Library override June 2009

[Unregistered]

after reading all the nonsense on this site, my question is: if the library was voted down by ten votes, would those proponents ask for a recount? No doubt in my mind that they should and would. Let the recount happen. That is the only way to settle this entire moronic idiocy.

[Unregistered]

I don't see anything wrong with post # 246. It must depend on who's ox is being gored

[dvorak]

Once again I'll state upfront: I voted for the library override both times. I'm pleased that it "won" the second time, not so pleased that the margin of victory was minuscule.
To have a recount with this margin is obviously needed and frankly I'm surprised it's not mandated.
The notion that a hand count would be less accurate then the machine count is simply wrong, as any number of research papers have demonstrated in recent years.
Had a recount petition been presented to me I would have signed it in a second. To have any doubt of fairness on this kind of issue would just continue to haunt the local politic for years and years, let us get a count, and put the result behind us.

[Unregistered]

There is no vote required to build the senior center. Please rememebr that this will be paid for totally by private donations from the same group of taxpayers who can't afford $70. I wonder how much they can afford to donate to the senior center or how much they can afford for the police station override especially since the police station will cost twice as much as the library. The way I figure it, if you can't afford $70 then sure as heck you can't afford double that amount for the police station.

[Unregistered]

#242- We're not shut off like a lightbulb, I said what I wanted to say, I don't think a new library is fiscally responsible at this time and I stand by my NO vote. There is no need to continue posting my oppositions, I can just respectfully disagree.

[Unregistered]

I read with interest post #231 claiming we would be paying 45% of Westwoods library. Post # 234 states we would have a 10,000 investment for 3.9 million instead of 100,000. If it's 10,000 and we are paying 45% of Westwoods, then their library cost around $22,000. That's a great deal. Let's see if we can get that in Walpole.

Let me see if I can explain it to you. What if you gave 10 cents to a friend. The next day, that friend is so happy to see you that they offer to give you back $40. If you decline to take the money, you are $40 poorer than you would be if you accepted the money.

Now multiply the dollar amounts by a factor of 100,000. We have already paid our $10K to the state. If we don't accept the grant money that the state is offering, our community is out $4M. If that $4M goes to Westwood because we didn't take it, we have effectively sacrificed $4M so that Westwood can build a new library.

I'm sure they'll thank you later when you aren't allowed to use their new library.


Post # 241 sounds like he or she may be worried the vote will be reversed if a recount is done. I find it amazing that people are so willing to continuously vote to take more money out of their pocket and hand it over to someone else so easily. It seems every override that comes down the pike, the same group of people want it. The way you can tell this is it's always the same. It's only 50 or 70 dollars a year.

I don't know about #241, but I'm not worried about a recount. It will either certify that the override passed without a doubt, or it will cause the planners to strengthen their resolve, roll up their sleeves again, and present an even better proposal to the town. After it came so close and after they've made so much progress toward passage, they would be remiss if they didn't take another bite at the proverbial apple.

But first we'll just have to wait and see how the recount turns out. Looks like Taylor is starting out 10 votes in the hole, so he'll be sledding uphill.


By the way, I didn't see where anyone said they checked off the pay more than required box on their tax forms. Maybe if enough of you did that, we could get a lot more from the state and we wouldn't have to go for overrides. After all it would only be the price of a cup of Dunkin Donuts coffee every day. So check off that box and contribute your fair share.

Every time you make a statement to bolster your position you show just how misinformed you are about the mechanics of an override. Proposition 2 1/2 applies to LOCAL property taxes. Overrides are passed at the TOWN level to approve any growth in a town's expenses above a fixed limit. Giving more money to the STATE does not alter the equation - the TOWN still must adhere to the restrictions of Prop 2 1/2.

You don't seem to have even the weakest grasp of how this stuff works. That probably explains why you can't see what a great deal the library project is. It's a no brainer!

[Unregistered]

I have been derelict in my duties. We have more excuses from the No-ponents to add to the list.

(Love #14 as well. My bad to not have thought of that one.)

#15. Why don't you any of you check the voluntary box on your state tax forms and pay your fair share? (Looks like you need another lesson in basic taxation. If I pay more money to the state, the state government will decide how much to give to each city or town. Some of my extra contribution will go to Boston, some to Holyoke, some to Norwood, etc. But if I pay more in an override to Walpole, the money will stay RIGHT HERE where everyone in town can benefit from it. So I think I am definitely paying "my fair share." Question is--- are you?)

#16. The caregivers couldn't/wouldn't bring their infirm charges out to vote. (New variation on the "can't vote in bad weather, can't vote in the winter because people are in Florida, didn't vote on September 11 because people were afraid to leave home.")

#17. How sad that their vote in November either 1. didn't count or 2. was thrown out. (Variation on #1 "The people said NO." Their votes haven't counted every time they didn't win-- think high school, Elm Street, general override.)

#18. A bright shiny building will make it all better. (My life is fine, thanks for asking. But it will be nice to have a municipal building that we can be proud of, where they don't have to put out buckets to catch the leaks in the ceiling when it rains.)

#19. I use the library, but I voted my wallet and voted no. (Enough said. I don't have any witty comebacks. Your statement speaks for itself, but it makes me very sad that you feel that way.)

[Unregistered]

I read with interest post #231 claiming we would be paying 45% of Westwoods library.

Post # 234 states we would have a 10,000 investment for 3.9 million instead of 100,000.

If it's 10,000 and we are paying 45% of Westwoods, then their library cost around $22,000.

That's a great deal. Let's see if we can get that in Walpole.

Mr. Taylor seems to get under your skin. It is a good thing we have people like Mr. Taylor

in any town or city. Without him and people like him, only one side of a story would be

heard.


The post regarding the $10,000 investment refers to our contribution to the state library fund, for the $3.9 mill grant we will be getting. These figures have nothing to do with the Westwood library cost. The $3.9 million grant that Walpole is entitled to is 45% of
OUR library cost, and the poster is assuming it will be 45% of Westwood's library cost if THEY get OUR grant. In fact it will probably be far less than 45% of their library cost because Westwood values education and intellect far more than the "secret society" fighting a library in Walpole. I am certain Westwood's library will be far grander than that planned for Walpole.

You are showing an extrodinary lack of understanding of basic math, economics, and the ability to reason. You are just the type of person who would benefit from a library. But alas, the campaign of misinformation against our library in Walpole is being lead by individuals who place the least value on intellectual persuits,... and I guess we need to take that from whence it comes.

The rest of us do not want to "reap" what you "sow".

[Unregistered]

There's an article in the Transcript with a bit more information about the recount:

http://www.dailynewstranscript.com/news/x1415147197/Recount-expected-in-Walpole-library-override-vote

[Unregistered]

I love the last line of the recount story in the Transcript "This isn't Iran where people have to take to the streets with masks," he said. Democracy will reveal who worked with Jimmy Taylor on the recount petition. The right to know is my democratic right.

[Unregistered]

There is no vote required to build the senior center. Please rememebr that this will be paid for totally by private donations from the same group of taxpayers who can't afford $70. I wonder how much they can afford to donate to the senior center or how much they can afford for the police station override especially since the police station will cost twice as much as the library. The way I figure it, if you can't afford $70 then sure as heck you can't afford double that amount for the police station.

Agreed, except for the part about the new senior center being paid "entirely by private donations." The Friends of the Council on Aging are asking the town to donate the land for the building. After all this discussion about how destitute the town is, I sincerely question whether we can afford to "give" any land away for any purpose.

Who knows, we might need that land sometime in the future for expansion or replacement of the police and/or fire stations. Imagine how much it could cost the taxpayers if we had to purchase more land in order to be able to rebuild our critical public safety infrastructure, after we gifted the perfect plot of land away to a private organization for a non-critical use.

Is a vote required for the town to give away public land? I certainly hope so, as I will be opposing any such proposal tooth and nail. It is fiscally irresponsible for the Board of Selectmen to even be entertaining the senior center project at this time.

And what are their plans later? Are they going to deed the new senior center back to the town? Doesn't that mean the taxpayers will be paying for utilities and maintenance of this "no cost" building?

I expect/demand much greater transparency from the FCOA. How much money have they raised to fund the project? Is it even economically feasible? Why are we tying up a prime piece of downtown real estate by promising it to a group that refuses to disclose any details about their plans?

[Unregistered]

How can the human eye be more accurate than a computerized scanner? There is an inherent bias in every human counter, there is none in the computer. Since first grade, people have been informed to be sure to completely fill out the appropriate oval so that your answers can be recorded properly. If my SAT's were regraded by hand, I coulda gone to Harvard!

[Unregistered]

The person who vocally opposed the library is the same person who wants the land promised to the library for the senior center. The same person who mentions how stormwater plans will cost millions for the library would have to raise millions to cover stormwater plans for the senior center since it would be the same piece of land. Isn't it time for the selectman to show just a little leadership by asking the Friends of the Council on Aging to show them the money? The council was given 5 years to fundraise and their time is just about up. Why aren't the selectmen applying for a grant to build a senior center? This will be a public project despite someone's private desire since it is on public land and will be staffed by public employees. I agree that if the town is going to give land to a private entity, then it should be put on the ballot for all to decide. How about a referendum question on the ballot?
Let's put the public back into the public process.

[Unregistered]

What if the recount shows the override lost by one or two votes. Will we have another recount or move on as has been suggested?

Post # 260 sounds as if he or she wants to stand in front of the peoples houses that signed the petition and hold up signs saying a no voter lives here. Myself, I could care less as I believe everyone has a right to their opinion no matter whether it's a popular opinion or not. I'll have milk and cookies out for you when your at my house.

[Unregistered]

after reading all the nonsense on this site, my question is: if the library was voted down by ten votes, would those proponents ask for a recount? No doubt in my mind that they should and would. Let the recount happen. That is the only way to settle this entire moronic idiocy.

Let's settle it??? How much more will it cost the Town for this Re-count? Tell the naysayers, who don't want to spend a dime, they are spending more of our tax dollars for their own self gratification. A sad group of people who are behind this.

[Unregistered]

There is no vote required to build the senior center. Please rememebr that this will be paid for totally by private donations from the same group of taxpayers who can't afford $70. I wonder how much they can afford to donate to the senior center or how much they can afford for the police station override especially since the police station will cost twice as much as the library. The way I figure it, if you can't afford $70 then sure as heck you can't afford double that amount for the police station.

I am 100% opposed to a senior center being built on "public" land with "private" funds, and I will fight this project 100% of the way. I actually would support a senior center being built, and would donate and support an over-ride for such a project, but only if it were done in the "PUBLIC EYE".

I am sick to death of the behind the scene politics that have taken place to keep this private dream alive. The power plant was likely a great source of "funding", and now the library is "in the way". We have people playing politics at every turn, with our town and it's future. The goal of these shenanigans is to persue a "privately" funded project that we all will ultimately pay for,... in more ways than one.

Public land and a public building should be built in the public domain. Full disclosure surrounding the building of something that we all will own and maintain (even if the vast majority of us will not use it) is absolutely necessary. I will never support this project (library or no library) until the hide and seek strategy behind it is bared for all to see!

[Unregistered]

The Board of Registrars are meeting tonight at 6 P.M. and not 7 P.M. as reported in local papers to certify the recount petition and discuss the recount process. Room 112.

(couldn't verify -- tg)

[Unregistered]

Let's settle it??? How much more will it cost the Town for this Re-count? Tell the naysayers, who don't want to spend a dime, they are spending more of our tax dollars for their own self gratification. A sad group of people who are behind this.

The Times story had the recount cost at approximately $3,000. Not alot to make sure a 10 vote margin is accurate. They spend $3,000 in town hall before you can blink. Talk about something real. You know there would have been a recount if the vote went the other way by 10 votes so stop the phony whining about the cost. This is chump change.


While I'm waiting by my telegraph for the recount numbers to come in, the top ten reasons to vote YES for a new library:

1. Maybe this will fianlly get that old cannon off that lot. Not very Fung shey is it?

2. So the Town Administrator and Library Director can just shout back and forth saving alot time and money on phones.

3. That new auditorium should have enough seats to have staff meetings for all the new library employees.

4. Saving the environment by using less gas driving all the way out to the old library so far out of the center of town.

5. Research shows new libraries and make you look thinner.

6. I won't have to call the town a run down backwater wasteland anymore.

7. I'll get to try that new 20th century technology they call automatic checkout. Wow!

8. More space for a whole section on Dr. Phil books.

9. We get plenty of windows to wave to the Friends of the Council on Aging every time they drive by.

10. Now I can get edumacated in the new liberry so sumday I won't be a dummy anymore.

[Unregistered]

What if the recount shows the override lost by one or two votes. Will we have another recount or move on as has been suggested?

If you know how recounts work then you wouldn't have to ask that question. I found the official answer as the first result returned from a simple 3-word google search, but I guess not everybody knows how to use the internet.

Why don't you take a trip to the library and ask an information professional? They won't have milk and cookies for you, but they will help you find the correct answer.

:)

[Unregistered]

While I'm waiting by my telegraph for the recount numbers to come in, the top ten reasons to vote YES for a new library:

1. Maybe this will fianlly get that old cannon off that lot. Not very Fung shey is it?
2. So the Town Administrator and Library Director can just shout back and forth saving alot time and money on phones.
3. That new auditorium should have enough seats to have staff meetings for all the new library employees.
4. Saving the environment by using less gas driving all the way out to the old library so far out of the center of town.
5. Research shows new libraries and make you look thinner.
6. I won't have to call the town a run down backwater wasteland anymore.
7. I'll get to try that new 20th century technology they call automatic checkout. Wow!
8. More space for a whole section on Dr. Phil books.
9. We get plenty of windows to wave to the Friends of the Council on Aging every time they drive by.
10. Now I can get edumacated in the new liberry so sumday I won't be a dummy anymore.

Cute list, but it only underscores the difference between the "YES" and the "NO" crowd. Every single one of the "19 reasons to vote NO" was used at one point or another by somebody on this board or in the Walpole Times to argue against the override. On the other hand, not one of the reasons in your list was actually used by a library proponent. (I challenge you to provide a single citation to prove me wrong!) So the YES folks continue to rely on facts to make our case, and the NO crowd continues to just make stuff up to suit their point of view.

If you can't find real facts to bolster your opinions, maybe your opinions need to be re-examined? Just a friendly observation.

On a related note, there is an interesting article in this week's Time magazine about online book retailer Amazon. Did you know that the $9.99 cost of a book download for Kindle is less than the cost Amazon pays to the book publisher? Amazon is selling book titles at a loss in order to stimulate sales of Kindle! This means that one of two things will eventually happen: (1) Amazon will eventually be forced to raise prices for each Kindle download to a more realistic price that covers their costs, or (2) publishers will be forced to cut costs of publishing book titles, meaning less editing, lower standards, and ultimately lower quality of the available titles.

The Wal-Mart Effect has made a lot of low-quality crap very affordable while pinching manufacturers to the point that they can't afford to make anything better. The Amazon Kindle is the Wal-Mart of the book publishing world.

[Unregistered]

Your list was great. I laughed at each one. Post 269 and 270 have no sense of humor. It's funny how a opposing view brings out the worst in some people. Thanks for the laugh.

[Unregistered]

Fung Shey? Whoops, we do need a library. The correct spelling is Feng Shui.

[Unregistered]

Cute list, but it only underscores the difference between the "YES" and the "NO" crowd. Every single one of the "19 reasons to vote NO" was used at one point or another by somebody on this board or in the Walpole Times to argue against the override. On the other hand, not one of the reasons in your list was actually used by a library proponent. (I challenge you to provide a single citation to prove me wrong!) So the YES folks continue to rely on facts to make our case, and the NO crowd continues to just make stuff up to suit their point of view.

If you can't find real facts to bolster your opinions, maybe your opinions need to be re-examined? Just a friendly observation.

