It has been bothering us for months, but let us take a few minutes to discuss our e-mails with Councilor Rosen regarding Councilor Gaffney’s recommendation to reduce the reserves in the Self-Insurance trust by over $7,000,000. Here is our column on the issue. We felt that this was a solid recommendation and would have reduced the tax bills to the taxpayer of Worcester by $5,625,000 without jeopardizing the financial strength of the trust.
The week before the vote, we sent and e-mail to Councilor Rosen asking where he stood on this recommendation. We had no idea where he stood, but we wanted to find out and maybe give him information supporting the recommendation by Councilor Gaffney. Here was his response:
“There is no need for me to make a decision on this until we receive, read, and digest further information from the Administration. Then the Council will question and discuss this matter thoroughly Tuesday night.”
Do you not think that he should maybe ask us where we stood and gather as much information as possible from his constituents and be more prepared for the Council vote?? In general, listen to what your constituents have to say??? Gary’s own TV show, Rosen’s Roundtable, emphasizes the need to discuss issues. Here we have a vote that will cut the taxpayers bills by $5,625,000 and he does not want to discuss it in advance of a Council meeting? In the end Gary voted against the recommendation; however, the council meeting did talk about a committee to review this and make a recommendation back to the Council.
Last week, we sent another e-mail to Gary asking what was the status of this report. He answered was that it was coming back to them in the “future” ? We then followed by asking when is the “future”?:
“Ask Councilor Gaffney to file an order requesting the City Manager report to the Council on establishing a new policy for funding this account.”
What?? Here is a real recommendation that can save the taxpayers $5,625,000 and he has 1) voted against it once, 2) has no idea on the status of the report and 3) that we should follow-up with Councilor Gaffney??? Maybe less time should be spent on lone stand-outs and more time on real issues that have the potential of a $5,625,000 benefit to the taxpayers?
Call us crazy but this single recommendation should be an election issue??
Maybe people running for office this November will see that take a stand on it!!