Chariho Budget Meeting Review-

Mr. Poulowski's first statement emphasized his dedication to cutting this budget by the 2 million dollars per the taxpayers wishes. The School Board proceeded to discuss items such as the Truancy Officer. A relatively new program, they denied to cut that position stating it was necessary to have a person allocated to bringing parents to court in their childrens' truancy issues.

Freshmen Basketball did get cut. Golf was the next issue, Mr. Poulowski adamanlty fought to keep this line item in the budget. Computer Lab Supervisors were saved as well. Most items up for discussion were quickly dismissed by Mr. Pini, stating they were contractual and could not be changed.

A suggestion was made to draft a bill to remove bus monitors from runs that do not contain 5th graders. State law requires bus monitors on runs that contain 5th graders.

Mr. Pini stated that no teaching positions can be cut. Twenty-one layoff notices were sent out in March. Of that total, about 6-8 teachers will definitely be released. It is impossible to lay off any more of the remaining teachers, who did receive lay-off notices because they HAVE to be given a position, its in their contract. You cannot have a teacher employed with no job to do. We fail to understand the rationale of sending layoff notices to employees that cannot be terminated.

After the Board determined that they were not committed to any more cuts, the floor was opened up to the public. A question was raised as to the legality of calling a second meeting and the fact that the Currillo (sp?) Act was repeatedly mentioned. Mrs. Brown kindly donated a copy of this act to us. This act is known publicly in Title 16 of the Rhode Island General Laws 16-2-21-4 and 16-2-21-5. Upon inspection of this statute, it appears that the legality of calling a second financial meeting is actually documented in the Chariho Act.

Once more, Hopkinton became the target of unsavory comments regarding our active participation at the Financial District meeting. It was mentioned by one board member, that again, the person who suggested the two million dollar cut was not in attendance, and that this person had "no job, no clue and no plan". Mr. Vincenzo Cordone, a Hopkinton Town Councilor took the podium and expressed his dissatisfaction and disgust at the way Hopkinton has been reviewed in the budget issue. When Hopkinton residents did not show up in numbers at previous FDM's we were chastised. When Hopkinton residents did show up in numbers, we were chastised as well.

Another resident spoke to the constant public requests for input from the residents by the Board. This resident recited a list of suggested cuts and then stated that she did not understand why we were being asked for suggestions. We are not the professionals here and would no more attempt brain surgery if asked. A resident asked about the policy for a petition to get back the monies the voters legally cut from the budget.

The Exit One Issue: We are working with our attorneys to explore other legal options regarding development at Exit One.

We are looking for levels of interest and support on the state and federal level and are scheduling meetings with the appropriate officials.

Town Government Issues: Request an increase in town impact fees, consider a residential building moratorium.

A study was done by Hopkinton First of the 39 Cities and Towns of Rhode Island asking for information regarding their respective Impact Fees, building caps and moratoriums. The results will be given to the Town Council on April 4th, 2005 and posted on this website at a later date. Seventeen of the Towns surveyed did not reply, this is in violation of the Freedom of Information Act.

Request a public, written snow plow policy for the Town of Hopkinton. Suggesting that NO privately owned roads, driveways, property or out of town roads be plowed by the Town at taxpayer expense. There has been no legal opinion made to date of this current practice.

There has been no ongoing assessment of the Town’s Comprehensive Plan, nor has there been consistent enforcement of zoning regulations. The Town Charter also needs to be revised now, as it contains known flaws. Suggest a review by a third-party legal firm in order to assure its validity.

We will keep the public informed with information through our website, by phone, and with letters to the editor.

Fundraising is obviously crucial and that continues as well. Donations continue to come and we are actively seeking other sources.

There will be Hopkinton First!! coverage at town-sponsored meetings and minutes will be posted on the website as they become available.

NO BIG BOXES!

Big Box studies your Town Council has not required:

(note: the Council has instructed our Town manager to put together a bid proposal for a Market Study, this bid proposal was reported to be 50% complete as of May 18th, 2004. This study request has now been abandoned per Interim Manager Chuck Niles)

These are the developers false promises and issues:

• They promise that unemployment in Hopkinton will drop.
• The types of jobs they promise are already available within minutes of Hopkinton.
• They promise increased tax revenues but don't mention the town services their "boxes" require.
• Your taxes may actually go up!   Increased revenue may result in the loss of state support.
• They promise not to poison your well but they cannot support that pledge with science.
• Even unintentionally, they will degrade the environment. Nothing they touch will be improved.
• They promise to make boxes attractive but are not mandated by regulation to do so.
• Developers build boxes cheaply and quickly, without regard to visual impact.
• They demand to be exempt from Impact Fees and taxes for years to come.