Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-11-04 State Election WarrantTOWN WARRANT FOR STATE ELECTION COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Middlesex, ss To either of the Constables of the Town of Reading, GREETING: In the name of the Commonwealth you are hereby required to notify and warn the inhabitants of said town who are qualified to vote in elections to vote at the following places designated for the eight precincts in said town, namely: Precinct 1 J. Warren Killam School Precinct 2 J. Warren Killam School Precinct 3 Joshua Eaton School Precinct 4 Joshua Eaton School Precinct 5 Community Center Precinct 6 Alice M. Barrows School Precinct 7 Highland School Precinct 8 Memorial High School on TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1980 from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. for the following purpose: To cast their votes in the State Election for the election of candi- dates for the following offices: ELECTORS OF PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT, Commonwealth of Massachusetts REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS, Seventh Congressional District COUNCILLOR, Fifth Councillor District, Precincts 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8 COUNCILLOR, Sixth Councillor District, Precincts 3, 4 and 5 SENATOR IN GENERAL COURT, First Essex and Middlesex Senatorial District, Precincts 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8 SENATOR IN GENERAL COURT, Third Middlesex Senatorial District Precincts 3, 4 and 5 REPRESENTATIVE IN GENERAL COURT, Twenty -first Middlesex District COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (2), Middlesex County SHERIFF, Middlesex County Also to vote YES or NO to the following questions: QUESTION 1 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION Do you approve of the adoption of an amend- ment to the Constitution summarized below, YES which was approved by the General Court in joint sessions of the House of Representatives NO and the Senate on September 7, 1977, by a vote of 262 -1, and on May 28, 1980, by a vote of 192 -0? SUMMARY The proposed amendment would add a new article to the state Constitution which would prohibit discrimination against handi- capped people. It would provide that no otherwise qualified hand- icapped individual could, on the sole basis of that handicap, be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or sub- jected to discrimination in any program or activity. QUESTION 2 LAW PROPOSED BY INITIATIVE PETITION Do you approve of a law summarized below, YES which was disapproved by the House of Repre- sentatives on May 6, 1980, by a vote of 5 -146, NO and on which no vote was taken by the Senate before May 7, 1980? SUMMARY The proposed law would limit certain taxes, and change laws relating to school budgets and compulsory binding arbitration. It would impose a limit on state and local taxes on real estate and personal property equal to 21/2% of the full and fair cash value of the property being taxed. If a locality currently imposes a tax greater than 2112% of that cash value, the tax would have to be decreased by 15% each year until the 21/2% level is reached. If a locality currently imposes a tax of less than 2112 %, it would not be allowed to increase the tax rate. In either situation, a city or town could raise its limit by a 2/3 local vote at a general election. The proposed law would provide that the total taxes on real estate and personal property imposed by the state or by localities could never be increased by more than 2112% of the total taxes imposed for the preceding year, unless two thirds of the voters agreed to the increase at a general election. It would further provide that no law or regulation which imposes additional costs on a city or town, or a law granting or increasing tax exemptions, would be effective unless the state agrees to assume the added cost. A division of the State Auditor's Depart- ment would determine the financial effect of laws and regulations on the various localities. The proposal would limit the amount of money required to be appropriated for public schools to that amount voted upon by the local appropriating authority. It would also repeal the law which provides for compulsory binding arbitration when labor negotia- tions concerning police and fire personnel come to an impasse. In addition, the petition would provide that no county, district, or authority could impose any annual increase in costs on a locality of greater than 4% of the total of the year before. The proposed law would also reduce the maximum excise tax rate on motor vehicles from $66 per thousand to $25 per thou- sand, and it would allow a state income tax deduction equal to one half of the rent paid for the taxpayer's principal place of residence. QUESTION 3 LAW PROPOSED BY INITIATIVE PETITION Do you approve of a law summarized below, YES which was disapproved by the House of Repre- sentatives on May 6, 1980, by a vote of 2 -147, NO and on which no vote was taken by the Senate before May 7, 1980? SUMMARY The proposed law would limit local property taxes and state taxes and would provide for increased state aid for local educational purposes. The act would limit local property taxes in the years 1981 through 1984 to the amount levied in the previous year increased by the percentage increase in personal income of the residents of the Commonwealth during the previous year. The local property tax limit could be exceeded to offset decreases in local aid, to cover shortages for prior years and to pay court judgments. Pen- sion and retirement allowances, payments to other governmental units, principal and interest on any indebtedness, unemployment compensation, amounts required to be raised as a condition of a state or federal grant, and costs for special education programs would be excluded from the property tax limit. These local limits would be reduced by any excess taxes actu- ally collected over the tax limit for the preceding year. The limit would not apply to any municipality