If this tax abatement really does result in such a negligible increase (I believe $10/yr was mentioned last night as a “potential” number) to taxpayers, I have absolutely no problem with it.
I believe in the preservation of open space and assisting our local farmers and such an increase is acceptable to me.
HOWEVER
I was EXTREMELY disappointed in how this went down. (Admin, yes, Jim Kaeding expressed my thoughts on this, as well).
* It appears that NO ONE really knew that this committee had been formed. Citizens were therefore ignorant of the formation of a town committee, it’s express charge, and were denied the opportunity to observe or participate in public meetings.
* WHO established this committee? Aside from the assessor, the committee members are all farmers? Yes? No? If this committee is comprised of only farmers, then there is a serious prejudice/agenda issue. If this committee was established by town government, why wasn’t a notice posted for volunteers?
* Is it really true that a letter was sent only to farmers??? By whom? If the letter was sent by town government/officials/committee, can they actually DO that (send only to the farmers)?
* No information, except given verbally (if you could actually hear & understand what was said), was provided for citizens in order to make an intelligent, educated decision on the adoption of this TOWN ORDINANCE. I find that unacceptable. The adoption of a town ordinance is a LAW and it is inconceivable to me that a town can adopt a LAW in such a manner.
Again, if this tax abatement proves to be as negligible to taxpayers as claimed then I support the assistance it will provide our local farmers and the preservation of our open space. ABSOLUTELY.
In fact, I have no doubt (if the assertions made last night are correct) that most Woodstock citizens would wholeheartedly support this assistance to our farmers.
BUT I do not believe in “means to an end” actions. EVER. And, sadly, that is what appears to have happened here.
Reality Check
I know this is going to come as a shock to some people but I agree with RC on this. The committee was admittedly a special interest group (they even stated that the comittee being comprised of all farmers was the whole point). While I don’t think that is the best way to form such a comittee, that was not nearly the problem that was presented by the lack of information to the public beforehand.
Now don’t get me wrong. I do try and support the town agriculture. For example we get our eggs out of the cooler and leave our $2.00 in the coffee can. We are also over at the Auger’s supporting them by buying their product whenever possible (Taylor Brooke) and serve the local syrup at the B&B (Norman’s Sugarhouse, great stuff). So I don’t have a problem with such an act in principle; I am 100% in support of local business. But I do have a problem that there was very little information given out about it before hand. I do hope that the mailing that went out only to farmers was not done at the taxpayer’s expense or there may be some legal problems.
One of my big issues before the meeting was with how it would impact the grand list. As it turns out the town assessor confirmed that it would not have an implact on the grand list at all. It is this type of information that could easily have been communicated beforehand.
Sorry for the ramble.
Thanks,
Kevin
This post represents my personal opinions and in no way should be considered an official act of the BOE or that I am speaking on behalf of the BOE in any way
I agree with RC and Kevin too. Its not about the money, its about principle, politics, and process. The 3 P’s… which if irresponsibly manipulated leads to the 4th P…Pissed Off.
OK Reality Check, go in there and knock yourself out. Get Schultz and Powers and the whole gang to submit some FOI’s and lets get some answers. Lets see the same passion for accountability of our Government process.
Sounds like a conspiracy to me! How about that FOI to see just HOW those Selectmen schemed this whole thing up! Come on now, where is the crew- we have the smoking gun- lots of ‘em!
Thanks RC. Let’s stay focused on this- and ask one of our selectmen to answer? If they won’t reply here- where will they respond? Republican strategy-just do whatever you want-and assume the public will forget. Weapons of mass destruction? Scooter Libby’s prison sentence eliminated? Relatives voted/confirmed to IWWA? Illegal meetings held-and NO reprimand? Now specials laws/ordinances being slipped through without full disclosure? I received an email from Joe Biden communicating his thoughts directly- why can’t our selectmen discover the power of an interactive internet? No- let’s just wait for everyone to forget and send out a glossy flyer.
But the Cafe never forgets. The history of the last 3 years can be found in the 955 articles and 9864 comments. If anyone needs a reminder about what happened regarding __X__ a year and a half ago, Admin can find it for you if you can’t find it.
Sadly, the wall of communication in this town seems impossible to scale (thanks Kevin & Woodstocker for actually addressing my post). This is why any improvement to the governing of our town is little more than a pipe dream…. (See RC’s new article. Admin).
Re: the tax abatement committee:
1) There were no non-farmers on the committee except for the assessor.
2) Letters regarding the meeting were sent to only farmers.
3) There was no public hearing therefore no opportunity for contemplation or absentee voting.
4) Committee Minutes were not posted on the website.
5) No written information was provided before or during the meeting.
6) There was no opportunity for a private ballot.
7) Less than 5% of people voted to accept this ordinance.
8 ) Money is not the issue, fair process is.
9) Preservation of farmland is not the issue, fair process is.
