Dickinson OKs budget

[rapuda]

I don't understand why a mayor that disagrees with a budget, passes it. He stated "the decision will illustrate the consequences of budget cuts."

"I don't think most of this is really very advisable," he said Friday, "but I think this is an illustration of what happens when we deal with budgets in a way that, really, I think ultimately is not in the interest of the town."

If he feels it's not in the best interest of the town, then why allow it to pass? Why not veto it?

He already cut $3.1 million dollars from the education budget, plus some from the general budget. He felt the budget was already "lean."

The only conclusion I can come to is that when we feel the squeeze from these budget cuts on our services, he can blame it on this latest cut. When we have to have a large increase next year due to the cuts this year, he can blame the town council for its further cuts. In other words, politics.

[collie]

Because, as a Republican, when given the choice, in the end he chose to cut things, not pay more. I think it's as simple as that. He's safe this way - if the cuts the coucnil made turn out to be ill advised, he can say "I told you so." Actually, that he didn't veto is an indication to me that he is mellowing, allowing the council to have a say, even if, as he puts it, it is only as a "lesson." If he turns out to be right expect him to exert his authority the next time.