I urge Hallowell voters to vote no on the bond on Friday, April 28. I feel a few projects have merit, others do not. They should be separated and financed separately also.

As a six-term city councilor, I remember when bond purchases were a huge deal. These were for very important projects, such as the reconstruction of City Hall. Projects that could not be expensed in one year and were designed to last for generations. This bond package has items that should be expensed in the yearly budget, such as the reclamation and paving of city roads and city hall maintenance.

As an engineer, I know that the best road paving projects last five to eight years. Would you take a 20-year loan out on a car that will last five to eight years, with no chance to trade or sell it, ever? This will most likely result in overlapping future bonds to pay for the same thing.

Also, why make the fire station ADA accessible and spend a lot of money on the building when the fire department will most likely move and the future use of the building has not been discussed yet? Let’s wait and tackle that one when the time comes. The building can be secured to minimize further weather damage with a few yearly budget line items while it’s future use is decided.

People have many differing views on the Stevens School. I wish Matt Morrill the best of luck, but do not want my tax dollars going towards private development. This is a slippery slope. Let each project stand alone and be funded that way. The taxpayers should know the size and duration of each bond and the effect on the city’s mil rate for the bond’s duration.

Andrew McPherson


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.