The Greater Holyoke Chamber of Commerce urges a NO Vote on Debt Exclusion
Read their statement (Back button to return)
Chip Mannix, Holyoke resident, renter:
"I have been a renter here in Holyoke since 2007. I went through a very bad deal with a new school in city where I was from. They stated they would provide 78% of bill . The problem was by the time the school was completed it was quite frankly not up to code. The tax rates to the homeowners and businesses went through the roof, which we were told would not be the fact, but it was.
Now in Holyoke, we have a number of schools that are sitting vacant that can be remodeled and fit the needs for the students. $540 a square foot - are you kidding me? Are we building the new Windsor Castle? This is all coming from a Mayor that could care less about the working woman and man who pays taxes on time. Instead, it’s all about him and his personal gain to Congress on the backs of tax payers of Holyoke. I live on Oakwood Ave in the Elmwood section of Ward 3. A lot of the home owners are saying that if this passes, they will sell or raise the rent dramatically. The owner of the house I live in said the very same thing. I love Holyoke but maybe forced to leave because of a bully mayor that is aspiring to move on from Holyoke and step on whoever he has to to get where he wants to. The tax rate will close the Mall (they pay eight million+ a year in taxes), they said with a $600,000 tax increase, they are gone. Business owners and homeowners are gone. The middle class will suffer under this proposal. Please don’t let this mayor bankrupt our city. Vote "NO" in Question 1! Thank you."
Statement from the Howard Greaney for City Council Campaign
The Middle School Question:
"The most important decision facing the citizens of Holyoke in the November 5 election is whether to vote for or against Question 1 on the ballot: a Proposition 2 1/2 debt exclusion tax override to fund the construction of 2 new middle schools. All candidates for public office in Holyoke should state their position on this issue.
This question on the official ballot has no limit on the amount of taxpayers' dollars to be spent on this project. The last sentence on the question even states, "including the payments of all costs incidental or related thereto."
This will give the city unlimited resources to use taxpayers' dollars at its discretion. When taxpayers give the city government a blank check to spend their money for any reason, it can result in fiscal disaster for the city. This question on its merit alone is seriously flawed. I cannot support this question as it is written and I urge all my fellow citizens to put emotions aside and read the text very carefully. The economic stability of the city is at stake and I urge you to vote No on question 1."
Howard Greaney Jr.
Candidate for City Councilor At Large
(Mr. Greaney is a 35 year Teacher in the Holyoke Public Schools, and a former member of the School Committee and City Council)
Marc Hickey, Candidate for Ward 3 School Committee:
"Being a school committee candidate, I need to balance the best education for our kids while staying within our budget. I am voting No to the current plan because our kids will not be getting a quality education waiting in trailers while construction of the proposed schools goes on for at least 4 years.
Meanwhile multiple Holyoke schools sit vacant. The proposal is both unaffordable, takes away money from current classrooms that need repair and has not thought through the impact on our children during the 4 year transition. We need a better approach than this plan on the table!"
Linda Vacon, Holyoke Ward 5 City Councilor, "No on debt exclusion for 2 new schools"
We have had a number of meetings to complete our due diligence on a matter that has a huge and long term (30 years) financial impact on our city.
Click here to continue reading ...
John Aubin, Holyoke resident, architect and builder:
"I am voting NO on November 5th to the two new middle school proposal.
Improving our schools is a daunting task that requires hard work and hard choices that go well beyond our public school system. The two new middle school proposal has been irresponsibly conceived and designed without regard to cost or the different populations they are destined to serve. It will give the appearance of change without addressing the fundamental issues affecting our children’s education or our community. This proposal will also result in an across the board 6.8% tax increase which will severely curtail economic development and perpetuate the concentrated poverty at the root of many of these issues.
I support improving our schools including renovating existing school or other buildings, building one new middle school, or a combination of these done within the city of Holyoke’s existing budget and as part of comprehensive plan that includes addressing poverty and segregation in our community and in our schools."
Wilmer Puello, City Council Candidate:
“As a product of the Holyoke Public Schools I’m proud to say that they absolutely work when we set goals and strive to achieve them. This tax override proposes to further strain our businesses and residents while failing to adequately address what our students actually need. We must stand up for our children’s future and unanimously reject this 30 year burden, vote no!”
Keith Davis, Holyoke Taxpayer:
"Enough is enough! The schools are already in receivership. Do we want the City to end up that way also? Did you know that a Prop 2 1/2 Override means that the City will be "double dipping" in collecting taxes. Why? Because an increase in our property tax will mean the CPA fee we pay will also be going up as it's based on a percentage of your tax bill. Seriously look at the alternatives such as renovation or taking back Lynch School. We all know that success in education is not from the building, it's from the quality of the teachers and the curriculum. Please Vote NO November 5th!"