NO on Meals Tax Increase

As part of the reaction to the Plymouth Town Meeting's recent approval (by a three vote margin) of an increase in the local meals tax, a petition drive has succeeded in putting the question on the local ballot for re-consideration. As part of that effort, the "Vote No on the Meals Tax Increase Committee" has been formed to help communicate the issue's details to the voters:

We are pleased to announce that we have formed the Vote No on the Meals Tax Increase Committee.


We are seeking your support with the upcoming town election to repeal the meals tax increase. The vote will either be held on Saturday, December 19th in a special election (as approved by the selectmen) or on Tuesday, January 19th as part of the U.S. Senate special election. Rep. deMacedo has developed legislation which would allow the meals tax question to be placed on the ballot on January 19th, preventing the town from the need to hold a separate election in December. We will keep you posted on additional developments.

Please let us know if you are able to participate in this campaign in any way as we will need many volunteers to ensure our success.

We are also grateful for any contributions. Contributions may be sent to the committee address below. Individual and corporate contributions can be accepted in any amount. Please include your contact information with any contribution. Under state law, we are required to record the name of employer and occupation for all individual contributions of $200 or more.

Contact information:
Vote No on Meals Tax Increase Committee
P.O. Box 1193
Plymouth, MA 02362

Chairman: Chris Fava
508-269-1381 (cell)
kjfclf@comcast.net (e-mail)

Treasurer: John Malloy
774-454-4190 (cell)
Malloy_001_1@msn.com (e-mail)

Executive Director: Laurie Curtis
508-479-8034 (cell)
laurie@1620associates.com (e-mail)

If you know of anyone else who would like to be added to this list or if you would like to be removed, please reply to this e-mail.

For the back story on this tax, click HERE for an article in this morning's Globe.

Spread the word. It's not often that the voters get a chance to reject a tax. Let's take advantage of this opportunity

Plymouth In The Spotlight

Ordinarily, having one's home town featured on the front page of the Sunday Globe elicits civic pride among the townies. But when the story consists of a Spotlight Team report, all bets are off. Plymoutheans perusing this morning's edition, learned that the latest target of the spotlighters investigative zeal was none other than Plymouth Rock Studio, America's Home Town's favorite development project. Suffice it to say, the news, especially for those (and they are legion) who see the creation of a new movie studio on the fairways of Waverly Oaks, as town's primary future economic driver, is not encouraging. It appears that had anyone bothered to look beyond the glitzy front put up by David Kirpatrick and his posse of Hollywood poseurs, they would have found a financial house of cards kept alive only by questionable claims of industry experience and ephemeral financial backing. In case you missed it, click HERE to read the whole story


While the View has not been a strong supporter of the proposed studio, it has refrained from criticising the plan, primarily due to our lack of understanding of the studio's business model. But, we were led to believe, an experienced and well-financed team of Hollywooders were planning to create a movie studio in Plymouth that would provide jobs, tax revenues and career training to us locals. Most of the Town's political leaders swarmed to support the project, and why not. The benefits to the Town were not insignificant. But if a story sounds too good, maybe it is. Which brings up the need for a due-diligence investigation into the promoters' bona fides. Someone has to look behind the curtain.

What we now know, thanks to the Globe's Spotlight Team, is that there is a lot of sunshine in Kirkpatrick's resume and his mysterious sources of financial backing are linked to a number of shady investors with, apparently, more jail time than assets. Moreover, his personal record is fraught with a litany of law suits, unpaid bills and nasty disputes not to mention a career that has been in decline for the past eighteen years culminating in a personal bankruptcy that has had him hitting up his mother for pocket cash.

While clearly not the only local official with a seat on the studio bandwagon, the Globe came up with several quotes from Board of Selectmen Chair, Dick Quintal, who emerges from the story as the odds on favorite for designated goat. First off, he maintains that he sees his paving the way for the studio as his legacy. He then touts his business acumen:

“They’ve got a track record,’’ he said. “I can pretty much tell somebody the minute I meet them if they’re real.’’

Amazingly, Quintal was made aware of Kirkpatrick's bankruptcy and at least some of the lawsuits, to which Quintal replied:

“I didn’t pay no attention to that,’’ he said. “That’s none of my business.’’

Somehow we think that his legacy may not turn out to be as quite as positive as he had imagined.

Plymouth Tea Party ?

This just in.

Following the very narrow approval of the increase in the meals tax at the recent Plymouth Town Meeting, a small band of activists refused to stand by and watch another tax increase, especially in the face of a recession featuring, as we now know, 10%+ unemployment, be foisted on local taxpayers.

Working under a very tight time constraint, the required number of signatures have been gathered to ensure that the question be placed on the Spring Town ballot.