10) Reva Seybolt chairman of the committee.
The First Selectman’s Office was glad to see that discussion was taking place and encourages communicating directly to Reva.
Here are the minutes to the Selectman’s meeting where the Tax Abatement committee was formed (Admin removed the parts that were not about Tax Abatement). Margaret Wholean was Selectman along with Eaffy and Very. Jim Kaeding was present. Wholean appointed the committee members.
Minutes
Town of Woodstock
Board of Selectmen
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Selectmen’s Conference Room – 7:30 PM
Present: Margaret Wholean, Mitch Eaffy, Delpha Very
Others Present: Allan Walker, Chandler Paquette, Stuart Morse, Diane Miller, Avis Spalding, Jim Kaeding, Kevin Withers, Brad Tillis (Woodstock Villager), Lindsay Ketchen (WINY Radio), Dustin Racioppi (Norwich Bulletin)
1. Call to Order…
2. Open RFP bids for Well Water Sampling…
3. Consider Appointments to the Tax Abatement Committee
Wholean said that letters have been sent to Diane Miller, Fred Chmura, Reva Seybolt, Amy Vinal, and Doug Young, as well as an email to the Conservation Committee, to join a committee to discuss implementing an ordinance for a farm building tax exemption.
Wholean moved to appoint Diane Miller, Fred Chmura, Reva Seybolt, Amy Vinal and Doug Young to the Tax Abatement Committee. Motion Carried Unanimously.
…Meeting adjourned at 8:55 pm.
Respectfully submitted by,
Carolyn Derrico
Admin,
Yes. I saw those minutes, as well.
Here are the minutes of the BOS meeting on 10/18/07 (as pertains only to the tax abatement committee):
______________________________________________
Minutes
Board of Selectmen
Regular Meeting
Thursday, October 18, 2007
7:30 pm – Meeting Room A
Present: Margaret Wholean, Mitch Eaffy, Delpha Very
Others Present: Dwight Ryniewicz, Stuart Morse, Allen Walker, Diane Miller, Chan Paquette, Avis Spalding, Peter Whitham, Everett Cowley, Jim Esslinger (Worcester Telegram & Gazette), Brad Tillis Woodstock Villager, and Lindsay Ketchen (WINY Radio)
Approve Minutes of the October 4, 2007 Regular Board of Selectmen Meeting
Eaffy moved to accept the Minutes of October 4, 2007 Regular Board of Selectmen Meeting. Wholean pointed out that on Page 4, Item 9, names of other possible candidates were omitted from the Tax Abatement Committee. Wholean suggested that Reva Seybolt, Rande or Fred Chmura, a member of the Vinal Healy family, and other interested volunteers, be added to this list. Motion Carried Unanimously.
______________________________________________
I believe it is important to note that Wholean suggested the addition of these members AND “other interested volunteers”.
It would appear that Wholean’s intention was that the committee be open to other membership.
I can not, however, locate any additional “interested volunteer” requests considered (they may be there and I’ve missed them) in subsequent minutes. So, one can assume that the answer lies in one of two things:
1) Notice posted in newspaper asking for volunteers for the tax abatement committee was disregarded and produced no additional applicants
OR
2) No notice posted in newspaper asking for volunteers for the tax abatement committee and solicitation of volunteers was sought by way of the meetings
Who knows for sure? The timing was such that the formation of this committee took place during the peak of election season. Making it very easy to miss by most everyone.
Ten Point Tony,
Is this your list? Or from the selectmen? I’m sorry, it’s just that I couldn’t tell from the last sentence.
Is #2 a typo (i.e. non-farmers)?
Reality Check, After consulting with Tony, we will correct these two issues. He/she means farmers and Reva not Rita. Admin
RC,
A little bit of each. I am working on contacting Ms. Seybolt as directred by the Selectman’s office who felt that this was a farmer initiative not a selectman initiative and thus Ms. Seybolt should take responsibility for answering questions. However, I was told that there was only one non-farmer on the committee (the assessor) and that letters only went to farmers and that perhaps in the future such issues should have a public hearing first. Hindsight is a wonderful thing isn’t it….or is it just convenient? Like you, money and protecting farmers is not the issue, fair process is. My fear is that this could result in the another loop hole like PA-490.
Ten Point Tony,
I agree that it’s about the process.
Someone told me that this letter went out on town letterhead (I don’t know for a fact). If so, the powers that be need to make certain that it never happens again.
I don’t know the answers to the questions so I look forward to what you learn from Ms. Seybolt.
Perhaps, if these loopholes do really exist (not just supposition), this can be amended to allow for the assistance to our true farmers and preservation of open space.(?)
I do believe we should be supporting our farmers and an increase of $5 or $10/yr is certainly reasonable, in my opinion. We just need to make sure that only those who are intended to receive this assistance (true farmers) are the ones who are eligible.
I’m in total agreement with you.