To the editor:

Last week's Barrington Times showed the questions on the ballot were drawn up without much consideration. 

In reading the text one might think that people voting would be to eliminate bottom line budgets from the charter. That would be nice if we had that power, but the state law stating that all school budgets are bottom line only is the senior law. It was enacted more than 30 years ago to prevent what happened here with the referendum: People who just want to cut voting to cut as much as they could without realizing the consequences.

After the election, when people realize they have no such power, the Barrington Town Council will have what it has now: A population that thought it was doing something and couldn't and they were angry. Only this time they will be 10 times angrier.

The town council needs to do better research. An angry mob makes for an unpleasant town: the town was sued in 2009.

And while you have the books open, look into this: the town was sued in 2009, by a large group of very angry property owners over their property valuation; tens of millions of dollars. It was caused by a specific set of circumstances starting with higher interest rates, a lot of property put on the market at once, a snap shot date of value at the height of market, and release after a 30-50% correction. The town was ugly and angry.

The town appointed me to the committee to solve it two from each side and myself on the virtue that everyone on all sides hated me. Peter DeAngelis the town manager gave me one instruction: Get everyone to calm down.

The town council should be proactive and less reactive.

Joel Hellmann

Barrington