Recently in Sensible Spending Category
Last November, Town Administrator Carter Terenzini presented the Route 25 corridor study results to the Board of Selectmen. This was at the same meeting that Stewart Lamprey made his presentation about Fox Hollow. Mr. Lamprey stated that Fox Hollow had been identified by the DOT and the Lakes Region Planning Board as the most dangerous intersection, with 27 accidents and 2 fatalities within 1000 feet of the intersection.
Karel Crawford made the statement, ‘I don’t feel the commissioner should dedicate to one part of the road (Rt 25). We have to represent the town of Moultonboro, and we have to represent the entire town, and others on the other intersection. I feel that because politically, because someone knew someone, though he has every right to do so, it feels wrong for the DOT to pick one road because Mr. Lamprey lives on
It was decided after much discussions over several weeks, that Fox Hollow would be moved to the top of the list of intersections to address. There have been several engineering firms out at the site of Fox Hollow and Route 25 studying the area and planning how to “fix” the intersection. The town is in the process of hiring a Town Planner to work with the recently hired engineering firm of KV Partners, LLC.
The planning was going along rather smoothly until late in the afternoon of Tuesday June 2, 2009 when there was a serious accident on Route 25 by the intersection of
It would seem that the corridor study was spot on. One only has to travel on Route 25 west on an icy, snowy day to understand why
We hope that the Board of Selectmen will be successful in their efforts to convince the DOT that Sheridan Road is in fact a higher priority than Fox Hollow and should be addressed sooner than later. …And no one stands to gain financially from improving
".......we hope that selectmen, school board members, county commissioners, city councilors and members of County Conventions will take a hard-nosed approach when it comes to proposals for so-called 'big-ticket projects' such as new buildings or proposals to add employees."
Article Date: Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Gov. John Lynch is calling for two kinds of budgets when a new Legislature convenes — tight and tighter.Republicans have been trying to weaken Lynch's big advantage in the polls by trying to identify him with the huge revenue shortfalls of the current biennium. So far it hasn't stuck. Voters seem prepared to identify the shortfalls with the weak national economy. Lynch met with department heads Friday and told them it's not going to be easy. He wants innovation and efficient use of limited resources. He also wants two proposals — one holding programs at current levels and one cutting spending by three percent in 2009 and 2010, going back to current levels in 2011.By assuming this posture of fiscal discipline, Lynch certainly set the tone for the fall campaign.But his approach should reach beyond the political debate of the coming weeks. It should also frame the discussion for the work of preparing budgets in the various cities and towns, school districts and counties across the state.
John Andrews, director of the
Given the current economic climate, they can be assured that the majority of taxpayers will support them in this effort. To this end we hope that selectmen, school board members, county commissioners, city councilors and members of County Conventions will take a hard-nosed approach when it comes to proposals for so-called 'big-ticket projects' such as new buildings or proposals to add employees.Even at times as difficult as the ones we are facing there will be some cases where major capital improvements or adding staff is absolutely imperative. But for the most part these requests, though they may produce certain benefits, fall short of being absolutely needed right here, right now.
Just as importantly, those officials — whether elected or appointed — who have a role in determining pay and benefits for public employees need to demonstrate they understand the burden under which so many taxpayers are finding themselves. To advocate pay raises on the grounds that there have been pay raises in previous years is simply untenable. Public employee unions also need to acknowledge the present economic realities when they sit down to negotiate new contracts. To push for substantial pay raises or to be unwilling to accept proposals for members to pick up a bigger share of health-care benefits will only hurt their credibility with taxpayers with private-sector jobs who fear being laid off. In the last several years, local communities and school districts have been more or less successful in funding the higher cost of government by capitalizing on the volume of residential and commercial construction, which has produced a tremendous expansion of the tax base in many area communities. But the tax base is no longer expanding at the same rate, so any increase in the cost of government is going to fall harder on current taxpayers. Those leaders in government who recognize that they are the stewards of the resources that come from the people understand that this coming budget season presents challenges far different from any other year in recent memory. It requires taking tough stands and standing by those decisions. And it also requires a sensitivity that
the taxpayer's ability to pay is not as great as in past years.
By DEROY MURDOCK
Union Leader May 25th, 2008
LAST WEEK, Americans finally started working for themselves rather than for their government masters. This milestone arrives two days later than in 2007, clearly proving that the era of big government is back with a vengeance......
Union Leader May 25th, 2008
GOV. JOHN LYNCH was supposed to be a kinder, gentler Craig Benson. He'd be the millionaire former business executive who balanced the state budget without raising taxes, but also without angering state employees by slashing jobs or upsetting the apple cart too much. Oops. During four years in office, Gov. Lynch has shown that he has no interest in cutting taxes, but lots of interest in raising them to pay for increased state spending.The governor cannot hide behind the excuse that he had to raise taxes because the economy is bad. He raised taxes his first year in office -- when the state budget was in surplus. In 2005, he proposed and got a 28-cents per pack cigarette tax increase. Last year, he got another 28-cents increase. This year he proposed a 25-cents per pack hike. That's three cigarette tax hikes in four years.Last year the governor proposed -- and got -- tax increases totaling more than $100 million. They helped pay for the largest general fund budget increase in 20 years -- 17.5 percent. Unfortunately, they didn't pay for all of it. ....
