Repayment not needed for fire truck purchase

EDITOR:

I will soon be the former chairman of the town of Fence in Wisconsin. I have decided not to run for re-election.

In regards to the purchase of the fire truck, it really bothers me that the supervisors have approved a fire protection fee ordinance that allows them to charge a fee to each property owner to repay the town.

The money is coming from CD accounts that they call a “machine fund.”

This was a previous levy where the extra money was deposited with no given reason for where it was to be spent. Today there still is no place marked for it to be spent.

Now the supervisors want to lend the fire department money and have the same people who paid into these “machine fund” accounts do it again. I do not believe the people should be charged twice.

The money has been sitting in the CDs for around 14 years. The fire truck payment can be taken from these funds, but I feel the people should not be charged to replace it. It does not need to be replaced.

The grant was given to the town so that a hardship would not be created for the people. When the supervisors want to charge the people to repay into the CD accounts, this is a hardship that is not necessary, especially when the people already paid into these accounts.

They aren’t looking out for the best interest of the people. They never look out for the best interest of the people.

I absolutely do not agree with charging the people again and I did not vote in favor of the ordinance — that is partly why I chose not to run for re-election.

Are these the people you want looking out for you and your money?

Frank Smith

Town of Fence chairman

COMMENTS