LETTER: Defeating CPA May Mean Voters Never Have Another Shot at It



Some of those who are urging a No vote on CPA, Question 5, are insisting that they do not oppose CPA but that this is just the wrong time for it. Their proposal that this should be postponed to a later date is in my opinion a false option.

If the CPA is defeated for a second time, I believe it may be gone for good in Watertown; at least we will be missing its financial benefits for a very long time to come. Those who propose a delay to a future time are clearly not aware of the enormous time, energy, organization, and numbers of people involved in getting the question on the ballot and educating voters about it.

The Town Council will also be reluctant to put it on the ballot after a second defeat.  It took 11 years after the 2005 defeat for a group to propose it again; a second defeat will seal it’s fate for the foreseeable future. Watertown’s tax dollars have been going into this fund all these years; it is time that we start getting the benefit of the program. Passing the CPA will not jeopardize approval of a later school financing issue. Please vote YES on Question 5.

Ernesta Kraczkiewicz
Riverside Street

9 thoughts on “LETTER: Defeating CPA May Mean Voters Never Have Another Shot at It

  1. I have to say there was almost zero education about this from the CPA folks. One debate where the CPA was last on the list(too late for many parents and other residents). No real pro/con’s conversations or questions answered. I can not begin to know how many post Counselor Palomba posted(on social media) with questions that went unanswered. To me this was a one sided dialog : you are either with the CPA(aka: and don’t worry if you don’t understand it, take our word for it) or divisive and against(aka: don’t listen to those silly children and anti-tax folks!). From my perspective the Invest in Watertown folks have really made this discussion ugly by belittling anyone/group with real concerns, who has questioned the CPA. Of course I respect any group and all the effort they put into getting something on the ballot, but with that comes the responsibility of educating the masses on the pros, and yes, on the cons! Why can’t you all have been respectful to all voices and concerns!?

  2. You know I wish others would sign their names to their comments. Please own what you say. This anonymous debate is part of the problem.

        • You beat me to punch Jonh Labadini… I agree 100% with Mr. Levendusky.. Yes I’m known for caustic hyperbole. It’s my favorite literary construct. But if you’re going to say something… put your name to it.

        • For the record…. the CPA proponents have yet to enumerate the specif projects they want to take on, how much they will cost, or when they will be completed.

          They’ve given vague generalities… They’ve provided some examples of what other communities have done, but they never even bothered to give us the price tag for those items and whether or not bonds (more debt) were issued, thus ensnaring those communities into keeping the surtax for decades!

          And I proudly stand by my remarks…. This is a rape of taxpayers’ dollars to fund a special interest slush fund.

          And yes it is being promoted by Radicals… Some the proponents have proposed a the evisceration of private property rights, by imposing “style” restrictions on homeowners.
          That violates property rights that live and breath in 3rd, 4th, and 5th, Amendments of the United States Constitution. It also violates the 1st Amendment Freedom of Expression. So yes these people are not just Radicals… they are Anti-Americans.

  3. Completely untrue. CPA folks have put out why they are PRO CPA. They have given examples, explanation, etc.. For that they are continually attacked in that position by Anti-CPA folks.

    Here’s what your friend John DiMascio wrote to SC Member Candace Miller on the public WRSS facebook page:

    “After hearing of your support of this latest attempt by Watertown Radicals to rape taxpayers of their money, you can be sure I will never support you again,”

    Members of Watertown Strong Schools support these kinds of posts. Disgusting.

    • Please point to the multitude of information that was pro/con for this issue to Watertown Residents?? There was one debate which was on a weekday and #5 was the last question(which many could not attend). There was a cable network which asked Invest to come but I heard they declined(so only one side WSS and Concerned Homeowners) were able to make their case. Why weren’t there more debates on different days and times for a tax increase/surcharge/CPA? Don’t we all see the issue is communication, debating respectfully and understanding each side of an issue? Let’s not vilify one side but understand where the other is coming from and try to have a dialog. In the end we should be able to respectfully agree to disagree and cast our vote. For the record, I’m a No on #5 but respect those who have their reasons to cast a yes vote….just not at the expense of others by personal or group attacks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *