David, You posted:
*Lincoln has the highest budget expenditure per capita among our group of > nine peer towns.* As I explained to you very directly when we met in person, and in my followup emails, your analyses use a non-Hanscom Lincoln population number that's significantly lower than actual. With an assumption that's ~15-20% too low, all of your Lincoln per-capita data will be ~15-20% artificially high. It's my understanding that others have given you this direct & specific feedback as well. We are all very mindful of our tax burden, and we all know each household has different financial circumstances. That's why we have open town meeting, and why the Commonwealth saw fit to implement a super-majority (2/3rds) requirement for key financial votes (exclusions, etc.). Whatever our tax burden is (or becomes), it's one that is/was supported by the (super) majority of residents. I hope you continue to share constructive comments and criticisms. BUT, when you post a fundamentally flawed analysis *after* having your incorrect assumptions noted, you force private criticism into this public forum. One raising-Lincoln's-per-capita-consumption-of-pork-rinds resident's view, -andy https://payne.org/lt-disclaimer
-- The LincolnTalk mailing list. To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
