topic (a.k.a. a Machine Vote).

The approval of Question 2 (a Yes vote) would put into place this automatic Referendum for the town Budget. Similarly, a vote for Question 1 would approve all the other proposed changes to the Charter, including the emergency funding provision.

Further comment regarding Question #2: A grassroots organization led by Jim Glenney and Len Murray petitioned the Commission with over 1400 signatures of Granby registered voters to get the budget format changed back to a Machine Vote. This Charter change is all about voter participation and citizen choice. By enacting the automatic Referendum (a Yes vote to Question 2), we will eliminate the historically poorly represented town meeting to review and approve town budgets, and enable much higher citizen representation and participation in the budget process.

Some of the changes included in Question #1 may appear benign, but the ‘emergency’ provision detailed above appears dangerously undefined and unbounded. Question #2 is straightforward and Independent of Question#1. I urge you to take the time to review the changes and if necessary, call your Town Manager, Bill Smith or First Selectmen, John Adams to put the Charter Commission’s summary back on the website. Request a copy because it is not too late. Go into the voting booth prepared to answer the questions as an informed taxpayer. You do not want to leave wondering if you voted in your best interest. Understand the revisions and avoid becoming the victim of Post Traumatic Voter Stress Disorder (PTVSD).