.
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...)
