Laserfiche WebLink
4u <br /> Minutes of meeting held on October 26, 1970 - page 2 <br /> held as to the Appropriation Committee' s plans for cutting $800,000. <br /> from the 1971 budget . In response to Chairman Cataldo' s question as to <br /> "holding the line" on the School budget, Chairman Furash answered in <br /> the affirmative. <br /> Parody for non-certified employees of the School Department and Town <br /> Employees was discussed. <br /> Town Manager O'Connell read a report ( to be publ±shed) as to the finan- <br /> cial impact of the passage of the Firefighters request for a L.2 hour <br /> work week. Also, he pointed out the actual hours of duty and days off <br /> that would be involved. <br /> Town Counsel Legro and Town Manager O'Connell reported on unexpected <br /> expenses that will probably be forthcoming, viz: the roof at Bowman <br /> School and a Land damage Award made by Court-Jury decision. <br /> After returning to the Comptroller' s Office, upon motion duly made and <br /> seconded, it was unanimously VOTED that Chairman Furash forward the <br /> following letter to the Lexington Minute Man: <br /> tt October 26, 1970 <br /> Editor <br /> Lexington Minute-Man <br /> Adams Building <br /> Lexington, Mass . 02173 <br /> Dear Sir: <br /> It is most unfortunate that some of our firefighters have <br /> chosen this election to ask for a reduction in their working <br /> hours . The Appropriation Committee has examined the financial <br /> impact of this request on our tax rate. If our town is to <br /> maintain an equal level of fire protection under the fire- <br /> fighter' s proposal, then more men will be needed--resulting <br /> in at least $100,000. in additional costs to the Town, or 501 <br /> on the tax rate. These costs would come at a time when we can <br /> least afford them--a time when all of us should be looking for <br /> ways to cut our spending and tax rate. <br /> Any claim that there will be no increase in costs comes at the <br /> expense of each homeowner in the form of less fire protection. <br /> Such claims assume that there will be fewer men on call, with <br /> extras available on overtime or special call. We do not feel <br /> that it serves the taxpayers well to reduce fire protection <br /> below current levels, or to cover increased costs through over- <br /> time . <br /> We have always appreciated the fine service rendered by our <br /> fire-fighters . We understand their desire for more rational <br /> hours. However, much of their current duty is in the form of <br /> night "stand by" duty, when they can relax or sleep. We be- <br /> lieve that this matter requires much more careful study than <br />