HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-11-05 State Election WarrantCOMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Middlesex, ss. Officer's Return, Reading:
By virtue of this Warrant, I, on October 11, 2002 notified and warned the
inhabitants of the Town of Reading, qualified to vote in elections and Town affairs, to
meet at the place and at the time specified by posting attested copies of this State Election
Warrant in the following public places within the Town of Reading:
Precinct 1 J. Warren Killam School, 333 Charles Street
Precinct 2 Registry of Motor Vehicles, 275 Salem Street
Precinct 3 Reading Police Station, 15 Union Street
Precinct 4 Joshua Eaton School, 365 Summer Avenue
Precinct 5 Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street
Precinct 6 Alice M. Barrows School, 16 Edgemont Avenue
Precinct 7 Reading Library, Local History Room, 64 Middlesex Avenue
Precinct 8 Charles Mobil on the Run, 1330 Main Street
The date of posting being not less than seven (7) days prior to November 5, 2002, the
date set for the State Election in this Warrant.
I also caused an attested copy of this Warrant to be published in the Reading
Chronicle in the issue of October 16, 2002.
i'
Daniel W. Halloran, Constable
A true copy. Attest:
Cheryl A!Johnson,;Town Clerk
STATE ELECTION WARRANT
(Seal)
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Middlesex ss.
To any of the Constables of the Town of Reading, Greetings:
In the name of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, you are hereby required to
notify and warn the inhabitants of the Town of Reading, qualified to vote in elections and
Town Affairs, to meet at the place designated for the eight precincts in said Town,
namely:
Precincts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 and 8
Hawkes Field House 62 Oakland Road
TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2002 from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. to
cast their votes in the State Election for candidates of political parties for the following
offices:
U.S. SENATOR FOR THE COMMONWEALTH
GOVERNOR FOR THE COMMONWEALTH
LT. GOVERNOR FOR THE COMMONWEALTH
ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE COMMONWEALTH
SECRETARY FOR THE COMMONWEALTH
TREASURER FOR THE COMMONWEALTH
AUDITOR FOR THE COMMONWEALTH
REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS ..............................6th Congressional District
COUNCILLOR ........................................................................6th District
SENATOR IN GENERAL COURT Middlesex and Essex District
REPRESENTATIVE IN GENERAL COURT 20th & 30th Middlesex Districts
DISTRICT ATTORNEY Northern District
REGISTER OF PROBATE Middlesex County
6th Congressional District
6th District
201h Middlesex District
30th Middlesex District
All Precincts
All Precincts
Precincts 1, 4, 6, 7 and 8
Precincts 2, 3 and 5
2
QUESTIONS
#1 - Eliminating State Personal Income Tax
#2 - English Language Education in Public Schools
#3 - Taxpayer Funding for Political Campaigns
#4 - Debt Exclusion from proposition two and one-half to fund road improvements
within the Town of Reading
and you are directed to serve this Warrant by posting an attested copy thereof in at least
one (1) public place in each precinct of the Town not less than seven (7) days prior to
November 5, 2002, the date set for the election in said Warrant, and to publish this
Warrant in a newspaper published in the Town.
Hereof fail not to make due return of this Warrant with your doings thereon to the
Town Clerk at or before the time appointed for said voting.
Given under our hands this 8"' day of October 2002.
A true copy. Attest:
beryl A! Johnson, Town Clerk
ami]le.W: Ant ony, Ch irman j
4
Matt 6w Cummings, Ice Chairman
Richard Schubert, ecretary
George V. Hines
d
Gail F.Wood
BOARD OF SELECTMEN
Daniel W. Halloran, Constable
STATE ELECTION
November 5, 2002
Pursuant to the Warrant and the Constable's Return thereon, a State Election was held for all
eight precincts at the Hawkes Field House. The Warrant was partially read by the Town Clerk, Cheryl A.
Johnson, when on motion of Warden Helen Monroe, Precinct 1, it was voted to dispense with the further
reading of the Warrant, except the Constable's Return, which was then read by the Town Clerk. The ballot
boxes were examined by the respective Wardens and each found to be empty and registered 00.