On a related note, there is an interesting article in this week's Time magazine about online book retailer Amazon. Did you know that the $9.99 cost of a book download for Kindle is less than the cost Amazon pays to the book publisher? Amazon is selling book titles at a loss in order to stimulate sales of Kindle! This means that one of two things will eventually happen: (1) Amazon will eventually be forced to raise prices for each Kindle download to a more realistic price that covers their costs, or (2) publishers will be forced to cut costs of publishing book titles, meaning less editing, lower standards, and ultimately lower quality of the available titles.

The Wal-Mart Effect has made a lot of low-quality crap very affordable while pinching manufacturers to the point that they can't afford to make anything better. The Amazon Kindle is the Wal-Mart of the book publishing world.

I feel very sorry for you.

Humorless is not a good way to go through life. I'd say lighten up, but that ain't happening.

[Unregistered]

I think I have the solution to the library. Seeing as the vote is pretty much split half & half. Why don't you yes people pay $140 a year and the no's pay nothing. That way you get your library and everyone is happy. The no voters would not use the library as we didn't vote for it. We would have to look up everything on the computer, which is pretty much what everyone does anyway. Problem solved. All you would have to give up is one coffee and donut per week. There shouldn't be any complaining about this idea as it's for the children, right. Thank you, please hold the applause down.

[Unregistered]

Love some of the quotes, particularly the one from the Precinct 2 RTM. No sense of humor.


http://www.wickedlocal.com/walpole/town_info/government/x488804997/Library-vote-will-be-re-counted

[Unregistered]

I feel very sorry for you.

Humorless is not a good way to go through life. I'd say lighten up, but that ain't happening.

I acknowledged the lame attempt at humor - why do you think I called it a "cute list?"

The lists of "reasons to vote no" highlight the ridiculous litany of statements made against the library. These statements have been thoroughly debunked, but the NO-ponents haplessly continue to repeat them anyway. The list of "reasons to vote yes" was fabricated out of thin air to try to make library supporters look equally foolish, but it backfired. All humor aside, you've got to admit that there is one side of this debate that is not confining its remarks to the facts.

Jimmy Taylor says he "knows for a fact" the vote will be overturned on recount - I guess he was personally looking over the shoulder of every voter in all 8 precincts as we filled out our ballots? The fact is, he hopes the vote will be overturned, but he doesn't "know" anything, libelous insults against our Town Clerk notwithstanding.

Susan Maguire stood before our Board of Selectmen back in December when the issue of overlapping lots for the library and senior center was discussed. She was representing the Friends of the Council on Aging when she testified in no uncertain terms that "this is not an infringement on the library project; this in no way affects the library project." How irresponsible of her to make such a claim when she clearly had not researched the answer! At the same meeting, Paul Cesary provided the correct answer: the state had told him "loud and clear" that amendments to the approved [library] plan would not be tolerated. Maguire was urging the board to take action that would have caused the state to pull the library grant, all the while claiming that it wouldn't have any effect.

She must have had her fingers crossed when, at that same board meeting, Maguire said "it was not the intention of the Friends [of the Council on Aging] to be any way adversarial to the library." I suppose that explains why she has been quoted several times in the Walpole Times and the Boston Globe, speaking out against the library project with ridiculous claims about storm water management and crying crocodile tears about town layoffs?

Maguire and Taylor have made a number of indefensible claims in their campaign against the library. Their credibility is actually negative in my book - when Maguire says something, I immediately suspect that the opposite is true. Are they intentionally lying or are they just grossly misinformed? In either case, I'd say "not a good way to go through life."

http://www.wickedlocal.com/walpole/homepage/x541375025/Seniors-and-library-eye-overlapping-land

The notion that Walpole town policy is being forged by the self-serving, incorrect, and intentionally misleading comments of a handful of people makes me sick. It is long past the time for our community to shake off the chains of ignorance that hold us down.

You know who they are.

[Unregistered]

I have seen the light! I understand the ‘NO’ mentality. Seriously, who would want a sparking new ‘green’ building in town, when it would conflict with the prevailing ‘shabby’ theme?
Come on now, it would be like ‘putting lipstick on a pig’.
This town is ‘grungy’ and proud of it. What we really need to complete the look is a power plant and maybe a regional trash transfer station or two.
I think that when we have an opportunity to upgrade the public safety building we should buy a used trailer for them, with lots of rust.
We will show those fools in Westwood how to live.
Bring on the junk yards.

[Unregistered]

I think I have the solution to the library. Seeing as the vote is pretty much split half & half. Why don't you yes people pay $140 a year and the no's pay nothing. That way you get your library and everyone is happy. The no voters would not use the library as we didn't vote for it. We would have to look up everything on the computer, which is pretty much what everyone does anyway. Problem solved. All you would have to give up is one coffee and donut per week. There shouldn't be any complaining about this idea as it's for the children, right. Thank you, please hold the applause down.

What an idea! am not paying for schools then... because I don't use them. I am also going to stop paying Social Security and Medicare, because I don't use those either. No senior center either, because I would rather do just about anything else imaginable than sit in a building associated with that woman. Hey, no senior bus to the grocery store either. That's not sometjhing i use. While we are at it, I am not paying for police and fire eitjher, because I have never used them. They can bill me if I have an emergency. I would imagine it would be in the $150,000 range for a fire.

This is all OK with you right? You would be in to a pay as you go system, right? Oh,... or is it that you just want to pay for what you want and the rest of us need to pay for that too. Anything not on your list we can foot on our own. Wow! What an inspiring community builder you are! You know the old saying,.... there are streets named after people like you....

[Unregistered]

speaking of bylaws, maybe the town could enact a bylaw so that whoever decides to ask for a recount on a ballot question needs more than 10 signatures per precinct and must have voted in the election. that's all of 80 people....talk about a minority

[Unregistered]

One hundred fifty three Walpole voters signed the petitions for the recount.

Walpole should consider moving all elections to coincide with state- national elections to improve turnout.

Having elections in June lowers participation and makes it easier for a small organized group to put their candidate/ issue forward.

[Unregistered]

I wonder how many of those 153 that signed the recount petition actually voted in this election. That would be quite a news story.

[Unregistered]

Never mind voted. Go to the Town Clerk's office and see the petition. You'll wonder how many of the 153 actually SIGNED IT!!!

[Unregistered]

Are all the petition signatures real? Check it out yourself. Some names aren't even signed!

[Unregistered]

I agree with everything you said except fire & police. Police detail work could be done by flagmen though. This would save some money as the increased job cost wouldn't be passed on to the consumer quite as much, because the flagmens pay would be lower than police pay.

By the way, the street named after me would be, Less Taxes Road. Something you apparently care nothing about.

[Unregistered]

I agree with everything you said except fire & police. Police detail work could be done by flagmen though. This would save some money as the increased job cost wouldn't be passed on to the consumer quite as much, because the flagmens pay would be lower than police pay.

By the way, the street named after me would be, Less Taxes Road. Something you apparently care nothing about.

Flagmen are in a union in this state and you might be surprised to learn they make about six dollare less per hour than police and most flagmen jobs are very political so you may not be getting the best man or woman for the job.

[Unregistered]

Posts #284 and 285 do not belong in the library thread.

[Dutch]

I wonder how many of those 153 that signed the recount petition actually voted in this election. That would be quite a news story.

I find it harder to believe (according to poster 221) that 195 folks who voted actually left the override question blank. Guess we'll now find out for sure if there are any 'partially filled ovals' that didn't properly register in the machines.....

With the razor thin margin of victory, it's no surprise that there are hard feelings. Regardless of which side won, the other side would want (and deserve) a recount.

In these situations, we shouldn't require a few of our neighbors to take all of the arrows for formally requesting a recount. I think TM should consider updating the town bylaws to implement a threshold for automatic recounts.

The Town of Marion had tried something similar. While it did fail, here's the verbiage they proposed in 07:

"There shall be an automatic hand recount of ballots cast on a question if the difference between the YES and NO vote counts on a question is equal to or less than one-half of one percent of the total votes cast for that question. The one-half of one percent of total votes shall be rounded up to the next higher integer. This provision shall not supersede recounts permitted to proponents by initiative request under the rules of the Election Division."

Seems reasonable to me, and would've triggered a recount in this case.. Appreciate any comments from those more familiar with election rules and why this would be a bad idea to formalize.

[Unregistered]

#284 & 285 are in relation to post 278.

[Unregistered]

By reviewing the ballots by hand it is possible to ascertain the voter intent - perhaps thay did not mark the oval all the way or the machine scanner was not calibrated correctly.

Also when I went to vote was notified that I was removed from the rolls because the town census was not returned and two follow up correspondances went unanswered. I know the census was sent back because I got my dog license, and I never received additional correspondance.

This required me to go the the central desk and complete a form and provide ID. When I asked the clerk what would khappen if I did not have an ID---she was perplexed.


This also happened to two of my long time neighbors. One did not have the time to go through the re-registration and the other did.

There were pages of names that were also unenrolled. I wounder what is behind this and how many chose not to re-register or did not have ID. As info, according to the Federal Voting Rights Act, ID is not required to vote.

[Unregistered]

A bylaw for automatic recounts would consume a lot of money. Town Meeting members win by just 2 votes.

[Unregistered]

I'm glad that Walpole still has a few people like Maguire and Taylor who don't take these issues sitting down. Having the library question on the ballot again within 7 months is not right. Shame on all who think this is democracy. The library was defeated by 800 votes in November. The voice of the people didn't count? Preposterous. Why even put the issues on the ballot? The town can be run as a dictatorship, the people have no say at all. Pathetic.

[Unregistered]

I read Mr. DeSavage's letter in the Times yesterday and he mentioned " a shady method used again to put the library issue on the ballot." The Board of Selectmen voted in an open public meeting to put the question on the ballot again. Where was Mr. DeSavage and all the no voters when the board took this action? They could have voiced their opinion.

This letter is similar to some of the posts on this board where there appears to be a complete lack of understanding of the democratic process. And the meniton of "a few who brought a pocket knife to what should have been a gunfight" is insulting and uncalled for.

[Unregistered]

I'm glad that Walpole still has a few people like Maguire and Taylor who don't take these issues sitting down. Having the library question on the ballot again within 7 months is not right. Shame on all who think this is democracy. The library was defeated by 800 votes in November. The voice of the people didn't count? Preposterous. Why even put the issues on the ballot? The town can be run as a dictatorship, the people have no say at all. Pathetic.

I'm confused as to why this line of thinking is so pervasive and at the same time so off the mark?

The first library proposal was voted down, and rightfully so in my opinion because it was way over done. The second library proposal was voted through because it is a down scaled proposal from the original and it has merit.

Without trying to insult those of you with the opinion that this is just the same proposal over and over... why is it that you are so uninformed about the library proposal but at the same time so adamant against it succeeding?

[Unregistered]

The library proposal was presented at Town Meeting for all learn and discuss. Susan Maguire was not at Town Meeting when the proposal was discussed. Perhaps if she had been at Town Meeting, she would know the proposal was different and that it had a new price tag of $11.2 million instead of $12 million. One letter to the editor claimed the new price was a scam. More misinformation.

[Unregistered]

The library proposal was presented at Town Meeting for all learn and discuss. Susan Maguire was not at Town Meeting when the proposal was discussed. Perhaps if she had been at Town Meeting, she would know the proposal was different and that it had a new price tag of $11.2 million instead of $12 million. One letter to the editor claimed the new price was a scam. More misinformation.

But why would anyone actually speak in public about what they beleive! This is Walpole. We meet in secret, make up our own truths, and put endless hours into crafting a campaign to convince the everyday citizens of our own reality! You know, overstating the override $$.... It would be far to dignified and honest for this crew to stand up and speak the truth and convince people for all of thei REAL reasons behind their opposition.

Being honest would never work! Then everyone would see how self serving and dis-ingenuous they are!

[Unregistered]

Here's how the library override wound up on the ballot. The minutes of the Board of Selectmen Meeting of January 13, 2009. The vote was 4-0-0. Present and voting were Mr. DeNapoli, Mr. Timson, Mr. Snuffer and Ms. Winston. As others have posted it didn't happen in some shady way or somehow forced on the town by a small group of people. The selectmen put it on the ballot.

January 13, 2009
Board of Selectmen Minutes

1-15 Library Request for Article

MOTION moved by Mr. DeNapoli that we approve the request of the library trustees to place an article on the STM warrant for the funding necessary for a new library through a debt exclusion override, seconded by Mr. Snuffer, VOTED 4-0-0

[Unregistered]

The recount for the Walpole Library starts at 6 P.M. Monday night in the Senior Center at Town Hall. The public can attend and watch this process. Come and see who is reading the ballots and recording the results. 5726 ballots have to be hand counted. I'll bring the popcorn.

[Unregistered]

"The second library proposal... is a down scaled proposal from the original..."

I have noticed that the big savings to be achieved by the "scaled down, changed" proposal was not ever even mentioned as a per household figure. We have always just heard of the same average $70 per year cost. This is doubtless because the annual per household difference would have been laughable -- and therefore not helpful to the cause.

The "changed" proposal was simply the device to get the job done -- force the thing back on the ballot. Post 291 is so totally correct. I thank 291 for saying it, and second the sentiment.

[Unregistered]

I thank poster 294 for making it plain that many of the NO voices never made it their business to attend meetings where the new proposal was discussed. They just threw out anythng in the newpsaper and hoped it would stick.

[Unregistered]

"WALPOLE - The hard-fought battle for a new public library in Walpole appeared to be won earlier this month, when voters agreed to a $6.2 million override to help get the job done. That victory may be short-lived."__________________________________________________ __________ To see this recommendation, click on the link below or cut and paste itinto a Web browser: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/06/28/library8217s_next_chapter_recount?s_campaign=8315

[Unregistered]

Just like they always do-throw out allegations and hope they stick!

[Unregistered]

"The second library proposal... is a down scaled proposal from the original..."

I have noticed that the big savings to be achieved by the "scaled down, changed" proposal was not ever even mentioned as a per household figure. We have always just heard of the same average $70 per year cost. This is doubtless because the annual per household difference would have been laughable -- and therefore not helpful to the cause.

The "changed" proposal was simply the device to get the job done -- force the thing back on the ballot. Post 291 is so totally correct. I thank 291 for saying it, and second the sentiment.

The revised proposal cost nearly 7% less than the original. That is a significant savings which would amount to a reduction of about $4.70 per year per household. The household dollar amount is paltry because the total $70/year is paltry.

If you really want to talk about laughably microscopic numbers, that $70/year represents a temporary increase of about 1.4% to your property taxes in the first year, decreasing to only 0.7% in the final year. To those who say 7% is not much of a cost savings on the project, why are you howling about a temporary 1.4% property tax increase? It's practically nothing!

You are squealing about chump change and looking rather ridiculous in the process - therefore not helpful to your cause.

[Unregistered]

The revised proposal cost nearly 7% less than the original. That is a significant savings which would amount to a reduction of about $4.70 per year per household. The household dollar amount is paltry because the total $70/year is paltry.

If you really want to talk about laughably microscopic numbers, that $70/year represents a temporary increase of about 1.4% to your property taxes in the first year, decreasing to only 0.7% in the final year. To those who say 7% is not much of a cost savings on the project, why are you howling about a temporary 1.4% property tax increase? It's practically nothing!

You are squealing about chump change and looking rather ridiculous in the process - therefore not helpful to your cause.

And this doesn't even tell the half of it. The cost of the library was reduced by $800,000, but the amount of state aid remained the same and the amount of private donations increased. So the $800K savings goes entirely toward the portion being repaid through the property tax override. The reduction under the new plan is actually 11.4%. If you would have paid $70 under the original proposal, you would now be paying only about $62 per year under the new proposal.

Also, that "1.4% tax increase" is actually an increase of 1.4% in your tax bill, NOT an increase of 1.4% in the tax rate. So it's really more like a tenth-of-one percent tax increase in the first year of the bond, and only gets smaller from there on out.

The cost reduction to taxpayers is significant when you compare the two proposals, and it really is a very small amount of money being asked of the average homeowner.

[Unregistered]

The recount is over. The library override passed by 8 Votes. YES 2775 and NO 2767. What a wonderful world.

[Unregistered]

The recount for the Walpole Library starts at 6 P.M. Monday night in the Senior Center at Town Hall. The public can attend and watch this process. Come and see who is reading the ballots and recording the results. 5726 ballots have to be hand counted. I'll bring the popcorn.

