Release the Poll Results.
By Jim Conley • May 4th, 2008 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
I’ve been reporting that the Brookline selectmen (at least one anyway) used the results of a survey paid for by the pro-override group “Yes for Brookline” to construct the questions we’ll be looking at on Tuesday.
Big deal? Well, yes if you think that the ballot ought to reflect what we need, not what will pass. [Incidentally, I'm more than amused by this (Karl) Rovian tactic being employed by the forces of enlightenment (i.e., the Brookline Liberals). Just win, baby.]
I don’t see why “Yes for Brookline” and its chairs Selectman Betsy DeWitt and Brookline School Committee members Alan Morse and Judy Meyers won’t release the data. They claim that the survey shows “broad support for an override.” How can that hurt their cause?
Folks, I’m going to get the data (I’m starting the appeal process tomorrow). And when that happens, I doubt that it’s going to reflect well on town government. But it’s going to reflect quite poorly, I suspect, on the three elected officials who withheld the material (despite repeated requests) until after the election of May 6th.
Don’t they think the public has a right to know how these override items and their amounts ended up on the ballot as they did?
Of course, the answer is no. I was just being rhetorical.
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
I’M SHOCKED! ELECTED BROOKLINE OFFICIALS GAMING THE SYSTEM!
Yes, they’re wearing two hats. But their public hats require openness. Pres. Bush’s Administration used Generals and other “experts” to sell the American public on its errant foreign policy goals and decisions going back to 2002.
ASIDE: I watched Bill Moyers’ PBS program over the weekend which included an interview of the authors of “Mission Accomplished” by Christopher Cerf and Victor Navasky. They have started the College of Expertology. Their approach is satirical. It’s in paperback, fresh off the press in March. A must read.
So we have our so-called “experts” here in Brookline, selling the overrides. Rather than relying upon facts and reason, our experts get outside help by means of polling, which is a form of manipulation of the many who swallow what the “experts” tell them. Let’s see how good a selling job this will accomplish. This manipulation, if successful, will require homeowners, property owners, to tighten their belts. But our Town budget will be getting fatter yet with more expenditures and less cut-backs.
One wonders how these “experts” handle their own finances. Here, the “experts” are in lock-step. Are the Town managers (who in turn manipulate and pull the strings on our elected “experts”) tightening their belts or maintaining and building up their perks, including retirement benefits? The effect is that the Town managers have done their own “polling” to sell the overrides to our elected “experts” who then use the same technique to pull the wool over the eyes of Brookline voters: POLLING BY DUMMIES FOR DUMMIES. But will Brookline voters comply as DUMMIES? Are we lemmings being led to the Muddy River?
Just say “NO, NO” to these “expert Nannettes.
ARE CONTRIBUTIONS TO “YES FOR BROOKLINE” DEDUCTIBLE AS CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS FOR FEDERAL INCOME TAX PURPOSES? Or are such contributions political in nature and not deductible? Has “Yes for Brookline” stated “Yes,” “No”, “Maybe,” “Maybe-not”? Or will contributors risk the “tax lottery” and take a deduction regardless? (There may be a whistleblower out there.)
Query whether the polling addressed this issue of deductibility? As noted in an earlier comment of mine on a related post, “Yes for Brookline” points out the potential federal income tax benefits to federal income tax itemizers of property tax deductions for the overrides, if successful. So does “Yes for Brookline” suggest a “two-fer” with contributions to it?
Is “Yes for Brookline” required to state forthrightly whether or not contributions to it are deductible for federal income tax purposes?
“Is “Yes for Brookline” required to state forthrightly whether or not contributions to it are deductible for federal income tax purposes?”
Who knows. But they do.
COMPLIANCE WITH DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS
Contributors to “Yes for Brookline” have been told, “No, you can’t take a federal tax deduction for your contribution.” Good advice. There are other disclosure requirements, including reports, imposed upon “Yes for Brookline.” Observers will be monitoring to assure compliance with all disclosure requirements. Why? Because we can expect similar organizations in the future that will tell us “THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING!” No, it is not the sky that is falling but Town government that is FAILING, aided and abetted by the FEARMONGERS. (Now let’s see, what are the remaining disclosure requirements and when are they to be accomplished? Can someone provide the missing links?)