This not only speaks to the potential of a small, but determined, group of committed citizens, but also of the relative receptiveness of local government. We should be glad we didn't have to depend on Terry Murray and her Beacon Hill cronies to ignore the people's voice as they did with the petition to put the Gay Marriage issue on the ballot.

Stay tuned.

MassRoundUp.com

Thanks to EABO Clipper over at RMG for suggesting this new site that reports on Mass politics, ala Drudge.

Direct SITE Link

Last, But By No Means Least, A New Tax

As an example of the Commonwealth's effort to help the cities and towns deal with the property tax burden, a local option to the tax on restaurant meals has been instituted whereby the tax rate would increase from 6.25% to 7% on a local option basis, but the additional .75% would go to the municipality. This came up for a vote at the Plymouth Town Meeting last week and was passed by a three vote margin.

Supporters argued that the Town should take advantage of this option to help offset the dramatic decline in state aid. Hands were wrung as this was seen as a small bit of relief to the property tax burden. And while money is fungible, I suspect instead of keeping the lid on the growth of property taxes, the money raised will probably end up funding another parade, or perhaps buying a third big belly trash compactor. And,as one opposition speaker noted, perhaps paraphrasing Gertrude Stein, "a tax is a tax is a tax." Here we are in the middle of a recession-induced 10% unemployment rate and we are increasing taxes, again!

But the story doesn't end here. Tax opponents have hit the bricks with a a petition to send the decision to the voters for a second opinion. But time is short. Most of the local restaurants have the petitions, so drop by and add your signature. If you can't find one, drop me an email. The petitions have to be turned in within the next few days, so act now.

Sunday morning, we signed the petition at the Stop & Shop at Exit 6. Interestingly enough, there was also a second effort going on to petition the state to rollback the recent state sales tax on alcoholic beverages, which already carry an excise tax. In other words, a tax on a tax. Dueling petitions, right here in America's Home Town. I suspect that the local effort will stand a much better chance of achieving at least a small bit of tax relief.

The Morning After

Okay, it took me a few days, but here is the report from the Plymouth Town Meeting held last Monday Night at Plymouth North High School. After the colors were smartly presented by the police honor guard, and after the National Anthem was ably performed by the High School chorale, and after we all pledged allegiance to the U.S. Flag, America's Home Town took up the people's business, or at least that portion of the people's business as was properly included on the official Warrant.

Many of the articles dealt essentially with housekeeping matters and even some which involved significant sums of money were quickly passed without debate. A few of the Articles, however, precipitated spirited debate.

For a community being pressed financially by the weak economy and cut-backs in state aid, Article 7, involving a misplaced $190,000, brought the debaters to their feet. While it was stipulated by the chair that this money could not, under the law, be put back into the general fund, speaker after speaker insisted that the money could be better spent than the items included in the article. $10,000 each was allocated to the Fourth of July and Thanksgiving parades, respectively, apparently to pay for public safety (police details?) And while someone suggested that the Thanksgiving parade had its roots in a religious celebration, the use of the money was approved.

$45,000 was allocated to something called Plymouth 2020, the celebration of the Town's 400th anniversary tens years hence. It sounds like quite a party.

Why this article included $10,000 to pay for two trash containers sporting the unlikely name of "Big Belly Compacting Trash Receptacles", for use on the waterfront area, seemed highly incongruous, but passed handily. Go figure.

Articles 21 and 22 provided for the establishment of a Right To Farm Law and the establishment of an agricultural Committee. Throughout the extensive promotion of these proposals by the Right-To-Farm Steering Committee and the Open Space Committee, we were assured that the principal act was essentially a re-codification of existing state law into the local by-laws; as a result, no new laws were enacted. The Ag Committee would simply help existing Town Departments deal with agricultural and farming issues, thereby no new powers or responsibilities were created. And all of this would come at no cost to the Town! The only question remaining is then why do we need these two new by-laws in the first place? BTW, both passed unanimously. Stay tuned.

The final issue of the night, resolved just prior to 10:30 p.m., was the rejection of Article 24, aka the Sex Offender Residency Restrictions by-law. Originally intended to restrict Level 3 Sex Offenders from residing within a half mile of a school, park, playground or elderly housing facility, the proposal was amended to also restrict loitering by certain sex offenders in or around Town or state parks.
Moreover, an amendment was proposed and voted down to remove the residency restrictions from the act. This was a badly-written law which had been cobbled together in, frankly, an amateurish manner. The Town Meeting wisely voted against the proposal. This rejection should be in no way seen as support for sexual predators. The expectation is that the issue will be sent to an appointed committee where a carefully considered by-law will be drafted. Re-consideration of this highly-emotional issue is expected at a future Town Meeting.