Very interesting process tonight at town hall. The certifiers seriously counting and people staring over their shoulders, others milling around, others sitting intently on the sidelines or at tables. It was still going strong at close to 10:00 p.m. All the usual suspects were there - Mr. Taylor, Ms. Maguire, Mr. Hayes, Ms. Martin-Smith, Mr. Cesary. Reporter Keith Ferguson and Blogger Sam Obar( I think?).

I couldn't stay to the end. Tom, are you going to post the results when announced? If I were a betting man, I would put my money on the polling machines getting it right. Thanks.

[Dutch]

Original Vote (Y)2,774 (N)2,764 (T)5,538
Recount 2,775 2,767 5,542

[Unregistered]

After going through all the posts here two things do stick out- first is the implications that there was secret dealings. I watched the selectmen's meeting and I watched town meeting. Pretty hard to be secret on TV, but when you come right down to it: What did the selectmen and town meeting do? Shove a library down people's throats? No. They allowed it to go before us. Some folks seem to think that is the same as a approving it.

Let's look at it the other way: I prefer to say yes or no myself. I don't want either TM or the selectmen deciding such issues for me. Saying “No! We can’t let this go before the people again! They may change their minds!” is not democracy. How would we like it if both entities decided we were not smart enough to think for ourselves, and decided to protect us? I'm not going to define democracy for anyone here- we all know what it is, and what it isn't, is letting a small group decide for you. All they did was put it on the ballot for you. Forget the library and forget the yes or no people. When you come right down to it, what SM and JPT and the rest are saying is this: We don't trust the people of Walpole to be allowed to vote on an issue.

I know- you can give me the argument that no is no a hundred times, and it's still a crock. If things change, they change and people should be given another crack at considering, if enough of them ask for it. The people of the town, even a small group have a right to ask. Period. No one, no matter how loud or angry should be allowed to deny them that right, just because we already said no. Several people have already brought up the example of women's suffrage. It was turned down numerous times throughout the years before women got the vote. If “no had meant no” the first time, then Ms. Maguire would not have had a vote at either TM or the election. History is full of examples of second votes that changed history.

As I said, this is not about the library. I haven’t been in there in years. It’s about the rights of the people. I don’t need a tiny group of guardians to protect me from myself, nor do the rest of us. And I certainly don’t need SM or JPT to protect me from myself. If they wanted to stop it, then they should have gone before the people and made their argument as to why it would have been foolish or a mistake. Convince us, and then let us vote. How dare they say I should not have the right to reconsider it? Well, then again, I guess in a democracy, they have the right to say that. Just as I have the right to tell them to get lost.

Once you start down the road of a handful of people being allowed to decide what we can and can't vote on, you've put their hands around the throat of the people.

[Unregistered]

Well said, 307! I was just there yesterday and it was buzzing with all ages -kids, middle-aged, teenagers & seniors. What a thrill it will be to have a new place!

[Unregistered]

Where was all the outrage about the override passing? It seems to me that a tiny group manufactured the outrage when they hastily persuaded 153 people to sign a petition that forced a costly and time consuming recount.

[Unregistered]

You say there are a small number of No goers but you want to ignore the fact that the library failed by a LARGE number of NO votes the first time that is not a small minority. Now you go around acting like you pulled of some kind of coupe because you know that what you did was wrong. You took the very basic values of America and democracy and trampled on them. The library should not have been allowed back on the ballet for at least 2 years. I'm not even against having a new library but now is not the time when so much else is needed. And shame on those that don't want to do anything for the elderly in this town. First things first lets get a new police and fire station or maybe we can just tell them not to respond to all those YES voters and your houses can burn and you can drive your own kids to the hospital the next time you have an emergency. Oh I'm sorry the library is an emergency PLEASE give me a break!!!!!!

[Unregistered]

That is a mean and really pathetic post; the yeses got it on the ballot and they won.

[Unregistered]

the recount last night was a great example of democracy at work. I believe the very close vote warranted it. Thanks to all of the Walpole folks who showed up last night to take part in one of the aspects of our great country. Exercising our rights! There was no bloodshed. All I saw was handshakes.

the critics need to back off on knocking those that wanted the recount. They had every right (and Reason!) to do it. Mr. Fucile and the town counsel did a great job.

To our fellow townfolk that didn't get out to vote that day, but aren't happy with the results: Maybe you should think twice the next time and get down to the polls!

What a country, huh??

[Unregistered]

A simple question for the new library champions: would you have wanted a recount if the tally on the early june vote was the opposite?

I think we all know the answer.


The people who wanted the recount could have been the other side and we all know it!

[Unregistered]

The answer is:probably. So what? There was a recount and it was in favor of the library. If it had gone the other way, we would have to live with it and give up over 4 million dollars. What I don't understand is why all of you are so suspicious and resentful of 4 million dollars. We have to accept elections that don't go our way. Deval Patrick is not my choice of governor nor is Obama my choice of president. Live with it. Let it go.

[Unregistered]

The last was my post and I did not put a smiley post on my message. Tom, please do not editorialize. We do not need any more animosity. Thanks.

(not me... it came in that way. (i was impressed; didn't know it could be done) to the best of my knowledge, posts can't be edited by others (than me), and i've been in the editing business long enough to know not to distort meaning -- tg)

[Unregistered]

You say there are a small number of No goers but you want to ignore the fact that the library failed by a LARGE number of NO votes the first time that is not a small minority. Now you go around acting like you pulled of some kind of coupe because you know that what you did was wrong. You took the very basic values of America and democracy and trampled on them. The library should not have been allowed back on the ballet for at least 2 years. I'm not even against having a new library but now is not the time when so much else is needed. And shame on those that don't want to do anything for the elderly in this town. First things first lets get a new police and fire station or maybe we can just tell them not to respond to all those YES voters and your houses can burn and you can drive your own kids to the hospital the next time you have an emergency. Oh I'm sorry the library is an emergency PLEASE give me a break!!!!!!

Valium helps you know.

[Unregistered]

To poster 310, when the selectmen have open forum, it might be a good idea to attend and ask them to explain to the public how the library question got on the ballot. The answer is really simple. The selectmen have the authority to put override questions on the ballot and there are no time restrictions. You scold the YES voters for trampling on your democratic rights. How so? By going out to vote on a ballot question?

It seems to me that some of the opponents want selective democracy. They accept a recount as a constitutional right but they don't accept the right of the selectmen to put a question on the ballot and let voters have their say. They want a two year interval for ballot questions. My suggestion is that we allow a recount every two years for any election just to be fair and balanced.

[Unregistered]

to 310: I don't understand the need for all of the vitriol. Did it help make your point?

You say that it should not have been allowed on the ballot for two years. Why? Because someone said so? There is no legal reason. There is no law demanding such. Why 2 years? Why not 3?

Now it happens that in most cases, there probably is a good reason why there should be a bylaw preventing a question from being placed on a ballot twice in a row. Of course, such a law would also prevent emergency issues from being placed on it as well. But if you and others feel that their should be such a limitation, and it does merit thinking about, then the proper way to make it happen is for it to become actual bylaw, not law of hot air.

Of course in this case, it would have automatically lost the town $4m. Not quite so black and white.

[Unregistered]

You say there are a small number of No goers but you want to ignore the fact that the library failed by a LARGE number of NO votes the first time that is not a small minority. Now you go around acting like you pulled of some kind of coupe because you know that what you did was wrong. You took the very basic values of America and democracy and trampled on them. The library should not have been allowed back on the ballet for at least 2 years. I'm not even against having a new library but now is not the time when so much else is needed. And shame on those that don't want to do anything for the elderly in this town. First things first lets get a new police and fire station or maybe we can just tell them not to respond to all those YES voters and your houses can burn and you can drive your own kids to the hospital the next time you have an emergency. Oh I'm sorry the library is an emergency PLEASE give me a break!!!!!!

Your anger is misdirected.

The folks who fought so hard to defeat the library are the same ones who fought so hard to defeat the other overrides that would have replaced our crumbling public safety buildings. Read the messages posted here and maybe you will come to understand that! The arguments they used against the library would also be good reasons not to invest in public safety or in schools, or in a new senior center. They have used you like a pawn in their game to defeat the library project by getting you to believe their lies.

You cry tears for democracy, but then you try to say the people should not have had another chance to vote on a new proposal. You sound just like Susan Maguire, who as RTM voted against letting the people vote on the first library proposal. Tell me, how would it be good for democracy to have prevented the voters of Walpole from considering this modified proposal?

If you want to promote a strong democracy, here's an idea: get out and vote EVERY TIME! If you can't be bothered to do that, then you've got no-one but yourself to blame if you don't agree with the outcome. People have died to defend your right to vote, so stop whining about the frequency that you are called upon to do so. You make me sick!

The same folks who supported the library plan are the same folks who support the police and fire departments, and are the same folks who support the school system and the Council on Aging. The library project does not threaten the funding for any of these other priorities! What does threaten those priorities is when people like you turn every spending initiative into a battle against any/every other spending initiative in this town. "We can't build a library because we need a new fire station! We can't build a new fire station because we need a new police station! We can't build a new police station because we need a new senior center! We can't do anything because we're talking about laying off lunch ladies!"

We need to invest in our town, our crumbling infrastructure, our educational system, and in our community. The library project is a good beginning. What shall we do next?

[Unregistered]

Wasn't there already an override vote for a new police station that failed? If so, why are people clamoring for a new police station? The people have spoken on that topic, now move on. Isn't that the right decision? By the way, I am in favor of a new police station, but apparantly the majority of people think that topic is now off the agenda forevermore.

[Unregistered]

You people just don't get it. PLEASE spear me your twisted mind set. For the ‘NO’ vote to have passed by such a wide margin only 8 months ago and have it back is a mockery to the democratic society. I am upset with you and those that didn't come out and vote. But when the number (%) of voters that turned out in November turned out only to be slapped in the face with another ballet (typical of Walpole) it sends a message to the voters that as long as the town official can be bought everyone can vote but the will of the people goes to the highest bidder!!! The only way this ‘YES’ vote should count is if it passed by more then what it lost by given that it's only been 8 months since the people spoke!!! Had the vote gone the other way the last time by the margin it did then so be it but it didn’t so don’t give me a bunch of crap about how I should get over it! No law was broken but it’s just plain wrong. And the funny thing is we can’t even keep the library we have now opened. I can’t wait to see this multimillion dollar and I may as well say it now over budget library (because you know it will be) opened. But HEY not to worry we’ll just buy of the town officials and get another ballet going for as long as it takes to pass another override. In the mean time the Fire department is cutting back because they don’t have the funds to keep all the stations manned which is the part of town you belong in. You ask am I upset………..you’re darn right I am!

[Unregistered]

Well put .. now lets move on..
we have a laundry list of issues that will need to be addressed..

[Unregistered]

Hold on #320, you must remember that we can't bring back the police station because the voters said No on that project. I trust the library opponents will remind you of that. They argued that we couldn't vote on the library again because the voters said No on the proposal the first time it was on the ballot.

They talk about democracy and rights but then I read in the Walpole Times that a vocal library opponent acknowledged she voted against putting the library override on the initial November ballot as a Town Meeting Member. And totally disapproves of "voting until you get it right" type of thing. The media might want to ask her why she ran for selectman again when she lost the first time if she doesn't believe in voting until you get it right.

The media has enabled this atmosphere of dissension by failing to point out the inconsistencies and contradictions in the logic of the opponents and printing letters with inaccurate information.

[Unregistered]

Poster number 321, can you tell us which town officials were bought off to put the override question on the ballot again?

Since 9 extra write-in ballots were discovered maybe someone should look into whether or not Mr. James Paul Taylor really won his write-in campaign for Housing Authority. He only won by three votes.

If you are so upset about the firefighters, then ask the selectman to put a general override on the ballot to fund their positions. It shouldn't cost too much.

[Unregistered]

You people just don't get it. PLEASE spear me your twisted mind set. For the ‘NO’ vote to have passed by such a wide margin only 8 months ago and have it back is a mockery to the democratic society. I am upset with you and those that didn't come out and vote. But when the number (%) of voters that turned out in November turned out only to be slapped in the face with another ballet (typical of Walpole) it sends a message to the voters that as long as the town official can be bought everyone can vote but the will of the people goes to the highest bidder!!! The only way this ‘YES’ vote should count is if it passed by more then what it lost by given that it's only been 8 months since the people spoke!!! Had the vote gone the other way the last time by the margin it did then so be it but it didn’t so don’t give me a bunch of crap about how I should get over it! No law was broken but it’s just plain wrong. And the funny thing is we can’t even keep the library we have now opened. I can’t wait to see this multimillion dollar and I may as well say it now over budget library (because you know it will be) opened. But HEY not to worry we’ll just buy of the town officials and get another ballet going for as long as it takes to pass another override. In the mean time the Fire department is cutting back because they don’t have the funds to keep all the stations manned which is the part of town you belong in. You ask am I upset………..you’re darn right I am!


You are getting upset over something that is trivial in cost to the average taxpayer in Town. What you really should be getting upset at is our State Government, Deval included, at what you be paying in additional SALES TAX, LIQUOR TAX, MEALS TAX and any Local Tax increase the cities or Town may additionally increase, at will as a result of these states taxes. This will cost you far more than the mere dollar amount of this debt exclusion override and remember, the debt exlusion dollar amount goes away, these other taxes willl not. Do your yelling at the State House and Governor. Oh, and don't forget, he(governor) hasn't ruled out an additional increase in gas tax down the road. Welcome to TAXACHUSETTS! What a mess!

[Unregistered]

Wondering where the public apology is from Mr. Taylor?

He stated on the record in print that he "knew for a fact" that the library vote was tabulated incorrectly. He further accused Town Officials of illegal actions.

I know that to the "No" voters he has hero status, but that does not excuse his apprent lying and borderline slanderous comments.

[Unregistered]

It shouldn't take a general override to pay for police and fire or anything else. When you do a budget you start with the basics the 'must haves' like police - fire - town hall - etc etc and when you run out of money the rest of the list gets put on hold. There are certain things you just don't cut back on. AND PLEASE don't tell me our kids come first they have more then I ever had while in school.

[Unregistered]

It shouldn't take a general override to pay for police and fire or anything else. When you do a budget you start with the basics the 'must haves' like police - fire - town hall - etc etc and when you run out of money the rest of the list gets put on hold. There are certain things you just don't cut back on. AND PLEASE don't tell me our kids come first they have more then I ever had while in school.

We ought to go back to Zero Based Budgeting instead of just consistently increasing the budgets when we probably do not have too.

[Unregistered]

The idea of zero based budgeting is a good one.

[Unregistered]

"the town official can be bought everyone can vote but the will of the people goes to the highest bidder"

Oh please do tell, we all want to know what you know.
Maybe you should team up with JT as he was sure the voting process was tainted also.
Pathetic indeed.

[Unregistered]

The sad reality about this issue, and most issues locally and nationwide, is that the vast majority, the real "will of the people" don't care at all. The voting turnout is pathetic. Evidently there are 8 more people that want a new library than do not want one, and the rest of the registered voters who were too lazy to vote have no real say in the matter anymore. Is it really that difficult to go to the polls? I firmly believe if the town offered free donuts at the WHS cafeteria on a Saturday morning, more people would flow through there than for an election..sad, especially approaching July 4th!

[Unregistered]

Election day is the day before high school graduation so those voters with high school seniors are too busy with graduation plans. There's soccer and baseball games etc. The good weather draws voters away to summer homes. There's weddings. It might be too hot or rainy.

It probably takes about 15 minutes to vote and the polls are open from 8 to 8. Absentee ballots are available if any of the above might be a factor. There's really no excuse not to vote.

We can guess about the will of the people forever but we learned the will of the people at the election and again at the recount. There was a slim majority for the library. In a democracy, majority rules whether we like it or not. Now that we are done with the recount and we can't help the fact that 65% of the voters stayed home, can we address the other issues that face the town constructively?

