Budcom votes YES on football? What's changed?
.
I got this email from a Gilford resident yesterday:
Doug,I am a little surprised by the Budget Committee's recent 180 on endorsing the $22,500 for Football in the upcoming school budget. Can you explain why the committee has now supported this? What's changed?
I, Doug, was NOT at Thursday's BudCom meeting. I stated the week before that I was opposed to funding football through the school and I remain so opposed. I have no explanation why Sue Greene was the only one on the committee to vote "no".
.
It is my belief that government, (in this case the school) ruins everything it touches. The present football program is quite good and functions well. When the school takes it, new, onerous requirements that NOBODY EVEN WANTS will be forced into effect-- i.e. paying coaches, chain gang members, etcetera.
.
If the parents of those involved in the game are unwilling to do this stuff for free FOR THEIR OWN CHILDREN, then I say they can go crap in their hats!
.
I am told that those who have been funding the program are either unable, or unwilling to do so anymore, and that is why the taxpayers must now pay. This is really too bad, because once again, it exposes THE BIG LIE purveyed by the original boosters of the program when they, in chorus, shouted, stated, wrote, and otherwise ballyhooed the fact that this would NEVER COST THE TAXPAYERS A DIME. Gregg "as long as I live this won't cost taxpayers a dime" Dickinson sold his bank for millions of dollars. Where is he now? Derek Thomlinson is on record saying he would "write the check" for some 18 grand. Hello? Derek signed the petition to take the dough from taxpayers.
.
The bottom line is, while I congratulate the fact that they are at least bringing this forward as a warrant article, they are still going against their original claims when this all started...
.
People like myself and Sue Greene warned about this from the very beginning. Good people denied us to our faces that our predictions would come true. We have both steadfastly held our positions on this, because after years of observation, we knew that this would be the end result-- and we knew that they were lying... because their LIPS WERE MOVING!!!!!!!!!!!
.
To those that say, "But Doug, the fact is that this is a GOOD program, and the money people are now broke (oh really?). What about the children?" My answer is that they should have thought about this in the first place. They should have listened to the few lone voices that warned that this would happen. It is THOSE people that we should be questioning-- the ones responsible for giving this latest "gift" to the taxpayers. (Man my butt is sore from all the "free gifts" we get in this town...)
.
As to the budget committee vote-- as I said, I wasn't there. I'll leave it to the rest (other than Sue) to explain what has changed...
.
My guess is that they did this out of fear of being unpopular. Because the budget preparers played the rope-a-dope with the budget committee- first offering a budget with a small percent increase, thus lulling everyone into a sense of peace and harmony-- followed by a flurry of budget add-ons at the very last seconds of the game-- most of the budget committee members don't want a big fight in the eleventh hour. And by falling for the "reduced" budget of "only" $22,500, they are willing, apparently, to sell their souls. You know 22,500 will "only" be thirty grand next year... for the children, of course.
We are told that the costs will be offset by fundraised revenues.
Just remember-- these are the same people that said football would never cost the taxpayers a dime!
I predict that in three years, the fundraising will disapear. Why should anybody engage in this when they can just rip money straight from our wallets? And why would a chain gangster work for free when they can make a few bucks doing it instead? Besides, the teachers (who will ultimately be the only ones "qualified" to do this stuff) need that extra dough...
.
I stand ashamed of the vote taken by my fellow budget committee members, as they are enabling those that knowingly engaged in this sophisticated fleecing of the taxpayers to get their way-- all the while using the kids as the means to their end.
At least there is one more chance at saving football from the clutches of the government system--JUST VOTE NO on voting day!
Oh, and just remember, I have it on good authority that hockey will be next. Does it ever stop? How can we need more and more and more in this era of declining enrollment? Does anyone even think about that? What happens when we don't have enough kids to fill our sports teams? Will we need to import some illegal children to play the games Americans won't play? (Gotta keep figuring out ways to keep the budgets & exhorbitant salaries up, you know...)
Comments
Just because the fundraising has dried up, does not mean the taxpayers should foot the bill. In fact the lack of fundraising would imply a true disinterest to fund the program. Coaching salaries, equipment, shower facilities !!
Where will it end?
Isnt the school budget large enough?
VOTE NO !
Posted by: Mike | January 5, 2008 09:33 AM
My problem is I want to know how much each sport cost the tax payers. I don't want these other sports taking the hard earned money that these kids fundraisers. What are the implications to the middle school program. I say vote no until they can give us an account of how they will handle the money fundraised.
Posted by: Pricilla | January 5, 2008 10:30 AM
Ah yes Mike... the SHOWER FACILITIES. Bingo! The 22,500 is simply the seed money for the 7 million dollar next phase of the free gift known as the meadows!
If you don't kill things outright in Gilford, they alays come back to bite us in our collective arses another day.
Another perfect example- the FREE library that isn't...
Posted by: Doug | January 5, 2008 02:20 PM
What changed? These things did change. For starters, two of last year's dissenters promised that if the messure was brought forward as a warrant article they "would support it". So they did. Those two votes having changed were enough to pass the messure. Additionally, to Pricilla's point, they DID make accountable claims to track the fundraising efforts. In my opinion, Doug would have voted against this even if they promissed to off set the entire amount with fundraising because he is philosophically against this program. For me, I'd eliminate both soccer and basketball in favor of football and hockey because I prefer those sports. How the money is used is up to them but this budget line item can be scrutinized. Speaking of which; Because the school portion of the budget is so big and they don't give us any time to scrutinize the budget, it doesn't get enough scrutiny. It's really hard to CLAIM that the school administration is inflating their budget when the boys sports portion went DOWN!!!
As for all those people that did infact LIE to get this program started, I wasn't there when this seed was allowed to start growing! There are good things that can come from this. It could be defeated at the polls. If not, it can and must be held accountable. If it does pass it will cost $22,500 as oppossed the $36,000 they were seeking last year!!!
Posted by: Terry Stewart | January 7, 2008 09:23 AM
The big problem I see is if this is a functioning sport club funded by donations appears to be doing well. Why come foward and ask for money did fundraising stop is the interest in football declining since our enrollment is down. i am very concerned that it is part of the process that the founders had long ago to fund Football.
1. Get the School to recognize Football
2. School the Fund Football
3. NEXT a new Facilty The Meadows committee is filled with ideas all sports related.
Sorry Terry I am voting NO until I see evidence of accountablity.
Posted by: Pricilla | January 7, 2008 10:23 AM
The members who voted no were right. What has changed for this Freinds of Football group. They played they won what more do they need. Looks to me that this has been the plan step by step.
Step 1- Get the Town to accept football no cost to the taxpayers it is privating funded by donation.
Step2. Go to the School we need help school no real reason just we need help.
STEP 3. Which will occur in during the 2008-2009 budget season the Meadows Commitee starts the campaign for the Atheletic stadium. It will be for the Children No facilities no way can Football be played on less than accurate fields, the danger of no lights, no bathrooms. Gilford will be in a crises and once that is done,it will just keep growing growing.Remeber the atheletic Director Loves Soccer sorry football.
Posted by: pricilla | January 7, 2008 06:29 PM
Pricilla is exactly correct. There is no question that this was a planned scam from the beginning. However, much like a pregnant women, it's too late. "The children" are already hooked on this sport and (sorry Pricilla)the mega sports complex has been on paper for over a year. I hear you but you are all years behind. The only way this train will stop is with a NO vote at the polls but it's not going to happen without you dragging people to the polls.
Posted by: Terry Stewart | January 8, 2008 07:48 AM