The Town Cleric declared the polls open at 7:00 a.m. and closed at 8:00 p.m., with the following results:
10932 ballots (68%) of registered voters) cast as follows:
SENATOR IN CONGRESS
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pet 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
John F. Kerry
999
886
906
1029
938
1020
1053
900
7731
Michael E. Cloud
270
217
222
286
222
256
224
253
1950
Randall Caroline Forsberg
8
0
4
12
15
5
9
4
57
All Others
3
1
4
1
4
0
0
7
20
Blanks
161
146
124
167
122
156
118
180
1174
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
GOVERNOR and
LIEUTENAN
T GOV
ERNOR
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
Howell and Aucoin
13
8
8
13
9
9
13
5
78
O'Brien and Gabarieli
516
458
484
543
517
516
555
442
4031
Romney and Healey
853
695
692
859
692
833
760
847
6231
Stein and Lorenzen
40
40
36
53
53
61
54
24
361
Johnson and Schebel
2
8
7
1
5
2
5
6
36
All Others
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
3
Blanks
16
41
33
26
24
16
16
20
192
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
ATTORNEY GENERAL
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pet 4
Pet 5
Pct 6
Pet 7
Pct 8
Total
Thomas Reilly
1030
906
914
1045
936
1047
1029
943
7850
All Others
8
3
3
4
5
2
6
5
36
Blanks
403
341
343
446
360
388
369
396
3046
Total
1441
1250,
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
SECRETARY OF STATE
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pet 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
William F. Galvin
937
828
822
951
902
971
968
826
7205
Jack E. Robinson, III
360
284
299
383
287
321
293
354
2581
All Others
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
Blanks
144
137
139
161
111
145
143
164
1144
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
T
REASURER
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
Timothy P. Cahill
565
517
532
572
555
580
584
519
4424
Daniel A. Grabauskas
707
557
567
714
572
686
620
637
5060
James O'Keefe
67
75
70
80
96
76
90
71
625
All Others
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
3
Blanks
102
101
90
128
78
95
109
117
820
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
AUDITOR
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
A. Joseph DeNucci
954
845
832
936
864
990
948
857
7226
,Kamal Jain
97
63
72
97
70
69
76
75
619
(John James Xenakis
158
145
154
189
184
165
161
152
1308
All Others
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
2
5
Blanks
232
197
201
273
182
213
218
258
1774
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
REPR
ESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS - Sixth District
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
John F. Tierney
831
732
749
812
777
852
844
742
6339
Mark C.Smith
500
405
410
548
425
470
439
485
3682
All Others
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
Blanks
110
113
101
135
99
115
120
117
910
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
COUNCI
LLOR
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
Michael J. Callahan
852
778
807
875
813
899
880
787
6691
All Others
4
1
2
3
6
1
2
5
24
Blanks
585
471
451
617
482
537
522
552
4217
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
SENATOR I
N GENERAL COURT
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
Richard R. Tisei
1085
930
942
1107
924
1075
999
1014
8076
All Others
1
1
4
6
7
1
5
7
32
Blanks
355
319
, 314
382
370,
361
400
323
2824
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
REPRESENTATIVE IN GENERAL COURT - Twentieth Middlesex Distric
t
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
Bradley H. Jones, Jr.
1065
1118
1047
968
977
5175
Mary Steuart
3
2
3
2
10
All Others
3
6
2
7
5
23
Blanks
370
371
386
426
360
1913
Total
1441
1495
1437
1404
1344
7121
REPRESENTATIVE IN GENE
RAL COURT - Thirtieth Middlesex
District
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
Carol A. Donovan
799
832
839
2470
All Others
1
4
5
10
Blanks
450
424
457
1
1
1331
Total
1250
12601
1 1301
3811
DISTRICT AT
TORN
EY
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
Martha Coakley
998
853
889
1031
899
1029
1013
910
7622
All Others
1
1
5
1
6
1
3
5
23
Blanks
442
396
366
463
396
407
388
429
3287
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
REGISTER OF PROBATE
Candidate
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
John R.Buonomo
672
615
649
667
677
715
707
591
5293
John W. Lambert
511
432
415
551
430
493
454
485
3771
All Others
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
2
Blanks
258
203
196
277
193
229
243
267
1866
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
QUESTION 1 - ELIMINATING STATE PERSONAL INCOME TAX
Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which a no vote was taken by the Senate or the
(House of Representatives before May 1, 2002?
E
Summary - This proposed law would provide that no income or other gain realized on or after July
1, 2003, would be subject to the state personal income tax. That tax applies to income received or
gain realized by individuals or married couples, by estates of deceased persons, by certain trustees
and other fiduciaries, by persons who are partners in and receive income from partnerships, by
corporate trusts, and by persons who receive income as shareholders of "S corporations" as defined
under federal tax law. The proposed law would not affect the tax due on income or gain realized before
July 1, 2003.
The proposed law states that if any of its parts were declared invalid, the other parts would stay in effect.
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
Yes
599
506
500
566
484
513
519
569
4256
No
738
616
644
824
718
837
771
658
5806
Blanks
104
128
116
105
99
87
114
117
870
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
QUESTION 2 - ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
iDo you approve of a law summarized below, on which a no vote was taken by the Senate or the
House of Representatives before May 1, 2002?
Summary - This proposed law would replace the current state law providing for transitional bilingual
education in public school with a law requiring that, with limited exceptions, all public school children mus
be taught English by being taught all subjects in English and being placed in English language classrooms.