It's over. Voters exercised their right to vote and opponents exercised their right to recount the vote. Let's work on finding solutions to the town's budget and infrastructure needs.

[Unregistered]

I say we convert the old library to a movie theatre. We could have different shows going on each floor. Parking could be a problem, but I think something could be worked out. Think of it. There is no movie theatre close by and we have all seen how everyone supports local business. It would bring in revenue for the town and a deal might be made to get a percent of the ticket and food charges.

[sdobar]

I think it was mentioned on this thread previously that property tax exemptions are available to those who qualify, especially seniors. This may enable senior citizens to enjoy the benefits of a new library but still not suffer financially as a result.
Here is a link for more information.
http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=dorterminal&L=4&L0=Home&L1=Individuals+and+Families&L2=Help+%26+Resources&L3=Information+for+Senior+Citizens+and+Retirees&sid=Ador&b=terminalcontent&f=dor_help_Property_Tax_Info&csid=Ador

[Unregistered]

From the selectmen's agenda:

7:30p.m Christopher Poulin, Seeking Associate Seat on ZBA (8-2)

Wonder how he will handle the library if the project has to go before the Zoning Board????? When he ran for selectman, he kept changng his position on the library.

[Unregistered]

The money is on the way.

http://www.dailynewstranscript.com/news/x1582180880/Walpole-waits-for-check

[Unregistered]

The money is on the way.

http://www.dailynewstranscript.com/news/x1582180880/Walpole-waits-for-check

It certainly looks that way! Thanks all for your hard work and dedication. Ignore the cynics! I am looking forward to our new library! Finally, something to be proud of! Something new! ... and its not a dirty business! We need something positive in this town. As the Boston Globe story clearly points out... we have had much bad press and many sad stories. Much of it brought on by ourselves.

I appreciate the perseverence of the library group, against the negative and misleading "NO" campaign lead by that same negative old guard. The old guard has kept us standing in the past, and created a club mentality where anything goes,... as long as you are the "right" person. A wink and a nod and folks are suppossed to look the other way. No more. Time to let the light shine in. Where better to start than a library. A place dedicated to providing INFORMATION and KNOWLEDGE! The truth and transparency are where we need to go! Our new library is a great place to start!!

[Unregistered]

It certainly looks that way! Thanks all for your hard work and dedication. Ignore the cynics! I am looking forward to our new library! Finally, something to be proud of! Something new! ... and its not a dirty business! We need something positive in this town. As the Boston Globe story clearly points out... we have had much bad press and many sad stories. Much of it brought on by ourselves.

I appreciate the perseverence of the library group, against the negative and misleading "NO" campaign lead by that same negative old guard. The old guard has kept us standing in the past, and created a club mentality where anything goes,... as long as you are the "right" person. A wink and a nod and folks are suppossed to look the other way. No more. Time to let the light shine in. Where better to start than a library. A place dedicated to providing INFORMATION and KNOWLEDGE! The truth and transparency are where we need to go! Our new library is a great place to start!!

I love the "negative and misleading" reference above. You see folks, any thoughful opinion that differs is not valid. Rather, it is "negative and misleading." Of course, none of us would have had "legitimate" reasons for voting no, or for speaking out about the risks of voting yes in such an uncertain economy, while we have so many other issues that require attention. Of course not. No - we were just "the old guard". ( I am - by they way 40 years old, and have been in this town for only 10 years. I guess I am old guard too.)

Change for the sake of change.
Time to let the light shine in.
It takes a village.

All well and good - until the rent comes due.

Just remember people - money doesn't matter to those that have it. If it matters to you and you did not vote - shame on you.

[Unregistered]

Speaking of transparency, maybe the new editor of the Times can shed some light on this story:

http://www.dailynewstranscript.com/news/x387871819/Clerk-does-not-know-why-votes-werent-counted

[Unregistered]

I love the "negative and misleading" reference above. You see folks, any thoughful opinion that differs is not valid. Rather, it is "negative and misleading."

Perhaps you weren't following the "debate" over the library vote. Many of the opinions offered by the "Vote No" campaign were neither "thoughtful" nor "positive." It was a campaign largely of negative and misleading statements to raise doubt about the project.

A few pages back, you can see a laundry list of the "arguments" made against the library. The vast majority of these were completely irrelevant to the discussion. Those who raised concerns about the negligible tax increase seemed to always speak about "somebody else who might not be able to afford it" while rarely claiming that their own pocketbook could not stand the strain.

The "so many other issues" that you say we should instead be focusing on were NOT ON THE BALLOT, therefore were not something the voters could do anything about. That is one of the classic examples of "misleading" statements made against the library - that we would build it at the expense of other priorities. How ironic that you would repeat an irrelevant, misleading, and thoroughly dis-proven argument against the library even as you scold the rest of us for holding an opinion that is different than your own?

It is possible for people to hold different opinions and carry on a respectful discussion about a topic. But when the arguments from one side are dominated by cynical, irrelevant fear-mongering, and when the people making those arguments refuse to acknowledge when their claims have been shattered, it is no longer a "respectful" discussion.

There seems to be a common theme here on Walpole Words recently where any opinion, no matter how ridiculous, is given equal weight to any other opinion, no matter how well-supported by facts. We are each entitled to our own opinion, but I have much greater respect for those who can back up their opinion with facts, or who are mature enough to admit they were wrong and change their opinion when confronted with irrefutable evidence to the contrary.

[Unregistered]

Perhaps you weren't following the "debate" over the library vote. Many of the opinions offered by the "Vote No" campaign were neither "thoughtful" nor "positive." It was a campaign largely of negative and misleading statements to raise doubt about the project.

A few pages back, you can see a laundry list of the "arguments" made against the library. The vast majority of these were completely irrelevant to the discussion. Those who raised concerns about the negligible tax increase seemed to always speak about "somebody else who might not be able to afford it" while rarely claiming that their own pocketbook could not stand the strain.

The "so many other issues" that you say we should instead be focusing on were NOT ON THE BALLOT, therefore were not something the voters could do anything about. That is one of the classic examples of "misleading" statements made against the library - that we would build it at the expense of other priorities. How ironic that you would repeat an irrelevant, misleading, and thoroughly dis-proven argument against the library even as you scold the rest of us for holding an opinion that is different than your own?

It is possible for people to hold different opinions and carry on a respectful discussion about a topic. But when the arguments from one side are dominated by cynical, irrelevant fear-mongering, and when the people making those arguments refuse to acknowledge when their claims have been shattered, it is no longer a "respectful" discussion.

There seems to be a common theme here on Walpole Words recently where any opinion, no matter how ridiculous, is given equal weight to any other opinion, no matter how well-supported by facts. We are each entitled to our own opinion, but I have much greater respect for those who can back up their opinion with facts, or who are mature enough to admit they were wrong and change their opinion when confronted with irrefutable evidence to the contrary.


Unfortunately, whether or not the claims of the NO VOTERS were valid or not will not be evident until years from now. What evidence - other than the fact that the Yes vote won - exists to validate the claims of the yes voters?

Speaking for myself, I voted "no" because of concerns down the line, not because I was opposed to seeing a bright, shiny, new municipal building in Walpole for the first time since the 60's. (Which by they way was a justification given to me as to why I people I know were voting "yes").

Whether or not I was right will not be evident until much later. I am not the kind to say I told you so, and I won't be later on either. I'll just suck it up and eat the costs - like we always do.

I'm over it, and really I was not that opposed to it in the first place. I just take issue with the notion that it was just the NO voters spewing venom.

Admit that it got ugly on both sides - and then 2 - 3 years from now hopefully you can provide evidence that will prove to the NO voters thier concerns were unfounded. I hope you can.

[Unregistered]

I love the "negative and misleading" reference above. You see folks, any thoughful opinion that differs is not valid. Rather, it is "negative and misleading." .

Negative and misleading refers to claims of a "starbucks" in the new library... not true, claims of an audotorium / theater.... not true, claims of a price tag over $12 mill ... not true, claims that libraries are no longer used.... not true (they are increasing in usage), claims that all books are available on line (kindle) for just about nothing... not true, claims that we need a new police station.... TRUE but the same people oppossed to the library voted that down... and it wasn't on the ballot anyways...

Should I go on, or do you look "negative and misleading" enough already....

[Unregistered]

Negative and misleading refers to claims of a "starbucks" in the new library... not true, claims of an audotorium / theater.... not true, claims of a price tag over $12 mill ... not true, claims that libraries are no longer used.... not true (they are increasing in usage), claims that all books are available on line (kindle) for just about nothing... not true, claims that we need a new police station.... TRUE but the same people oppossed to the library voted that down... and it wasn't on the ballot anyways...

Should I go on, or do you look "negative and misleading" enough already....

Most poeple I know did not say any of those things. Most people I know were concerned only about the cost. Don't paint all the NO voters with the same broad brush. We're not all whack-jobs that are simply opposed to anything that isn't status quo.

However, as I said already - if - when this is all said and done -the price is still under 12 million, then you can say "I told you so". If it's not costing us to support the library at the expense of other - more neccesary services - you can tell me "I told you so".

It'll come out in the wash - one way or the other.

[Unregistered]

Most poeple I know did not say any of those things. Most people I know were concerned only about the cost. Don't paint all the NO voters with the same broad brush. We're not all whack-jobs that are simply opposed to anything that isn't status quo.

However, as I said already - if - when this is all said and done -the price is still under 12 million, then you can say "I told you so". If it's not costing us to support the library at the expense of other - more neccesary services - you can tell me "I told you so".

It'll come out in the wash - one way or the other.

I applaud you if you were not among the nay sayers quoted above,... but please realize that this is not a "generalization" when virtually every letter in the local paper and every media news story (Times, Globe, Transcript) quoted these very same bogus arguments. The "NO" campaign was a deliberate attempt to deceive. You may not have been a part of it, but it was a very deliberate and intention campaign to cloud the issues. I spoke to countless people who quoted these very same "sound bites".

Now onto you new "sound bite" regarding the cost. We voted for an over-ride amount that is set in stone. There will be no additional cost to the tax payer without another over-ride. If the project does go over budget (which I do not believe will happen) isn't it impossible to get any more $$ from the tax payer without another over-ride? Again, this would be up to the voters. Right?

Why are you making it sound like you are somehow going to be forced to pay more? You make it sound like these sneaky library people are going to take a few extra $$ while they are getting the $70 bucks you are already on the hook for. I do not understand why you are making it sound like a robbery will take place against the tax payer some time in the future. If you ask me,...it is a bit misleading,... yoiu know, like mis-information.

[Unregistered]

As one of the opponents would say, Let's Move On.

[Unregistered]

Unfortunately, whether or not the claims of the NO VOTERS were valid or not will not be evident until years from now. What evidence - other than the fact that the Yes vote won - exists to validate the claims of the yes voters?

Speaking for myself, I voted "no" because of concerns down the line, not because I was opposed to seeing a bright, shiny, new municipal building in Walpole for the first time since the 60's. (Which by they way was a justification given to me as to why I people I know were voting "yes").

Really?

It will not take years to prove that the library roof is leaking - the evidence has already been collected by the bucket. It will not take years to prove that a handicapped person does not have proper access to the facility - dozens of code violations have already been identified. It will not take years to understand how Proposition 2 1/2 works. It will not take years to prove that library use continues to increase, even in this age of the internet. It will not take years to prove that $70/year does NOT buy a kindle and a virtually endless supply of book titles for every Walpole citizen - simple arithmetic provides the answer right now.

If library opponents made claims that can't be verified without a crystal ball, they weren't using "facts." The word for that is "speculation." For example, when James Taylor said he "knew for a fact" that the library vote would be overturned, that was pure unfounded speculation - not fact!

It may not be the most convincing argument in favor of a new library, but when a library supporter told you this would be the first new municipal building constructed in Walpole since the 1960's, they were telling the Honest-To-God-Truth! Is that something you have difficulty recognizing?

[Unregistered]

Really?

It will not take years to prove that the library roof is leaking - the evidence has already been collected by the bucket. It will not take years to prove that a handicapped person does not have proper access to the facility - dozens of code violations have already been identified. It will not take years to understand how Proposition 2 1/2 works. It will not take years to prove that library use continues to increase, even in this age of the internet. It will not take years to prove that $70/year does NOT buy a kindle and a virtually endless supply of book titles for every Walpole citizen - simple arithmetic provides the answer right now.

If library opponents made claims that can't be verified without a crystal ball, they weren't using "facts." The word for that is "speculation." For example, when James Taylor said he "knew for a fact" that the library vote would be overturned, that was pure unfounded speculation - not fact!

It may not be the most convincing argument in favor of a new library, but when a library supporter told you this would be the first new municipal building constructed in Walpole since the 1960's, they were telling the Honest-To-God-Truth! Is that something you have difficulty recognizing?

Yes - because I'm just a dumb "NO" voter, and you're just so much smarter than me. I'm sorry I ever opposed anything you would support. It won't happen again.

[Unregistered]

Yes - because I'm just a dumb "NO" voter, and you're just so much smarter than me. I'm sorry I ever opposed anything you would support. It won't happen again.

Good! At least we can begin making some progress around here!

[Unregistered]

Good! At least we can begin making some progress around here!

Progress? That remains to be seen?

I just hope you're man/woman enough to come back to this site in 1, 2, or 3 years, when these costs that you all are saying do not exist and are just a scare tactic by the "no" voters -are out in the open.

My guess is what will happen then is you will all circle the wagons to "justify" these cost which you now claim will never be.

And by the way, all the things you mentioned in a previous thread (leaking roof, etc) these are things that can be fixed without buidling a new library. Is a new building going to put us on the map or something? Is it going to raise the college acceptance rate for our high school kids? Is a new library on Stone Street going to increase the property value of a person that lives on Washington Street? I'm not using scare tactics here, I'm voted no because I don't want to pay anything for this when I - and most people - get very little if anything out of it.

Most of this town agrees with me, unfortunately a lot did not vote and were in a state of shock the next day. Admittedly -the "yes" vote side was far more organized and agressive on getting out the vote. And that is was politics is all about.

But reading the post on this thread - you're all talking like you have a mandate here. This thing is going to be scrutinized to the hilt.

[Unregistered]

I just hope you're man/woman enough to come back to this site in 1, 2, or 3 years, when these costs that you all are saying do not exist and are just a scare tactic by the "no" voters -are out in the open.

My guess is what will happen then is you will all circle the wagons to "justify" these cost which you now claim will never be.

What costs are these? Are you referring to the bogus scare tactic claim that the town would violate state law and continue collecting the extra override payments after the override had been paid off? Or are you referring to the bogus scare tactic that claimed the library project would illegally steal funds from some other town budget?

NO-ponents have been allowed (on this forum and elsewhere) to insinuate that the library would be built in violation of state law. Yet another example where you simply are not confining your arguments to the facts.

If the library project runs into cost overruns down the line, the planners would be forced to seek another override or revise their plans to use less money. It is that simple. The only way the taxpayers will end up paying more than has already been stated is if we approve another override. And since you are so gosh-darn certain that the majority of the town would never support another override, you have nothing to worry about, do you?

You have NO LEGITIMATE BASIS to claim that there will be additional expenses. Furthermore, you have NO LEGITIMATE BASIS to claim that these costs will be dumped into taxpayers' laps without the voters having our democratic say in whether such expenses are acceptable.


And by the way, all the things you mentioned in a previous thread (leaking roof, etc) these are things that can be fixed without buidling a new library. Is a new building going to put us on the map or something? Is it going to raise the college acceptance rate for our high school kids? Is a new library on Stone Street going to increase the property value of a person that lives on Washington Street? I'm not using scare tactics here, I'm voted no because I don't want to pay anything for this when I - and most people - get very little if anything out of it.

Yes, having solid public services is good for property values all over town! Did you know that the public library is considered as part of the school system's accreditation score? So a weak/non-compliant library will hurt WHS graduates' chances of getting into a good college! The health of the public school system is one of the top factors that determine property value, so a failed library will harm everybody's property values whether we use the library or not.

