To the editor:

The Barrington Times front page article shows the fatal flaw with the town referendum process.

First, Jim Hummel may have understood what he was voting to reduce but it’s unlikely most did. The line items that were cut cannot detail the amounts and which services would have been cut by peoples’ votes. The title is not the best translation. Some of the services cut would create an angry response in the town. A lose-lose situation. I had to explain cuts dozens of times when I was involved, and worse since the law protects the schools and that is where the overspending lies. 

The idea of a town referendum, which Ken Block took credit for on TV — sure, it sounds good until you play the film to the end and see the consequences. The town council has tried its best to fix it but the best answer would be to revert to the financial town meeting. That will give officials and advocates a chance to rebut a proposal before the consequences ensue. But people would have to admit they were wrong.

Also, and more important, the town needs to get an appropriations committee that understands the material and is brave enough to stand up to the richest, most powerful and vindictive organization in town — it is no small thing to be able to do — the Barrington schools. I tried. I lost. I paid the price. Well my kids did.

But the road the town council is on does not end well. They can play it out but no one is going to be happy, especially with the repeat of the 2008 town revaluation lining up. Anger will be everywhere.

Joel Hellmann

Barrington