having a general tax rate of less than $35 per thousand of equalized valuation. The tax limit could be exceeded by a two - thirds vote of the local appropriating body. The cost of regional and independent vocational schools would be subject to the same limitations. The proposed law would also limit state taxes imposed in the years 1981 through 1984 to an amount no greater than that im- posed the previous year, increased by the percentage increase in the personal income of Massachusetts residents in the previous year. This state tax limit could be exceeded only to increase local aid or to assume other costs approved by a two- thirds vote of the state legislature. The amounts necessary to pay principal and interest on state indebtedness, pensions, retirement allowances, unemployment compensation, and court judgments, and money required to be raised as a condition of a federal grant would not be subject to the state tax limit. The total amount of local aid for any year which would be subject to legislative appropriation could not be less than the total amount of aid for the preceding year increased by half the increase in collected state taxes during that preceding year. The state tax limit would be reduced by any ex- cess taxes actually collected over the tax limit for the preceding year. The proposed law also would require, subject to legislative ap- propriation, a gradual increase in the percentage of local educa- tional costs paid by the Commonwealth to a level of 50% in 1984. The proposal would also require, again subject to legislative ap- propriation, that school aid paid by the Commonwealth in any year between 1981 through 1984 must be at least 15% greater than that provided in 1980. QUESTION 4 REFERENDUM ON AN EXISTING LAW Do you approve of a law summarized below, which was approved by the House of Represen- YES tatives on November 1, 1979, by a vote of 83 -62, and which was approved by the Senate on No- NO vember 1, 1979? SUMMARY The law provides for increases in the salaries of members of the legislature and the constitutional officers of the Commonwealth. The law increases salaries of members of the legislature by an annual amount varying from $1,853 to $17,923. The size of the raise conferred on a particular individual depends upon his posi- tion within the legislature. The law has the effect of setting the base salary for a legislator at $20,335, but under the law legisla- tive salaries range as high as the approximately $55,920 paid to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The salaries of the constitutional officers are increased either by $20,000, in the case of the Governor, or $10,000 in all other cases. The law raises the annual salary of the Governor to $60,000, that of the Attorney General to $47,500, and the sala- ries of the Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of the Commonwealth, Treasurer and Receiver General, and the Auditor to $40,000. The law also amends the statutes pertaining to the organiza- tion of the offices of the Secretaries of Administration and Finance and of Human Services and to the compensation of se- nior officials within those offices. It gives the Secretaries of Ad- ministration and Finance and of Human Services greater flexibil- ity in establishing positions and setting salaries for those under their supervision. QUESTION 5 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION Do you approve of the adoption of an amend- ment to the Constitution summarized below, YES which was approved by the General Court in joint sessions of the House of Representatives NO and the Senate on November 30, 1977, by a vote of 257 -8, and on September 18, 1980, by a vote of 179 -6? SUMMARY The proposed amendment would limit the power of the legislature to impose certain costs on cities and towns. It would provide that any law which imposes additional costs upon two or more cities or towns by regulating the compensation, hours, status, condi- tions, or benefits of municipal employment would not be effective within a municipality until it accepts the law by vote or appropria- tion of money. Local acceptance would not be required if the legislature either passed the law by a two- thirds vote, or pro- vided, during the same session in which the law was enacted, that the additional costs would be assumed by the Com- monwealth. QUESTION 6 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION Do you approve of the adoption of an amend- ment to the Constitution summarized below, YES which was approved by the General Court in joint sessions of the House of Representatives NO and the Senate on September 7, 1977, by a vote of 264 -0, and on September 19, 1980, by a vote of 162 -0? SUMMARY The proposed amendment would change the procedure by which the Legislature declares a measure to be an emergency law, making it effective when it is signed by the Governor. The amendment would allow the Legislature to make such a declara- tion by a voice vote, rather than by a recorded vote, as now required. The amendment would maintain the existing option al- lowing for a formal roll call vote. QUESTION 7 E. Shall licenses be granted in this town for the YES sale therein of alcoholic beverages by restau- rants and function rooms having a seating ca- NO pacity of not less than one hundred persons? The polls will be open from 7:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. And you are directed to serve this warrant by posting an attested copy thereof in at least three public places in each of the a... eight precincts of the town not less than seven days prior to November 4, 1980, the date set for the meeting in said warrant, and to cause this warrant to be published in the Reading Chronicle one day at least prior to said date. Hereof fail not and make due return of this warrant with your doings thereon to the Town Clerk at or before the time ap- pointed for said meeting. Given under our hands this fifteenth day of October, A.D. am Maureen T. O'Brien A true copy attest: John W. Price Sally M. Hoyt, Constable SELECTMEN OF READING