Under state law, if we spend more than a certain percentage of the library's current assessed value, we would be forced to bring the building into FULL COMPLIANCE with current building regulations. (The library director has estimated that we would hit this threshold if we spent a mere $200,000 on renovations.) So we cannot even fix the leaky roof without triggering a mandatory repair of ALL of the buildings' short-comings.

Please present your proposal for how the town can address all of the problems with the existing library building without spending more than $200,000? Barring that, please present your proposal for how the town can bring the existing building into full compliance for less than $6.2M? Library planners have already made a solid case that this is unfeasible, and NO-ponents have offered ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to rebut these claims.

I am trying to keep an open mind, but if you cannot even lay out a rough plan for how you would accomplish these goals, then the notion that we should repair the existing structure in place is naive and uninformed.


Most of this town agrees with me, unfortunately a lot did not vote and were in a state of shock the next day. Admittedly -the "yes" vote side was far more organized and agressive on getting out the vote. And that is was politics is all about.

But reading the post on this thread - you're all talking like you have a mandate here. This thing is going to be scrutinized to the hilt.

You simply cannot say how "most of the town" feels. The ONLY thing you extrapolate from the results of the vote are that the town is deeply divided, with a MAJORITY IN FAVOR OF THE LIBRARY. The vote (and the recount) show that more people voted "yes" than voted "no." You may have a gut feeling that many in town are unhappy with the result, but you cannot truthfully say that "most of the town agrees" with you! YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW MOST OF THE TOWN FEELS!!!

Please write back if you ever learn how to base your statements on fact. I eagerly await your detailed library renovation proposal and your statistically-significant survey of Walpole residents to support your position.

[Unregistered]

You simply cannot say how "most of the town" feels. The ONLY thing you extrapolate from the results of the vote are that the town is deeply divided, with a MAJORITY IN FAVOR OF THE LIBRARY. The vote (and the recount) show that more people voted "yes" than voted "no." You may have a gut feeling that many in town are unhappy with the result, but you cannot truthfully say that "most of the town agrees" with you! YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW MOST OF THE TOWN FEELS!!!

Please write back if you ever learn how to base your statements on fact. I eagerly await your detailed library renovation proposal and your statistically-significant survey of Walpole residents to support your position.


You're right. I can not tell you how most of the town feels. I can say that I can name at least 10 people in this town that did not vote that would have voted "no" - which alone would have pushed the vote the other way. Traditionally, those that are most passionate about a ballot question or election will have a strong turnout becuase they are more organized, and mobilized, so I will assume that most of the "yes" votes that you could have recieved - you got. Which means the low turnout was attributed in large part to the those that would have voted "no".

I say this only because I know you're next point is to insult my thought process again and state that for every 10 people that would have voted no, you can find ten that would have votes yes. I'm telling you that this is simply not true. I can also assume that - since the library was voted down once, and recieved a second life, the yes side was able to re-group and re-strategize, while the no voters probably just assumed it would get shot down again.

Do I have facts to back me up? No. But this is an open forum, which is full of opinions. That is my opinion.

Personally, hey - it's a library - who needs a new one? What's the average visit per person in town to the library per year? THE AVERAGE PERSON. Maybe 4 - 5 times a year, maybe? But that's me. I don't love my town or my kids any less because I don't care about a library. To me, the one we have is fine. So sue me.

I'm not cheap, but if I'm going to get behind a new public building in town, it's not going to be a library - not in 2009. I'd glady pay for a few extra teachers, or update one of the elementary or junior high schools. Heck, I voted yes on the last two overrides.

As for the rest of you're insulting quote happy email - let's just say "you win". This is old news now.

[Unregistered]

You're right. I can not tell you how most of the town feels. I can say that I can name at least 10 people in this town that did not vote that would have voted "no" - which alone would have pushed the vote the other way. Traditionally, those that are most passionate about a ballot question or election will have a strong turnout becuase they are more organized, and mobilized, so I will assume that most of the "yes" votes that you could have recieved - you got. Which means the low turnout was attributed in large part to the those that would have voted "no".

I say this only because I know you're next point is to insult my thought process again and state that for every 10 people that would have voted no, you can find ten that would have votes yes. I'm telling you that this is simply not true. I can also assume that - since the library was voted down once, and recieved a second life, the yes side was able to re-group and re-strategize, while the no voters probably just assumed it would get shot down again.

Do I have facts to back me up? No. But this is an open forum, which is full of opinions. That is my opinion.

Personally, hey - it's a library - who needs a new one? What's the average visit per person in town to the library per year? THE AVERAGE PERSON. Maybe 4 - 5 times a year, maybe? But that's me. I don't love my town or my kids any less because I don't care about a library. To me, the one we have is fine. So sue me.

I'm not cheap, but if I'm going to get behind a new public building in town, it's not going to be a library - not in 2009. I'd glady pay for a few extra teachers, or update one of the elementary or junior high schools. Heck, I voted yes on the last two overrides.

As for the rest of you're insulting quote happy email - let's just say "you win". This is old news now.

There was also swine flu about at the time, which may have kept older, more fiscally conservative voters home. One thing is true - even many who favored the library did not think it was fair play to do a "re do" on the previous vote.

[Unregistered]

You all keep beating this to death. Obviously some thought it was not important enough to get out on a beautiful spring day and vote. Too bad, end of discussion.

[Unregistered]

There was also swine flu about at the time, which may have kept older, more fiscally conservative voters home. One thing is true - even many who favored the library did not think it was fair play to do a "re do" on the previous vote.

I'm the "no" guy from 2 posts ago - and even I gotta admit - this one is a bit of a stretch.....

[Unregistered]

And now the Selectman have removed James Taylor's article from the Town Meeting warrant, even though he followed the Town Charter protocol and got the required signatures. His article proposes to put a time limit on how soon a defeated vote can be put on the ballot again. He is proposing two years. Let the people decide. What is going on in this town? Why do we even have elections and a Town Meeting? Democracy has died in Walpole. Is there no honor left?

[Unregistered]

Jimmy didn't understand or chose to ignore the protocol. Since he had gathered more than 10 sigantaures, all he had to do was file the petition with the Town Clerk and the article wouls have automatically gone on the warrant. He chose to go the selectmen to ask them to put it on the warrant and they did not based upon advice from Town Counsel. If Jimmy and his supporters understood procedure, the article would have gone on to town meeting only to have it fail there since it is not legal. The letter was not quite factual and kudos to the Walpole Times for identifying a co-author. I hope this practice will continue.

[Unregistered]

Jimmy didn't understand or chose to ignore the protocol. Since he had gathered more than 10 sigantaures, all he had to do was file the petition with the Town Clerk and the article wouls have automatically gone on the warrant. He chose to go the selectmen to ask them to put it on the warrant and they did not based upon advice from Town Counsel. If Jimmy and his supporters understood procedure, the article would have gone on to town meeting only to have it fail there since it is not legal. The letter was not quite factual and kudos to the Walpole Times for identifying a co-author. I hope this practice will continue.


I agree that the co-author should be identified. And why is the article not legal? It is merely a proposal for discussion. There was no guarantee that it would be adopted. It is an attempt to come up with something to help prevent this nonsense from recurring.

[Unregistered]

I agree that the co-author should be identified. And why is the article not legal? It is merely a proposal for discussion. There was no guarantee that it would be adopted. It is an attempt to come up with something to help prevent this nonsense from recurring.

The State Attorney General's Office must approve any bylaws passed by Town Meeting. Since Taylor chose to go to the Board of Selectmen (he had the option to bypass them and take it straight to Town Meeting) they were within their rights, indeed have a fiduciary responsibility to the town, to review the proposed bylaw to make sure they weren't wasting the taxpayers' money to put a flawed question before Town Meeting. Town Counsel concluded that Taylor's proposed bylaw would not pass legal muster at the AG's office, so the board did not put the measure on the warrant.

If Taylor is intent on creating havoc at Town Meeting and wasting everybody's time to discuss a fatally flawed piece of legislation, he had a path to do so that did not involve asking for the advice and counsel of the Board of Selectmen. But since Taylor chose to put it to the Board first, they had the responsibility to send it back to him.

[Unregistered]

Amen #358. Taylor could have filed his petition directly with the Town Clerk. The co-author of the letter to the editor, Bill Hamilton, should have known that. Hamilton was a selectman and should understand procedure after a 15 year stint on the board.

I am delighted to see that the Walpole Times printed a joint name with Taylor's letter.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

[Unregistered]

The money is on the way.

http://www.dailynewstranscript.com/news/x1582180880/Walpole-waits-for-check

I am certain you were going to post this link to the Selectmen's Agenda, showing the acceptance of the first check for the library. I bet you just got busy, so let me get the FACTS out there for you.

People like you always want to be certain the rest of us have the facts... Lord forbid you try to create HYSTERIA where it is not warrented.

http://www.wickedlocal.com/walpole/town_info/government/x576511504/Selectmen-agenda-Sept-22

[Unregistered]

I see Tom has reported on the front page of this site that the first payment of library grant money has just been accepted by the town. He also reports that George Comeau, Chairman of the State Board of Library Commissioners was "distressed when he heard some people in town wondering whether the money would come."

I hope Mr. Comeau and his colleagues realize that the only people saying such things were just using cynical remarks to try to defeat a property tax override. I seriously doubt that anyone in town actually believed that nonsense, including the people saying it.

Thanks in part to this generous grant, Walpole will soon have a new public treasure. Maybe we can all be more gracious hosts when Mr. Comeau and the Board of Library Commissioners come back to "The Friendly Town" for the opening ceremony of our new library?

[Unregistered]

I do hope Mr. Comeau and the Board of Library Commissioners can make it for the opening as well as this may be their only chance to see the "public treasure" open and actually containing books. Just because we can build it doesn't mean we have the budget to operate it.

[Unregistered]

I do hope Mr. Comeau and the Board of Library Commissioners can make it for the opening as well as this may be their only chance to see the "public treasure" open and actually containing books. Just because we can build it doesn't mean we have the budget to operate it.

Oh please! tThe new library actually requires LESS staffing as the circulation desk will be combined, rather than seperate locations on seperate floors. Once again, the facts never get in the way of detractors. I am so tired of the lies and campaigns of mis-information in this town.

Knowledge is power.... and in Walpole we are in short supply.

[Unregistered]

I do hope Mr. Comeau and the Board of Library Commissioners can make it for the opening as well as this may be their only chance to see the "public treasure" open and actually containing books. Just because we can build it doesn't mean we have the budget to operate it.

On what basis do you imply that we won't have the budget to operate the new library? Presumably you have studied the new library plan to determine the necessary staffing levels for the new facility? Do books being delivered to a new building cost more than books being delivered to an old building? Does it cost more to heat or cool a certified "green" energy-efficient building than it does to heat or cool an aging, leaky building?

I must just be an idiot, because I do not see why the library department will cost any more to operate simply because it is housed in another location. Please show me the numbers so I can benefit from your superior analytic skills!

I suppose this also means we shouldn't build a new police or fire station because then we'll have to pay more money for police cars, fire engines, and ambulances than we would if we just left those departments in their existing facilities. And you can just forget about a new senior center! The cost of Bingo cards will skyrocket!

[Unregistered]

You simply cannot say how "most of the town" feels. The ONLY thing you extrapolate from the results of the vote are that the town is deeply divided, with a MAJORITY IN FAVOR OF THE LIBRARY. The vote (and the recount) show that more people voted "yes" than voted "no." You may have a gut feeling that many in town are unhappy with the result, but you cannot truthfully say that "most of the town agrees" with you! YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW MOST OF THE TOWN FEELS!!!

Please write back if you ever learn how to base your statements on fact. I eagerly await your detailed library renovation proposal and your statistically-significant survey of Walpole residents to support your position.

I thought the majority voted against the library? Remember Nov. 2008? But that vote didn't count.

[Unregistered]

Put a bandaid on it.. enough already!

[Unregistered]

I thought the majority voted against the library? Remember Nov. 2008? But that vote didn't count.


So much for putting forth facts to support your rants! And by the way... the proposal was modified and the cost reduced before it was put back before the voters. As a result, the MAJORITY voted for the library. The first voted counted. Library trustees went back to the drawing table, people liked what they saw second time around.

The real fact of the matter is that a few people spread gross mis-information about the library which did not allow many voters to have the facts. There never was a coffee shop. Never was a theater. No police station was on the ballot.

You were asked to stick to the facts. Remember?

[Unregistered]

Here's a letter to the editor about pay raises for the library. The place to speak about this was at Town Meeting bu the writer was NOT present:

http://www.wickedlocal.com/walpole/news/opinions/x1945257471/Letter-to-the-editor-Walpole-and-the-state-government-not-on-the-same-page

[Unregistered]

While the author of the Letter to the Editor may very well be quite familiar with watching a dog chasing it's own tail, has she considered that the de minimis "raise" to the library staff was only to acknowledge that their salaries had not been adjusted for years. Certainly the author has enjoyed multiple bump-ups in Social Security entitlements in the same years. The ironic thing? The Library staff is predominantly seniors, the same demographic the author claims to represent. Again, where was the opposition at Town Meeting, instead of sniping in the paper?

[Unregistered]

I can't wait until the overide for the new police station. And then the fire station. And then the senior center. But at least our taxes will go down every year with the library overide. Walpole, the town of the overide.

[Unregistered]

I can't wait until the overide for the new police station. And then the fire station. And then the senior center. But at least our taxes will go down every year with the library overide. Walpole, the town of the overide.

Not just Walpole. Every town in the Commonwealth has also (or is also) grappling with an aging infastructure. No town has funding in their existing budget to replace that aging infastructure. New Police Stations, fire station, libraries, and senior centers are typically funded by over-rides throughout the state.

Walpole has failed to keep up with surrounding communities when it comes to said infastructure. Prior to the library over-ride, the last new building was many many decades ago.

Walpole is not the "town of the overide" as you incorrectly state. It is however a town with very reasonable property taxes in comparison to our neighbors, with service levels that often exceed them. Replacing aging infastructure is a necessity at some point. And when will we reach that point for you? It currently rains INSIDE of our +100 year old police station.

Walpole is the land of :
1. anti-tax pro-dirty business (1/3)
2. school funding fanatics (1/3)
3. Moderates somewhere in between (1/3)

We never get anywhere because there is no consensus. The moderates are really the swing vote. They support schools, within reason. They support business that is suitable to a clean, family community with its own drinking water. They support over-rides that are well thought out and serve the greater good, providing balance to the investment in our community.

I guess we know whnat group you fall into.....

[Unregistered]

Why not do a one-time permanent override and ramp up Walpole's property taxes to Medfield/Westwood/Dover levels? Then we can afford a new police station, decent schools, and a renovated downtown. If you don't want to pay them, sell the house, downsize, move to Norwood or North Attleboro. It sure would stop a lot of griping and solve a lot of problems.

[Unregistered]

Why not do a one-time permanent override and ramp up Walpole's property taxes to Medfield/Westwood/Dover levels? Then we can afford a new police station, decent schools, and a renovated downtown. If you don't want to pay them, sell the house, downsize, move to Norwood or North Attleboro. It sure would stop a lot of griping and solve a lot of problems.

This isn't Medfield / Westwood / or Dover. Moderation and balance are what we need.

[Unregistered]

Not just Walpole. Every town in the Commonwealth has also (or is also) grappling with an aging infastructure. No town has funding in their existing budget to replace that aging infastructure. New Police Stations, fire station, libraries, and senior centers are typically funded by over-rides throughout the state.

Walpole has failed to keep up with surrounding communities when it comes to said infastructure. Prior to the library over-ride, the last new building was many many decades ago.

Walpole is not the "town of the overide" as you incorrectly state. It is however a town with very reasonable property taxes in comparison to our neighbors, with service levels that often exceed them. Replacing aging infastructure is a necessity at some point. And when will we reach that point for you? It currently rains INSIDE of our +100 year old police station.

Walpole is the land of :
1. anti-tax pro-dirty business (1/3)
2. school funding fanatics (1/3)
3. Moderates somewhere in between (1/3)

We never get anywhere because there is no consensus. The moderates are really the swing vote. They support schools, within reason. They support business that is suitable to a clean, family community with its own drinking water. They support over-rides that are well thought out and serve the greater good, providing balance to the investment in our community.

I guess we know whnat group you fall into.....

Do these other towns need to replace every public building at the same time? Do they have an overide vote twice a year? Do these moderates want to have there taxes go up substantially every year? What is more important to you, a new library or a new police station? Pretend that you can only have one in the next ten years. Which one would you pick? I know I'd chose the police/fire station. Crime is up in town because we can't replace officers, but at least we'll have a new library that will be closed on Saturdays in the summer months because no one uses it. If you house is on fire, are you going to call the library? And what impact do you think these overides have on seniors living on a fixed income? Nobody cares about them. They have lived in town for 50 years and can no longer afford to live in their modest homes because the taxes eat up their SS checks. Let's forget them, their voice doesn't count. And many don't get out to vote due to health issues. And before you say it, many don't even know how to go about getting an absentee ballot. But at least you got a new library at their expense.

[Unregistered]

If you wan to pay higher taxes why don't you sell you house and move to Dover, or Weston.
It would be much easier on the residents of Walpole if you paid you higher taxes in other towns.

[Unregistered]

Do these other towns need to replace every public building at the same time? Do they have an overide vote twice a year? Do these moderates want to have there taxes go up substantially every year? What is more important to you, a new library or a new police station? Pretend that you can only have one in the next ten years. Which one would you pick? I know I'd chose the police/fire station. Crime is up in town because we can't replace officers, but at least we'll have a new library that will be closed on Saturdays in the summer months because no one uses it. If you house is on fire, are you going to call the library? And what impact do you think these overides have on seniors living on a fixed income? Nobody cares about them. They have lived in town for 50 years and can no longer afford to live in their modest homes because the taxes eat up their SS checks. Let's forget them, their voice doesn't count. And many don't get out to vote due to health issues. And before you say it, many don't even know how to go about getting an absentee ballot. But at least you got a new library at their expense.



Move on my friend, the library is a done deal. Stop dwelling in the past. When you have volunteers out there who can fund raise (to offset your taxes) $18,000, stop complaining and help out if your so miserable.
Ask those who are "pretending" to raise money for a Senior Center how much they raised. The silence is defeaning. The next generation of elderly "Baby Boomers" don't need a Senior Center.

[Unregistered]

Do these other towns need to replace every public building at the same time? Do they have an overide vote twice a year? Do these moderates want to have there taxes go up substantially every year? What is more important to you, a new library or a new police station? Pretend that you can only have one in the next ten years. Which one would you pick? I know I'd chose the police/fire station. Crime is up in town because we can't replace officers, but at least we'll have a new library that will be closed on Saturdays in the summer months because no one uses it. If you house is on fire, are you going to call the library? And what impact do you think these overides have on seniors living on a fixed income? Nobody cares about them. They have lived in town for 50 years and can no longer afford to live in their modest homes because the taxes eat up their SS checks. Let's forget them, their voice doesn't count. And many don't get out to vote due to health issues. And before you say it, many don't even know how to go about getting an absentee ballot. But at least you got a new library at their expense.

...and Social Security, Medicare, Medicade, shuttle service, call a ride etc... are all things things that did not exist generations ago. All the fine younger tax payers in town fund those services for the seniors, and willingly. It is part of being in a community. I know taxes are more than they used to be. I feel for the seniors on fixed incomes. But I also know that healthcare and senior services are far better than at any time in history. Seniors today live 20 years longer than seniors 50 years ago. No-one begrudges them that. In fact we celebrate having our elders around that much longer. But you cannot have it both ways.

With progress, comes progress. On all fronts. More services, better health care, greater longevity,.. and yes higher property taxes. But I am paying those too. And one of my biggest costs is health care. Healthcare costs which are skyrocketing. Skyrocketing because of an aging population who lives longer and uses more healthcare to do so. I am not complaining. I am glad to have you around. But then to, I wish you would stop complaining about being around. It costs us all alot too.

But glad to have you here, even if I think your complaints sound like a one way street..

[Unregistered]

If you wan to pay higher taxes why don't you sell you house and move to Dover, or Weston.
It would be much easier on the residents of Walpole if you paid you higher taxes in other towns.

...and perhaps you could sell your hous and move to Brockton or Fall River. If you don't want any services then your living there would be much easier on the rest of us.

Silly argument... isn't it...

[Unregistered]

Do these other towns need to replace every public building at the same time? Do they have an overide vote twice a year? Do these moderates want to have there taxes go up substantially every year? What is more important to you, a new library or a new police station? Pretend that you can only have one in the next ten years. Which one would you pick? I know I'd chose the police/fire station. Crime is up in town because we can't replace officers, but at least we'll have a new library that will be closed on Saturdays in the summer months because no one uses it. If you house is on fire, are you going to call the library? And what impact do you think these overides have on seniors living on a fixed income? Nobody cares about them. They have lived in town for 50 years and can no longer afford to live in their modest homes because the taxes eat up their SS checks. Let's forget them, their voice doesn't count. And many don't get out to vote due to health issues. And before you say it, many don't even know how to go about getting an absentee ballot. But at least you got a new library at their expense.

Life is far to short (and the overall impact on tax bills far too little) for people to still be this upset about the library. You people are getting to be as sad as the people who still swear up and down that Gore won in 2004.

The simple fact is this, there was an election, your side didn't win (to be truthful, our side didn't win, but I have long since moved on to more important things).

And if somebody doesn't know how to get an absentee ballot, and didn't think to call town election officials to figure it out, that is on them.

I thought the saying was "Ignorance is Bliss" not "Ignorance is Sombody who can't let it go"

[Unregistered]

We already voted down a Police Station and now you are doing the same thing the library people did
1-its in the same bad location
2-"the cost is less"
3-your setting up "friends of"
its the same thing all over again
Could this have something to do with the Board of Selectmans strong ties to Police Officers?

1-How about we worry about to increase our revenue instead of how to spend what we dont have.
2-how to support the town services we have and prevent layoffs

I would like a new car and pool this year but money is tight. So I will drive my old one and have to do with out a pool.
As I see it the Police have a station lets really gut it, and use what we have!

[Unregistered]

Oh wait a minute... one of the reasons used NOT to support a library was that we needed a police station more... now the police station comes along and surprise, surprise...there's opposition to that too....hmm what could we possibly need more now?????

[Unregistered]

In our rush to have new and better we are doing something different, putting a debt load on the next generations that will leave them living a far lower standard of living than we live.
The only thing that MAY stop this from happening is we are running out of places to borrow money. In the 90's it was Japan now China. China told Obama last week to grow up an stop spending like crazy people.
Where do we go next?
After all this money comes from somewhere. For the school overrides the state gave us money, for the library the state gave money. But who is the state? us. And the state of MA is broke now also (though still giving out money).

We are truely the ME generation, pile on the debt and someone else will pay.

but who? and When?
your children, as they grow up in a country that used to be great.

[Unregistered]

The pro-library people are smug and righteous and closed-minded. No use trying to reach closed minds. It's a waste. Better off talking to a stone wall.

[Unregistered]

"Reach closed minds....?" Don't you mean "change" closed minds? Those that do not agree with you, yes, the smug, righteous ones, as opposed to the anti-library upstanding citizens? Walpole has a much lower tax base than any of the neighboring communities, and no sustainable business revenues, like Foxborough, Norwood, or Dedham. Put pressure on the Selectmen to have a master plan for the town's future..it should start w/ a mayor, whose fulltime job would be to run the town..not these moonlighting Selectmen with no expertise in town budgets or management.

[Unregistered]

"Reach closed minds....?" Don't you mean "change" closed minds? Those that do not agree with you, yes, the smug, righteous ones, as opposed to the anti-library upstanding citizens? Walpole has a much lower tax base than any of the neighboring communities, and no sustainable business revenues, like Foxborough, Norwood, or Dedham. Put pressure on the Selectmen to have a master plan for the town's future..it should start w/ a mayor, whose fulltime job would be to run the town..not these moonlighting Selectmen with no expertise in town budgets or management.

Move back to the City Buddy!
But we should be electing our Selectman based on what they bring to the table.
This coming election is VERY important to Walpoles Future. Make sure your vote goes to someone who has a direction for Walpole. Remember we are losing more and more money from the state. What has this Board of Selectman brought to Walpole over the last 5 years. Have we made any forward progress? We need new members to help Walpole grow, not remain the same! (which is a currently losing of $$$$ from the state)

[Unregistered]

In our rush to have new and better we are doing something different, putting a debt load on the next generations that will leave them living a far lower standard of living than we live.
The only thing that MAY stop this from happening is we are running out of places to borrow money. In the 90's it was Japan now China. China told Obama last week to grow up an stop spending like crazy people.
Where do we go next?
After all this money comes from somewhere. For the school overrides the state gave us money, for the library the state gave money. But who is the state? us. And the state of MA is broke now also (though still giving out money).

We are truely the ME generation, pile on the debt and someone else will pay.

but who? and When?
your children, as they grow up in a country that used to be great.

The debt-load sinking this country is health care, medicare, and social security. We are victims of our own success. People live longer. It costs money to keep them happy and cared for. Funny that the "next generation" that is paying for it doesn't complain. The squalkers are a few folks benefiting from that success, deriving services never before seen, growing to ripe old ages, all while telling us that the only thing we should be giving money to are their causes and their care. Lord forbind they chip in $23 a year for a library... (you did say that they live in "modest" homes).

Funny isn't it? ...no not really. Kind of sad.

[Unregistered]

I've just had a look at the architect sketches. I've got to say... not a fan.

http://walpolepl.blogspot.com/2009/11/new-design-images-from-architect_24.html

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_0eJweV7dWnE/SwwtcZtCzoI/AAAAAAAAACU/m8xOq84rRCM/s320/WPL112409PLview.JPG

This design will sit between Blackburn Hall and the town hall (former school, architecture from an older era), and yet it doesn't carry forward a theme from either building, nor does it appear to form the basis of any cohesive Walpole look. Isn't this supposed to be the basis of a "Walpole campus" going forward?

Is the architect working in a vacuum here? I'd love to read the architect's ideas on what s/he is thinking on this library design. I'm sure it's well thought out, I just wish it fit into a more classic New England town scene.

One other thought that occurred to me was, are there any existing library designs that would fit our space? You could potentially save hundreds of thousands of dollars by reusing another library's design.

[Unregistered]

I'm disappointed in the design of the building. It doesn't look like anything around it. I was hoping for a more New England look.

[Sparky]

I'm disappointed in the design of the building. It doesn't look like anything around it. I was hoping for a more New England look.
Agreed. Everyone in town seems to make this same comment, yet it keeps coming back contemporary, now with more glass.

[Unregistered]

This drawing was posted a week before the one the previous poster put up. Fits the center of town alot better than that other thing. It's ugly.

http://walpolepl.blogspot.com/2009/11/current-library-drawings-we-will-post.html

[Unregistered]

I believe that is the previous, more expensive, design. We don't need a library that contains extraneous uses such as a preschool.

The look of the exterior seems more New England than the cubist/glass design proposal.

[Unregistered]

The pro-library people are smug and righteous and closed-minded. No use trying to reach closed minds. It's a waste. Better off talking to a stone wall.

I am pro-library but not smug, self-righteous and close-minded. I just like reading and appreciate cultural institutions. Please don't lump us into one group, as this type of stereotyping is smug, righteous and close-minded! Man, irony can be so ironic sometimes!

[Unregistered]

Agreed. Everyone in town seems to make this same comment, yet it keeps coming back contemporary, now with more glass.

Well, I'm one of the one's who thinks it looks just fine. Take a real look at Blackburn Hall, the police and fire stations and Town Hall, they are not very pretty looking buildings. So you think now we can get off the library griping? It's a done deal!

[Unregistered]

Well, I'm one of the one's who thinks it looks just fine. Take a real look at Blackburn Hall, the police and fire stations and Town Hall, they are not very pretty looking buildings. So you think now we can get off the library griping? It's a done deal!

Blackburn Hall is not a pretty building? Maybe it needs some paint and upkeep, but is is one of the nicest looking public buildings around.

(let me guess: Do you live on Glenwood Ave?)

[Unregistered]

Why haven't we heard from the Permanent Building Committee on the proposed police station? Are they on board with this? It seems to me a proposal of this magnitude would come from them, not the Selectmen. Seems to be micro-management at its best.

[Unregistered]

Shouldn't the functionality (is that a word?) and the usefulness of the building be more important than how it looks?

[Unregistered]

Shouldn't the functionality (is that a word?) and the usefulness of the building be more important than how it looks?

If functionallity were the key thing, Old Town Hall, Blackburn Hall, The Middle Schools, and the library would have been gone a long time ago.

The most important thing is to stir up opposition.

[Sparky]

If functionallity were the key thing, Old Town Hall, Blackburn Hall, The Middle Schools, and the library would have been gone a long time ago.

The most important thing is to stir up opposition.
I think your post is trying to stir up opposition.

I think both functionality and aesthetics are equally important.

[Unregistered]

I think your post is trying to stir up opposition.

I think both functionality and aesthetics are equally important.

My post was simply to point out that if you go back through every override in the past 10 years, the VOTE NO people have used asthetics, functionallity, more pressing need for "X" (even though when "X" was up three years ago it was a waste), lies, slander, and any other thing they can think of that will sway people. The only thing that they have ben consistent about is their willingness to say anything to try and win, and then complain if they dont.

If that is stirring up opposition, so be it.

[Unregistered]

Oh wait a minute... one of the reasons used NOT to support a library was that we needed a police station more... now the police station comes along and surprise, surprise...there's opposition to that too....hmm what could we possibly need more now?????

This is still a valid sentiment. Many, like myself, who were opposed to the library saw that the priority really should have been on the police and fire stations first. The opposition to the police station now stems from the fact that you have gotten your "just $80 per year" tax increase for the library that isn't really a priority.

It is the law of unintended consequences and people aren't ready to pony up yet another "just $80 per year" regardless the cause especially in light of the recent sales tax hike, the impending disaster of "ObamaCare", and the fact that Snuffer has already set the table for "just another $80 per year" for a couple years down the road when it is time for the fire station.

Personally my opposition is not to the police station it is to the lack of forwarding thinking and not revisiting the idea of a combined facility so we can quit getting nickeled and dimed (or $80 'ed)

[Sparky]

This is still a valid sentiment. Many, like myself, who were opposed to the library saw that the priority really should have been on the police and fire stations first. The opposition to the police station now stems from the fact that you have gotten your "just $80 per year" tax increase for the library that isn't really a priority.

It is the law of unintended consequences and people aren't ready to pony up yet another "just $80 per year" regardless the cause especially in light of the recent sales tax hike, the impending disaster of "ObamaCare", and the fact that Snuffer has already set the table for "just another $80 per year" for a couple years down the road when it is time for the fire station.

Personally my opposition is not to the police station it is to the lack of forwarding thinking and not revisiting the idea of a combined facility so we can quit getting nickeled and dimed (or $80 'ed)
I half agree with you. First, I think in the library-police/fire debate, you can't ignore the large sum of free money that was on the table for the library. If we had declined the library grant and prioritized the police facility, we would still be facing the library issue in a few years, without that free money. This would also have to be considered a lack of forward thinking.

I fully agree with your reason for current opposition. I still don't accept the notion that a combined facility is not feasible. Is the argument that there is insufficient property available? Have we looked into land swaps? I think this proposal is going to get a lot of opposition for exactly the reason you suggest.

[Unregistered]

This is still a valid sentiment. Many, like myself, who were opposed to the library saw that the priority really should have been on the police and fire stations first. The opposition to the police station now stems from the fact that you have gotten your "just $80 per year" tax increase for the library that isn't really a priority.

It is the law of unintended consequences and people aren't ready to pony up yet another "just $80 per year" regardless the cause especially in light of the recent sales tax hike, the impending disaster of "ObamaCare", and the fact that Snuffer has already set the table for "just another $80 per year" for a couple years down the road when it is time for the fire station.

