Waterbury reverses vote on fire station bond
|
|
Waterbury Town Clerk Carla Lawrence looks up Waterbury resident Louise Welch on the checklist as fellow resident William Mulhern votes in the background Tuesday at Waterbury Town Hall. Stefan Hard/Times Argus |
Toolbox
By Thatcher Moats Times Argus Staff - Published: January 7, 2009
WATERBURY – Waterbury residents voted decisively Tuesday to rescind a bond measure passed last year to finance two new fire stations.
The tally was 1,139-317 to rescind the $5.8 million bond proposal, which was passed on Election Day in November.
Waterbury Selectboard Chairwoman Rebecca Ellis was disappointed with the decision, but understood the voters' choice.
"Well, clearly I'm disappointed, but I think people are obviously concerned about their personal finances and their ability to make ends meet, and that's reflected in the rescission vote," Ellis said.
The $5.8 million would have been used to rebuild the community's two fire stations, which are deteriorating and don't provide enough space, according to the fire chief and many others.
The selectboard could legally put another bond measure before voters sometime soon; local governments are allowed to place two bond votes before residents every 12 months. Ellis said she needs to discuss with other board members what the next move will be, but she said any plan put before Waterbury voters would likely be restructured.
"My preliminary sense is that we would not put the same proposal out," Ellis said. The cost of the project would be re-evaluated, she said.
During the last session, the Legislature changed the rules for rescission votes: for a vote to be rescinded, the votes for need to outnumber the votes against, and the votes to rescind need to total two-thirds of the "yes" votes for the measure that was originally passed.
Waterbury had 1,436 votes in favor of the bond on Election Day and 1,375 votes against the bond.
The 1,139 votes cast in favor of the rescission passed the two-thirds threshold.
Because of the two-thirds rule, Ellis did not read too much into the lopsided result of Tuesday's
25