The HWRSD School Committee Election.

If this season’s election for School Committee (SC) feels a little like DEJA VU, it may be because three of the five candidates ran against each other in a previous SC election, in 2013.

The common candidate that lost the 2013 election also lost a bid for election the time before that. And now he is attempting... for a record third time... to insert himself onto the School Committee.

Will this be “three times is the charm”?

Or will it be "three strikes and you're out"?

It should be the latter.

The candidate, Richard Boroff, was on the SC before, during a period that has subsequently become known as a time when the School District was “budgeting by override” and the towns were “addicted to overrides" (10 overrides in 11 years). As a direct result our property tax rates rose to the highest levels on the North Shore and the cost to educate our children in Hamilton and Wenham soared to $2,000 more per pupil than in comparable school districts.

And that’s not simply an OPINION.

It’s a FACT that was proven repeatedly by research conducted twice by the Blue Ribbon Committee and then by an outside professional Operational Audit of the Hamilton-Wenham Regional School District (HWRSD). The Operational Audit identified 124 recommendations, 28 of which had fiscal implications that, if enacted, would have resulted in $15 million in savings over five years. Although we have not seen anywhere near that amount of savings... because most of the recommendations were not implemented... the Operational Audit at least exposed enough waste and misappropriated funds and bungled finances that about $4.5 million was returned to the towns from the School District over a 2-year period. That may not be what the taxpayers could or should have received, but it’s a pretty good return on the $90k cost of the Operational Audit. (Thank you EiE)

But I digress.

Suffice it to say that this same candidate for SC doggedly fought for all 10 overrides and against the Blue Ribbon Committee and the Operational Audit and any and all attempts to reign in the spending he so adamantly supported.

But he was wrong. What he did was irresponsible and it would be wrong to allow him to regain a seat on a committee that has thankfully become more transparent, polite, responsive and fiscally responsible in his absence.

Consider the last time this candidate ran for the SC in 2013. He had this to say at the League of Women Voter's Candidates Night on why he should be elected:

"I believe that the School Committee, because of their youth and inexperience, needs somebody like me to say, 'Now wait a minute folks. That's not the way it's done and here's the way it should be done and here's the reason why.’"

At a SC meeting held on April 7th, 2011, this candidate said, during the discussion of what to do with excess funds discovered in the district's budget that deservedly needed to be returned to the taxpayers:

"I don't see any reason to give it back... I've been around long enough to see the district get screwed when it tried to help out the towns and I'm not willing to put that foot forward.”

And this year, at the League of Women Voter's Candidates Night on March 23rd, Mr. Borroff was specifically asked about his previous support of the 10 school budget overrides, the cumulative cost of which has now exceeded more than $100 million (How? Because overrides are not one-time, single-year events...they are appropriated every year after approval, plus 2.5% per year). This is what he had to say about his candidacy and the fiscal problems uncovered from his previous tenure on the SC:

"I can see where the problems are and what's going on and that kind of thing......Long term, they (my decisions) may or may not have been the right decisions. (Spoiler alert: they were the wrong decisions) We found that some of the problems that we ended up having (were) more money than we thought we had. Peter Gray was able to figure that out and we found that revolving accounts were not being used properly. So if we don't need overrides, we don't need them. We'll do with what we have."

For the record, the Operational Audit was the reason we were able "to figure it out". The same audit that Mr. Boroff so adamantly opposed.

Secondly, Mr Boroff has proven that he can not, as he claims, "see where the problems are and what's going on."

And lastly, consider closely his statement: "So if we don't need overrides, we won't go to them. We'll do with what we have."

If only that had been true when he was on the SC before. It's a little too late now...about $100 million too late.

In conclusion, there are many reasons why Richard Boroff has failed twice to win re-election back on to the School Committee. The School Committee has evolved and has become more transparent and there is no longer a place at the table for obstructionism, obstinance and his kind of poor policy decisions.

The School Committee has moved well beyond that.

Help prove this for a third, and hopefully final time, by voting for:

JEANISE BERTRAND

MICHELLE BAILEY and

DAVID POLITO for the contested seats on the School Committee.

Let's support the School Committee's positive momentum and continue to move forward, not backward.

Jay Burnham

Hamilton