To the editor:

Over the last two years, I have yet to meet a single Tiverton resident who does not like the privacy and sense of transparency and control afforded by the Financial Town Referendum. Gone are the days of having to pack into a crowded gymnasium for hours to raise your hand in front of teachers, union officials and other highly interested parties to cast your vote on how you want your taxes spent. But the FTR is only as good as how it is administered by the Town Council.

Imagine my shock and alarm when I read the new ordinance planned by the Town Council which states: “all casino revenue shall be allocated only for the following purposes: debt service/reduction, capital development, infrastructure projects”. At first glance, this seems innocuous; all of these items need to be paid for. But, aren’t they already covered by the town budget – our taxes? So, how can it be that these items are covered twice? And how will expenditures be split between the casino revenue and the budget? The ordinance is disturbingly silent on any algorithm to be used.

The ordinance goes on to say: “the town administrator shall annually develop a preliminary proposal for allocating anticipated gaming revenue ... The proposal shall be developed in the same time frame in which the preliminary ... budget request is prepared ... (and) shall be submitted to the Town Council …for its review and approval ... (and) shall be submitted to the Budget Committee for its consideration, to help inform the review and further development of the municipal budget”. So far, so good.

The ordinance continues: “The Town Council shall include the proposal with the budget information made available to the public, and allow for public comment during public workshops, meetings and at least one public hearing that are part of the budget process”. Now here’s where it gets dicey. “The Town Council shall approve the final allocation of gaming revenue not later than the date scheduled for approval of the municipal budget”.

Huh? Where is the FTR in the process? Unless I’m missing something, it would be cut out of the process if this ordinance goes into effect. In my 21 years living in Tiverton, I don’t recall ever hearing about an ordinance being used to affect budgetary matters. Where did this procedural change come from? Glad you asked. You see, once the charter change recommendations produced by the duly elected Charter Review Commission were summarily dismissed, the Town Council felt free to produce their own recommendations, one of which allows the Town Council to issue ordinances to affect budgetary changes totally independent from the FTR. Projections I’ve heard indicate that casino revenue will total approximately $3 million. Not exactly chump change whose disposition would be controlled outside of an FTR process which, two years ago, Tiverton residents voted in to perform exactly this function.

So, in summary, how does the Town Council get to create its own slush fund using casino revenue? Simple. They reject the charter changes proposed by the CRC, which tighten up the FTR process (already rejected), replace them with changes that loosen the FTR process (unless the voters reject them this November) and then, without any voter participation, snatch the casino revenue to be used at the discretion of the town council (but only if Tiverton voters allow it to happen).

Let’s hope this letter triggers an honest and open dialogue that will empower the voters of Tiverton to cast the most informed votes possible on November 6.

Terence Garvey

Tiverton