Personally my opposition is not to the police station it is to the lack of forwarding thinking and not revisiting the idea of a combined facility so we can quit getting nickeled and dimed (or $80 'ed)

...and just how did you vote when this was on the table last time? I am sick and tired of the "Just Say NO" crowd. There is NEVER a good time to do anything as far as this group is concerned. The "Greatest Generation" did so much to bring this country forward. And they did it through selfless sacrifice and with an eye to building a better future. I am tired of the "Me, Myself, and I" crowd in this town who will do and say ANYTHING to get their way. This includes lies, tantrums, and cavorting with the likes of a maga power plant developer.

It is laughable that you now won't support a police station because the library passed. Be honest. You won't support anything. Ever. ...just say "NO" :(

[Unregistered]

The library opponents framed their opposition to the library by writing letters to the editor in which they said that the police station should be the priority. Now that the police station is on the ballot, some of the same opponents are opposed to the police station. Which leads me to believe that they would never support any override for anything. They just stirred up opposition to the library by touting the need for a police station.

The new battle cry is why isn't the proposal a combined station? If it were combined, then there would be another argument. Just come out and say NO without the diversionary arguments.

[Unregistered]

If the library grant were truly "free money" then we would be building a $4.5 million dollar library and my taxes would not be going up because of this "free money".

I understand the dilemma of the grant but I also question why we had to build a new library and could not just use it to renovate the existing one. We are also going to have to spend money to renovate unless we want another abandoned eyesore in this town (that "free money" keeps getting more expensive). That may have been spelled out in the grant but I think it is the responsibility of our town leaders to take a look at our needs and priorities and they should have addressed it with the state as part of the grant (i.e. thanks but here is what we really need).

I have never seen an estimate on the cost to renovate the building before or after the override vote. It would be hard to convince me that it would have taken $11 million to renovate the building when we can build from the ground up for that amount.

[Sparky]

If the library grant were truly "free money" then we would be building a $4.5 million dollar library and my taxes would not be going up because of this "free money".
...
I have never seen an estimate on the cost to renovate the building before or after the override vote. It would be hard to convince me that it would have taken $11 million to renovate the building when we can build from the ground up for that amount.

This addresses your points:

"Cesary said there is not enough room to expand the current library. And he said that due to code requirements, the town could not renovate it for less than the $6 million Walpole would need to expend for its share of a new building. The state would not reimburse for a renovation alone since the building does not meet its space standards, he said."

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2009/05/28/walpole_library_plan_to_get_another_shot/

Oh, and you can't build a new library for $4.5M. This is 2010, not 1975.

[Unregistered]

"The state would not reimburse for a renovation alone since the building does not meet its space standards, he said."



OK...this just proves the ridiculousness of the whole thing. In the day and age of the internet, hundreds of TV channels, Kindle, etc, the state won't pony up the money unless we build some 31,000 square (really square, have you seen the drawings) foot monstronsity? I don't fault the town for taking what was offered. I fault the town for not pointing out to the state that using "free money" to tax it's citizens even more was a really stupid idea.

[Unregistered]

It's YOUR money and if this town didn't take it YOUR money would have gone to another town. So we could have had the usual patchwork of a renovation or a brand new building for pretty close to the same cost. See you there.

[Unregistered]

We do need a new library:

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/general/view/20100325study_third_of_americans_use_library_compu ters/srvc=home&position=recent

[Unregistered]

I am by no means a financial wizard. Just ask my wife. But, after reading that there may be some extra money in the library fund (for lack of a better term), I was a little curious about something. I know there is talk of maybe getting that money back to the people. Would it be a good idea to use that money to maybe pay the debt down quicker? I have no idea the payment on a loan of that nature, but they say it's never a bad thing to make an extra car payment or mortgage payment. Is that something that's possible, or am I way off base here?

[Unregistered]

I believe the town uses short term borrowing while the construction is underway, and once the project is complete and the final cost is known, the town bonds the final amount spent, not what was appropriated. I don't think you'll find that in the end that there will be extra money to return to the tax payers.

[Unregistered]

Thank you. I thought it seemed a little early to be talking about coming in under budget. It's still a long way until completion and I'm sure other things will come up along the way.

[Unregistered]

I believe the town uses short term borrowing while the construction is underway, and once the project is complete and the final cost is known, the town bonds the final amount spent, not what was appropriated. I don't think you'll find that in the end that there will be extra money to return to the tax payers.

Pretty much correct. Now, can everyone please get off the bandwagon on the library. IT'S BEING BUILT and no money is coming back

[Unregistered]

Pretty much correct. Now, can everyone please get off the bandwagon on the library. IT'S BEING BUILT and no money is coming back

I'm well aware that the library is being built. My question was based on the story in the Walpole Times that there may be money coming back. I didn't say anything in opposition to the library. You're the one who needs to get off the bandwagon.

[Unregistered]

If we had declined the library grant and prioritized the police facility, we would still be facing the library issue in a few years, without that free money. This would also have to be considered a lack of forward thinking.

Please do not ever use the term "free money" when describing this library project.

No point in beating a dead horse - this library thing is done ( for now - till the issue of staffing it comes up again) , but let's call that grant exactly what it was: It was a coupon for something for which there was no immediate need. It's the equivalent of a late night informercial. "Act now and you'll get this $200.00 value at the low, low price of 99.00!"

Only it was 99.00 bucks we didn't have to spend.

[Unregistered]

Please do not ever use the term "free money" when describing this library project.

No point in beating a dead horse - this library thing is done ( for now - till the issue of staffing it comes up again) , but let's call that grant exactly what it was: It was a coupon for something for which there was no immediate need. It's the equivalent of a late night informercial. "Act now and you'll get this $200.00 value at the low, low price of 99.00!"

Only it was 99.00 bucks we didn't have to spend.

Clearly you have not visited the library this decade. Otherwise you could not say "no immediate need". The only thing there was to look forward to in this facility is that it may soon serve 2 uses; library and indoor pool. Man does it rain inside that place!!

[Unregistered]

Clearly you have not visited the library this decade. Otherwise you could not say "no immediate need". The only thing there was to look forward to in this facility is that it may soon serve 2 uses; library and indoor pool. Man does it rain inside that place!!

flat roofs will do that. Its nice to see that the new library also has a flat roof.

[Unregistered]

flat roofs will do that. Its nice to see that the new library also has a flat roof.

Well, you need a flat roof so that we can put out table and umbrellas and sit out on the Summer days/evenings sipping our coffee from the cafe.

[Unregistered]

Well, you need a flat roof so that we can put out table and umbrellas and sit out on the Summer days/evenings sipping our coffee from the cafe.

Petty,... petty...

But what else would you expect from someone who doesn't want a library. Never let the facts get in you way though. The "cafe" is an area under the stairs where people can drink the coffee they bring from home. If there ever is a real "cafe", it will be a leased space to raise revenue to support the operating budget. It is irrelevant. You clearly just want to make up petty little things to gripe about. The fact of the matter is that the current library is falling apart. We haven't built a municiple building in this town since the middle of the last century. Our Town Hall is an old school. Our Police Station is an historic Town Hall that is grossly inadequate.

The "just say NO" crowd changes the argument every time, to suit what they want to say "no" to. Building by building we will get it doen. And folks like you can just sit on the side lines and hurl negative comments. Each generation has a responsability to build for the future. Sadly, some folks just want to take it with them.

[Unregistered]

The fact of the matter is that the current library is falling apart. We haven't built a municipal building in this town since the middle of the last century. Our Town Hall is an old school. Our Police Station is an historic Town Hall that is grossly inadequate.

The "just say NO" crowd changes the argument every time, to suit what they want to say "no" to. Building by building we will get it done. And folks like you can just sit on the side lines and hurl negative comments. Each generation has a responsibility to build for the future. Sadly, some folks just want to take it with them.

I am not a just say NO person. I voted in favor of the first override, and would do that again. But please, enlighten me with some concrete facts. Who cares if there has not been a new municipal building in 40 years? Will a new town hall generate income, or attract new businesses to Walpole? I'm asking here, really. What proof is there that a new building is the panacea we need? Esthetics are not a reason, making a percentage of the towns people feel good about having a new building is certainly not a reason. So please, tell me: What is the tangible return on investment with a new town hall, or a new library?

I'm really sick of the elitist attitude in this town when it comes to these issues. I do not want to "take it with me". My problem is much simpler than that. My problem is that I AM STRUGGLING TO KEEP WHAT I HAVE NOW for my family. I have high school fees to pay, athletic fees to pay, afterschool fees to pay. I'm paying an exorbitant amount in taxes to live in a 100 year old house on a quarter acre of land. Every time you turn around it's $20 for this new fee, $75 for that one.

So what happens when you get frustrated, and you try and control the waste? You get insulted. You are made to feel guilty or ashamed for having your own opinion. "We owe it to the next generation" Just remember something, what is bad for the parents is inherently bad for the children.

Allot of us are in the same boat. You are obviously not. Good for you. Sure, there are some people that would say no to just about anything because they think change is something to be afraid of, or because they are just plain cheap. But the majority are just like me, people that get mad when they are worried about their own financial future, but are flim-flammed into paying for stuff they just don't need.

And I've said it before, the majority of people in this town will go to the library less than 2 times year.

The question is simple: With unemployment up, cost of living going up, how does it make sense - right now - to undertake this "building by building renaissance you speak of?

[Unregistered]

I am not a just say NO person. I voted in favor of the first override, and would do that again. But please, enlighten me with some concrete facts. Who cares if there has not been a new municipal building in 40 years? Will a new town hall generate income, or attract new businesses to Walpole? I'm asking here, really. What proof is there that a new building is the panacea we need? Esthetics are not a reason, making a percentage of the towns people feel good about having a new building is certainly not a reason. So please, tell me: What is the tangible return on investment with a new town hall, or a new library?

I'm really sick of the elitist attitude in this town when it comes to these issues. I do not want to "take it with me". My problem is much simpler than that. My problem is that I AM STRUGGLING TO KEEP WHAT I HAVE NOW for my family. I have high school fees to pay, athletic fees to pay, afterschool fees to pay. I'm paying an exorbitant amount in taxes to live in a 100 year old house on a quarter acre of land. Every time you turn around it's $20 for this new fee, $75 for that one.

So what happens when you get frustrated, and you try and control the waste? You get insulted. You are made to feel guilty or ashamed for having your own opinion. "We owe it to the next generation" Just remember something, what is bad for the parents is inherently bad for the children.

Allot of us are in the same boat. You are obviously not. Good for you. Sure, there are some people that would say no to just about anything because they think change is something to be afraid of, or because they are just plain cheap. But the majority are just like me, people that get mad when they are worried about their own financial future, but are flim-flammed into paying for stuff they just don't need.

And I've said it before, the majority of people in this town will go to the library less than 2 times year.

The question is simple: With unemployment up, cost of living going up, how does it make sense - right now - to undertake this "building by building renaissance you speak of?

Municipal buildings aren't built so that there's a tangible return on investment. Older buildings cost more to heat/operate and repair over the long haul.

As for your exorbitant property taxes, I'd suggest looking around to other similar towns before thinking you're somehow being put out. Or you can always sell your manse and move to Norwood if you want to.

[Unregistered]

Municipal buildings aren't built so that there's a tangible return on investment. Older buildings cost more to heat/operate and repair over the long haul.

As for your exorbitant property taxes, I'd suggest looking around to other similar towns before thinking you're somehow being put out. Or you can always sell your manse and move to Norwood if you want to.

You clearly fall into the list of elitests I was reffering to. No reasoning with you.

[Unregistered]

You clearly fall into the list of elitests I was reffering to. No reasoning with you.

I'm not an elitist, I had a suggestion for you. But you're probably the type who thinks any property taxes are too high and will continue to complain about everything rather than make your situation better.

[Unregistered]

I'm not an elitist, I had a suggestion for you. But you're probably the type who thinks any property taxes are too high and will continue to complain about everything rather than make your situation better.

The suprising thing about so many of these "just say no folks" who claim to be strapped, living on a budget, and unable to afford taxes,.... they own summer homes, rental properties, and vacation like there is no tomorrow. It is all about priorities, Everyone's are not the same. Very little gets done around here. The fact that there has not been a new municiple building in over 50 years is proof. We are not on a wild building boom. We are not elitists who are spending you money with reckless abandon. But we all have our priorities. And once in a while something needs to get done. The deferal of any maintenance o investment in this community is short sighted.

But heck, sometimes things don't go our way. Like I don't have that vacation house or rental property like so many. But I do have a new library on the way:)

[Unregistered]

The suprising thing about so many of these "just say no folks" who claim to be strapped, living on a budget, and unable to afford taxes,.... they own summer homes, rental properties, and vacation like there is no tomorrow. It is all about priorities, Everyone's are not the same. Very little gets done around here. The fact that there has not been a new municiple building in over 50 years is proof. We are not on a wild building boom. We are not elitists who are spending you money with reckless abandon. But we all have our priorities. And once in a while something needs to get done. The deferal of any maintenance o investment in this community is short sighted.

But heck, sometimes things don't go our way. Like I don't have that vacation house or rental property like so many. But I do have a new library on the way:)

Hello !! Millions spent on our High School-Adams farm-Elm Street School- Water Treatment Plants. 50 years, check the facts. we put lots of funds back in our Buildings. Go ask Newton and see how they are doing with their $200 Million School...

[Unregistered]

Hello !! Millions spent on our High School-Adams farm-Elm Street School- Water Treatment Plants. 50 years, check the facts. we put lots of funds back in our Buildings. Go ask Newton and see how they are doing with their $200 Million School...

Check YOUR facts. We have not built a new municiple building in this town in over 50 years.

[Unregistered]

Mostly due to the lack of local pride we convieniently forget that we built the septage facility on Robbins Road several years ago and for some strange reason do not use it nor do we market it to the septage haulers at a competitive price.Guess that a brick ***house does not qualify.

[Unregistered]

Check YOUR facts. We have not built a new municiple building in this town in over 50 years.


Are you planning on tearing down the house you live in and build a new one? If its 50 years old, you should.

My house is 150 years old, I took out the pump in the well, now I have running water, I stopped using candles, now I have electric lights. Are you getting my point here Charlie? With age comes updates and improvements. Thr Real Bird School on Washington Street ( Washington Green) Condos, Build in 1920, I bet most of the people there dont even know that. (old municipal building)

[Unregistered]

Are you planning on tearing down the house you live in and build a new one? If its 50 years old, you should.

My house is 150 years old, I took out the pump in the well, now I have running water, I stopped using candles, now I have electric lights. Are you getting my point here Charlie? With age comes updates and improvements. Thr Real Bird School on Washington Street ( Washington Green) Condos, Build in 1920, I bet most of the people there dont even know that. (old municipal building)

Stop twisting everything to suit your own "NO" hysteria:) Saying that we have not built a new public building in this town in 50 years is NOT the same as saying every building should be rebuilt when it is 50 years old! If every single house in thie town were over 50 years old, and desperately in need of an update, you would not find many people buying here. It is not that we need to replace a building when it is 50 years old, it is rather that building or upgrading 2 public facilities every century will leave this town in a pretty dilapitated state.

We have 4 elementary schools, 2 middle schools, 1 high school, 1 police station, 1 fire station (we will call it one now), and 1 town hall. That is 10 buildings. By your standards, it will be 500 years before we get a new police station. Give me a break. That is clearly ludicrous.

If that is what you think is a reasonable investment in the infastructure of this town, well then you should go live out in the sticks somewhere. You are a "just say NO-er"! No matter what-er!

[Unregistered]

Stop twisting everything to suit your own "NO" hysteria:) Saying that we have not built a new public building in this town in 50 years is NOT the same as saying every building should be rebuilt when it is 50 years old! If every single house in thie town were over 50 years old, and desperately in need of an update, you would not find many people buying here. It is not that we need to replace a building when it is 50 years old, it is rather that building or upgrading 2 public facilities every century will leave this town in a pretty dilapitated state.

We have 4 elementary schools, 2 middle schools, 1 high school, 1 police station, 1 fire station (we will call it one now), and 1 town hall. That is 10 buildings. By your standards, it will be 500 years before we get a new police station. Give me a break. That is clearly ludicrous.

