July 11, 2001

Amesbury to vote on 'under-ride.'

Newburyport Daily News. By Dan Hackett

AMESBURY -- Voters will decide in November whether to impose stricter control over town spending in the form of a tax "under-ride," the opposite of a Proposition 2 1/2 override.

Last night, six municipal councilors voted to put the question on the Nov. 6 ballot despite warnings from other town officials that many voters would not understand it could lead to cuts in services.

The bill's sponsor, Councilor-at-Large Thomas K. Iacobucci, warned against using such "scare tactics," adding, "I believe the voters are intelligent enough to make a decision, and I believe we should let them do that."

If the "under-ride" passes in November, it would shape the town budget starting in July 2002. This year's spending plan would not be changed.

If last night's debate was any foreshadowing, the "under-ride" is sure to stir controversy during an election that will see at least three mayoral candidates and six open council seats.

Two councilors who voted to put the "under-ride" on the ballot vowed nonetheless to campaign against it. Council President Al Sears, who harbors "very serious" concerns about the measure, said the large number of phone calls and e-mails from "under-ride" supporters persuaded him to vote to put it on the ballot. Sears called upon Iacobucci and other "under-ride" supporters to foster "clear debate" on the complex issue.

"I give voters a lot of credit," said District 5 Councilor Debra Perrotta Dow, "and I believe they will be able to ask the right questions and make the right decisions for the right reasons, and we should put this on the ballot."

Town assessor Henry Fournier warned that the issue would confuse many voters who are busy with their families and work. He said voters in general have "very little knowledge of what's going on in town" and many are "very much in the dark" about town affairs.

He said the problem exists "not because there's not public input, but because they're not paying attention."

"I have more faith in the voters of this community, apparently, than some people in this room do tonight," said Sears, who remained "dead set against" the "under-ride."

Considering taxpayers' ire toward surprise tax increases in recent months, Iacobucci predicted that voters would take it upon themselves to learn more about the "under-ride."

The "under-ride" would hold down the amount of money that the town could raise in property taxes each year, reducing that figure by $1.5 million. Some new spending would be allowed, but the "under-ride" would guard against any large leaps in the tax levy -- the total dollar amount that the town plans to raise.

Today, that power lies with the Municipal Council, which can cut the budget proposed by the mayor. But some councilors have been frustrated by their inability to make deeper cuts and the difficulty getting consistent and accurate financial information from the mayor's office.

Ted Van Nahl, the aide to Mayor Nicholas J. Costello, warned that an "under-ride" could cost the town more to borrow money because investors might deem the it as a sign of Amesbury's financial instability. "They'll say this town potentially can't meet its obligations."

"You're really putting us right on the edge," he told Iacobucci.

Iacobucci, who has announced that he will not run for re-election, in turn challenged the mayor's administration to tell beleaguered taxpayers that, legally, the town could hike its tax rate over $2 next year, if the new council approved a budget of that size or outside aid dried up.

Fournier argued that the spending cap could not touch a number of expenses like health insurance, legal bills or utilities, and he defied Iacobucci and the bill's other supporters to pinpoint where they would cut the budget.

"If that kind of cut is easily made, then someone has fallen down on the job," Fournier said. "But I don't believe that's the case."

Councilors Gerard Nolan and Leonard Johnson voted against measure. A group of citizens were ready to launch a petition drive to get the "under-ride" on the ballot, if the council turned it down.