On November 5 I joined nearly 1,500 of my fellow citizens to vote on the proposed budget increase for the Town Hall project. The increase was roundly defeated, but it has been pointed out that voters may have rejected the plan for differing reasons. I voted no because the project has grown beyond reasonable bounds, and the budget process has left me with a bait-and-switch feeling. The initial cost estimates provided by Daedelus, a firm hired by the town to assist with the estimate process, turned out to be way too low. I hope that we did not pay Daedelus too much for this service.
Each new project that comes before the town has its own logic and its own group of ardent supporters. During the time we have lived in Harvard, most of the various proposed projects have been good ideas when considered solely by themselves. However, we expect our town officials, including the Selectmen, to take a big-picture view of the town, and to not become so enamoured of any particular project that they lose the long-term focus. It is ultimately the voters who control the big picture, because we have to pay the bill.
For every dollar spent by the town, there is an alternative use for that dollar: the money could be spent on a project at hand, or kept in reserve for future important projects. Some might say the dollar should stay in the wallets of the taxpayers, and this may be what the voters said on November 5. Given that there are other important capital projects just down the road (Bromfield or OPEB, anyone?), the Town Hall project lays claim to just too many of our dollars. With the $3.9 million (plus interest) already approved, we should be able to renovate the building in a manner that will make all of us feel proud. Some supporters of the expanded budget say, well, if we are going to do the maxi renovations anyway, it is cheaper to do them now. This argument falls to the ground if we decide to be satisfied with more modest renovations, but preserve our budget and tax dollars for the future.
Mark Van Baalen
Madigan Lane