If that is what you think is a reasonable investment in the infastructure of this town, well then you should go live out in the sticks somewhere. You are a "just say NO-er"! No matter what-er!

LOL..Im a "yesser" aaww forget it..no going back and fourth with you.

2 treatment plants, 5 pump stations, 2 dpw garages, NEW salt shed, east walpole civic center,center pool house, septic plant,adams farm barn, any if these places been remodeled or built in the last 20 years? NEXT !

[Unregistered]

I'm not an elitist, I had a suggestion for you. But you're probably the type who thinks any property taxes are too high and will continue to complain about everything rather than make your situation better.

I wasn't a suggestion, and I can manage my property taxes just fine as is. I also don't have a summer home. I don't spend money I don't have, and I don't like the town spending money it doesn't have on things it doesn't need. I also was ignorant enough to buy into the whole "coupon". No matter what the grant was for, it's still millions we don't have now. Alas, a handful were swayed by this ploy, and now all of us will foot the bill.

I'm also not a townie - having moved here only 12 years ago. I move to Walpole because of what it offered (all the while knowing what it didn't offer). I'm not someone that didn't want to pay Medfield or Dover prices, but now expects Medfield or Dover services.

Another poster named at least a dozen public structures that have been built in the last 20 years. The were all voted on - and passed. Some of those that voted "NO" on the library must have voted yes on these. I know I voted on the High School override ( which was very hotly contested). Money was tight then too, but we had an accreditation concern, which is a little more important than a leaking roof in a library.

Affluent, kept,soccer mom's with no sense of reality or accountability finding a "cause" in order to fill some hole in thier own self-worth. That is the perception of library group, and it's not that far off. You'd be hard-pressed to find one home-owning family making a combined income under 80k that thinks this library was a good idea. It's the old " money doesn't matter to people that have it" mentality, and you clearly fit the profile.

YOU people are out of touch. I hope you enjoy this library because it probably cost us all a new police station - which is something we DO need.

[Unregistered]

LOL..Im a "yesser" aaww forget it..no going back and fourth with you.

2 treatment plants, 5 pump stations, 2 dpw garages, NEW salt shed, east walpole civic center,center pool house, septic plant,adams farm barn, any if these places been remodeled or built in the last 20 years? NEXT !

A salt shed (NEW! ooh lala!) and repairing the town pool (not sure where you get "pool house"). Tax $$ were not used for the Adams Farm barn. I am the one LOL now:) By the way, what is the east walpole civic center? Did we build one? Fix something? what major infastructure improvement went on there? Kind of an odd place to spend money,.. serves a VERY small group, when you are complaining about a town wide library for young and old alike. I bet the east walpole folks can use a room at the new library...

If you keep looking, I am certain you can find a few new tires on vehicles, maybe some ball point pens we purchased. Who knows, perhaps we have even patched a roof. Not quite the same as we were discussing though. The point you were trying to respond to related to major upgrades to the 10 top publically used buildings. High traffic facilities that serve the population of the town on a daily basis.

Not quite comparative to your somewhat suspect "facts" list. Not that I haven't learned something....Heck, perhaps we can all meet at the salt shed for a picnic before it gets to cold. Maybe they will hold the Prom there. Maybe the Senior Center can share space with them come spring. The parking won't be an issue once the salt is gone. You bringing lunch?... oh I guess that is a silly question.

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;12416]Another poster named at least a dozen public structures that have been built in the last 20 years. The were all voted on - and passed. Some of those that voted "NO" on the library must have voted yes on these. I know I voted on the High School override ( which was very hotly contested). QUOTE]

I appreciate your desire to voice an opinion, but you seem a bit confused about the discussion, and the distinction between major projects and minor repairs. Major projects cannot be accomodated in our operating budget, and thus require a voter Prop 2 1/2 over-ride for a tax increase. Minor repairs are accomodated in our normal operating budget, and have no direct voter approval. The budget as a whole is open to scrutiny and public comment, but voters do not go to the polls to vote on these small repairs.

There were NO VOTES on the salt shed, pool repairs, dpw garage, Adams Farm barn, pumping station improvements etc. These were not overrides to prop 2 1/2. They were minor maintenance items that are a part of our ongoing operating costs. Major improvements to infastructure cannot be completed through our operating budget, due to the high cost of these projects. All the projects you are siting were minor and completed in the normal course of running the town. They never came befor the voter as the high school, library, and police station projects you are trying to compare them to.

You can continue to be against the Library, but hopefully you can move on and come see the value in the new facility. As for the personal insults about soccor moms, and folks needing something to occupy themselves,... well I guess I might suggest you occupy yourself by heading to the Library and brushing up on the financial workings of the town before you go casting stones.

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;12416]Another poster named at least a dozen public structures that have been built in the last 20 years. The were all voted on - and passed. Some of those that voted "NO" on the library must have voted yes on these. I know I voted on the High School override ( which was very hotly contested). QUOTE]

I appreciate your desire to voice an opinion, but you seem a bit confused about the discussion, and the distinction between major projects and minor repairs. Major projects cannot be accomodated in our operating budget, and thus require a voter Prop 2 1/2 over-ride for a tax increase. Minor repairs are accomodated in our normal operating budget, and have no direct voter approval. The budget as a whole is open to scrutiny and public comment, but voters do not go to the polls to vote on these small repairs.

There were NO VOTES on the salt shed, pool repairs, dpw garage, Adams Farm barn, pumping station improvements etc. These were not overrides to prop 2 1/2. They were minor maintenance items that are a part of our ongoing operating costs. Major improvements to infastructure cannot be completed through our operating budget, due to the high cost of these projects. All the projects you are siting were minor and completed in the normal course of running the town. They never came befor the voter as the high school, library, and police station projects you are trying to compare them to.

You can continue to be against the Library, but hopefully you can move on and come see the value in the new facility. As for the personal insults about soccor moms, and folks needing something to occupy themselves,... well I guess I might suggest you occupy yourself by heading to the Library and brushing up on the financial workings of the town before you go casting stones.

No. My point was that not all of us say "no" for the sake of saying "no" - like the poster insinuates. I know the difference between a budget decision on minor repairs, and a ballot question. The High School - like the library - was a hotly contested ballot question. I voted yes on that becuase it was clearly a critical need. The library was/is not.

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;12418]

I know the difference between a budget decision on minor repairs, and a ballot question.

"Another poster named at least a dozen public structures that have been built in the last 20 years. The were all voted on - and passed. "

I am glad that you know the difference. But your quote as noted would certainly lead one to believe you are a bit confused. We certainly have not voted on the repairs to the dozen public structures you quote.

[Unregistered]

A salt shed (NEW! ooh lala!) and repairing the town pool (not sure where you get "pool house"). Tax $$ were not used for the Adams Farm barn. I am the one LOL now:) By the way, what is the east walpole civic center? Did we build one? Fix something? what major infastructure improvement went on there? Kind of an odd place to spend money,.. serves a VERY small group, when you are complaining about a town wide library for young and old alike. I bet the east walpole folks can use a room at the new library...

If you keep looking, I am certain you can find a few new tires on vehicles, maybe some ball point pens we purchased. Who knows, perhaps we have even patched a roof. Not quite the same as we were discussing though. The point you were trying to respond to related to major upgrades to the 10 top publically used buildings. High traffic facilities that serve the population of the town on a daily basis.

Not quite comparative to your somewhat suspect "facts" list. Not that I haven't learned something....Heck, perhaps we can all meet at the salt shed for a picnic before it gets to cold. Maybe they will hold the Prom there. Maybe the Senior Center can share space with them come spring. The parking won't be an issue once the salt is gone. You bringing lunch?... oh I guess that is a silly question.

The buildings the poster mentions, may not be glamorous, but they are town buildings. So yes, there have been structures built with in the last 50 years

[Unregistered]

Check YOUR facts. We have not built a new municiple building in this town in over 50 years.

Really. Tore down the old well station on washington street, complete new water treatment plant 1995. Sewer plant on Robbins Road 1988. Salt shed ( holds 0ver 5000 tons of salt) large structure 1999. new public works garage, 4 new vehicle bays, 2 offices, sign making area,2 offices. break-meeting room 1999. Extention 5 truck bays for water department equipment, 2001. Elm Street School. yes, not a new building but spent millions on it 1995. Some capitol projects, some overrides, all needed a vote somewhere. ALL MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS !! so hold off on the 50 year thing..I know my facts.

[Unregistered]

I wasn't a suggestion, and I can manage my property taxes just fine as is. I also don't have a summer home. I don't spend money I don't have, and I don't like the town spending money it doesn't have on things it doesn't need. I also was ignorant enough to buy into the whole "coupon". No matter what the grant was for, it's still millions we don't have now. Alas, a handful were swayed by this ploy, and now all of us will foot the bill.

I'm also not a townie - having moved here only 12 years ago. I move to Walpole because of what it offered (all the while knowing what it didn't offer). I'm not someone that didn't want to pay Medfield or Dover prices, but now expects Medfield or Dover services.

Another poster named at least a dozen public structures that have been built in the last 20 years. The were all voted on - and passed. Some of those that voted "NO" on the library must have voted yes on these. I know I voted on the High School override ( which was very hotly contested). Money was tight then too, but we had an accreditation concern, which is a little more important than a leaking roof in a library.

Affluent, kept,soccer mom's with no sense of reality or accountability finding a "cause" in order to fill some hole in thier own self-worth. That is the perception of library group, and it's not that far off. You'd be hard-pressed to find one home-owning family making a combined income under 80k that thinks this library was a good idea. It's the old " money doesn't matter to people that have it" mentality, and you clearly fit the profile.

YOU people are out of touch. I hope you enjoy this library because it probably cost us all a new police station - which is something we DO need.

Your reading comprehension is poor. I indeed suggested you check out the neighboring towns if you think your property taxes in Walpole are too high. As for the suggestion that I'm a soccer mom, well I'm not. Since I'm not a woman. I'm in a two income household that makes not a whole lot more than your arbitrary line of distinction of affluence. And we both think the library was a good idea. And we own a home. We cut our own grass and everything.

I'd like to hear why you need a new police station though.

[Unregistered]

The buildings the poster mentions, may not be glamorous, but they are town buildings. So yes, there have been structures built with in the last 50 years

Now your changing from buildings to structures..... Gve it up

[Unregistered]

The buildings the poster mentions, may not be glamorous, but they are town buildings. So yes, there have been structures built with in the last 50 years

Again, we are talking about the top 10 municiple buildings that the poulation of the town uses on a daily basis. We are not talking about every minor improvement, shed, and out-house we have ever invested in. To compare a barn (that the friends of Adams Farm paid for - NOT the municiple budget) to a school, library, police, fire or Town Hall is silly. Your point is not made. Your example is not on par with the discsussion. Salt sheds, garages, and pumping stations do not fall into this category.

And if you really want to be informed, Water and Sewer is self funded and has their own budget. Rate payers and users pay for all upgrades. It does NOT come out of our municiple budget.

[Unregistered]

Again, we are talking about the top 10 municiple buildings that the poulation of the town uses on a daily basis. We are not talking about every minor improvement, shed, and out-house we have ever invested in. To compare a barn (that the friends of Adams Farm paid for - NOT the municiple budget) to a school, library, police, fire or Town Hall is silly. Your point is not made. Your example is not on par with the discsussion. Salt sheds, garages, and pumping stations do not fall into this category.

And if you really want to be informed, Water and Sewer is self funded and has their own budget. Rate payers and users pay for all upgrades. It does NOT come out of our municiple budget.

but its still voted on by towm meeting...but im sure you are a town meeting member and knew that . (sent from the old but soon to be library) :)

[Unregistered]

Now your changing from buildings to structures..... Gve it up

Go Deval.....more tax hikes.I love it !!!

[David C.]

This is all very silly. The library decision is done. It's clear there are people that support it, and people that don't. I did not because I did not the time was right - financially - for us to shell out money for a library, but I can appreciate that many people did not feel the same way as I did. That's politics! Win some, lose some.

Maybe they use it more than me, so it holds more value to them than it does me. There is nothing you can say, no matter how much you insult each other, or cdefine what is a civic building and what is not, that's going to convince the other side that you were right and they were wrong.

Quite frankly, some of the rationale I'm reading here is embarrasingly silly when we're talking about a vote that's over a year old for a building that's well underway. You can't "un-build" the thing.

For the "yes" voters: Enjoy the library, but know that you'll be in for a terrible fight if you ever go seeking more funds. It's going to get ugly, in no small part because of threads like this, and posters like the previous two or three anonymous posters.

To the "NO" voters, try and get some satisfaction out of whatever service the library can provide for you. I came to grips long ago with this decision, and now I'm actually looking forward the library's completion. I'm on board. What choice do I have? I may as well get the most out of it! If you can't move on then I guess you'll just have to simmer in your anger. It won't do you any good.

I always assumed this site was intended as a community board for the exchange of thoughts and ideas that might contribute to the betterment of the town. You've turned it into an adult version of Facebook, where you can say anything you want without threat of consequence, insulting each other's intelligence, trying to prove how much smarter you are than the next guy, and telling each other that they don't belong in Walpole.

A keyboard full of courage. Grow up people.

[Unregistered]

I couldn't help but notice how nicely the new library is coming along. I really do appreciate the time and effort that the town put into making the building blend in with the local existing architecture. Taking the cues from the fire station were really a good idea. Congrats to all who were involved with the approval of this sure-to-be beautiful building which will reflect on the town for generations!

I especially am really happy we didn't go down the route that Walpole did...making a library look like a fire station doesn't seem to fit in with the neighborhood. The flat roof is a turn-off, and that style of architecture surely will become dated within a few years (sort of like the old Walpole library addition....what a way to ruin a beautiful building!)


(oops....I thought this was "Westwood Words"!!)

[Unregistered]

I couldn't help but notice how nicely the new library is coming along. I really do appreciate the time and effort that the town put into making the building blend in with the local existing architecture. Taking the cues from the fire station were really a good idea. Congrats to all who were involved with the approval of this sure-to-be beautiful building which will reflect on the town for generations!

I especially am really happy we didn't go down the route that Walpole did...making a library look like a fire station doesn't seem to fit in with the neighborhood. The flat roof is a turn-off, and that style of architecture surely will become dated within a few years (sort of like the old Walpole library addition....what a way to ruin a beautiful building!)


(oops....I thought this was "Westwood Words"!!)

Since the fire station (and police station) is what really belongs on that corner it seems appropriate that they at least make it look like the fire station.

[Unregistered]

Give it a rest. The building looks great! Your sour grapes on the other hand appear petty.

When someone takes the time to do their homework, pursue a grant, and gather support,... a police and fire facility will be built. But since there has been nothing but petty infighting for years, it is still not underway. Besides, the only other thing I have heard suggested for the land the library is on, is a Senior Center. The divisiveness and bad politics of SOME of the people involved in trying to get that project going is what has brought that issue to a standstill.

A police and fire facility would be great on the current parcel that houses Blackburn and the fire station. Give the Rec Department and the Senior Center the old library. I think that is a perfect fit between 2 groups!

[Unregistered]

Give it a rest. The building looks great! Your sour grapes on the other hand appear petty.

When someone takes the time to do their homework, pursue a grant, and gather support,... a police and fire facility will be built. But since there has been nothing but petty infighting for years, it is still not underway. Besides, the only other thing I have heard suggested for the land the library is on, is a Senior Center. The divisiveness and bad politics of SOME of the people involved in trying to get that project going is what has brought that issue to a standstill.

A police and fire facility would be great on the current parcel that houses Blackburn and the fire station. Give the Rec Department and the Senior Center the old library. I think that is a perfect fit between 2 groups!

are you suggesting that we tear down one of the nicest looking buildings in the county to construct something more on the lines of our new monstrosity?

[Unregistered]

are you suggesting that we tear down one of the nicest looking buildings in the county to construct something more on the lines of our new monstrosity?

I am suggesting that we use our resources wisely. We need to balance preservation and fiscal responsibility. We cannot preserve an ever growing inventory of old, charming, underutilized, and deteriorating buildings.