The propsoed law would require public schools to educate English learners (children who cannot do ordin"
classwork in English and who either do not speak English or whose native language is not English) throng A
a sheltered English immersion program, normally not lasting more than one year. In the program, all books
and nearly all teaching would be in English, with the curriculum designed for children learning English,
although a teacher could use a minimal amount of a child's native language when necessary. Schools would
be encouraged to place in the same classroom children who are from different native-language groups but
who have the same level of English skills. Once a student is able to do regular schoolwork in English, the
student would be transferred to an English language mainstream classroom. These requirements would non-
affect special education programs for physically or mentally impaired students or foreign language classes
for children who already know English.
Parents or guardians of certain children could apply each year to have the requirements waived, so as to
place their child in bilingual education or other classes, if the parents or guardians visit the school to be
I unformed in a language they can understand about all available options. To obtain a waiver, the child
must either (1) already know English; or (2) be at least 10 years old, and the school principal and staff
believe that another course of study would be better for the child's educational progress and rapid
learning of English; or (3) have special physical or psychological needs (other than lack of English skills),
have already spent 30 days in an English language classroom during that school year, the school principal
and staff document their belief that the child's special needs make another course of study better for the
child's educational progress and rapid learning of English, and the school superintendent approves the
waiver. If 20 or more students in one grade level at a school receive waivers, the school would have to
offer either bilingual education classes providing instruction in both the student's native language and Engl iii-
or classes using other generally recognized educational methodologies permitted by law. In other cases,
a student receiving a waiver would have to be allowed to transfer to a school offering such classes.
A parent or guardian could sue to enforce the proposed law and, if successful, would receive attorney's
fees, costs and coompensatory money damages. Any school employee, school committee member or
other elected official or administrator who willfully and repeatedly refused to implement the proposed
law could be personally ordered to pay such fees, costs, and damages; could not be reimbursed for that
payment by any public or private party; and could not be elected to a school committee or employed in
the public schools for 5 years. Parents or guardians of a child who received a waiver based on special
needs could sue if, before the child reaches age 18, they discover that the application for a waiver was
induced by fraud or intentional misrepresentation and injured the child's education.
All English learners in grades kindergarten and up would take annual standardized tests of English skills.
All English learners in grades 2 and up would take annual written standardized tests, in English, of
academic subjects. Severely learning disabled students could be exempted from the tests. Individual
scores would be released only to parents, but aggregate scores, school and school district rankings, the
number of English learners in each school and district, and related data would be made public.
The proposed law would provide, subject to the state Legislature's appropriation, $5 million each year
for 10 years for school committees to provide free or low-cost English language instruction to adults who
pledged to tutor English learners. -
The proposed law would replace the current law, under which a school committee must establish a
transitional bilingual education program for any 20 or more enrolled children of the same language group
who cannot do ordinary classwork in English and whose native language is not English or whose parents
do not speak English. In that program, schools must teach all required courses in both English and the
child's native language; teach both the native language and English; and teach the history and culture of
both the native land of the child's parents and the United States. Teaching of non-required subjects may
be in a language other than English, and for subjects where verbalization is not essential (such as art or
music), the child must participate in regular classes with English-speaking students.
Under the current law, a child stays in the program for 3 years or until the child can perform successfully
in English-only classes, whichever occurs first. A test of the child's English skills is given each year. A
school committee may not transfer a child out of the program before the third year unless the parents
approve and the child has received an English-skills test score appropriate to the child's grade level. A
child may stay in the program longer than 3 years if the school committee and the parent or guardian
approve. Parents must be informed of their child's enrollment in the program and have the right to
withdraw their child from the program.
The proposed law's testing requirements would take effect immediately, and its-other requirements would
govern all school years beginning after the proposed law's effective date. The proposed law states that if
any of its parts were declared invalid, the other parts would stay in effect.
A YES VOTE would require that, with limited exceptions, all public school children must be taught
English by being taught all subjects in English and being placed in English language classrooms.
A NO VOTE would make no changes in English language education in public schools.
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
Yes
967
841
879
974
838
968
950
917
7334
No
385
313
313
436
372
407
386
305
2917
Blanks
89
96
68
85
91
2
1 i 68
122
681
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
' 1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
QUESTION 3 - TAXPAYER FUNDING FOR POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS
Do you support taxpayer money being used to fund political campaigns for public office in the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts?
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3'
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
Yes
378
294
309
398
368
396
357
284
2784
No
969
868
872
999
846
987
965
936
7442
Blanks
94
88
79
98
87
54
82
124
706
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
QUESTION - 4 DEBT EXCLUSION FROM PROPOSITION TWO AND ONE-HALF TO
FUND ROAD IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF READING
Shall the Town of Reading be allowed to exempt from the provisions of proposition two and one-
half, so called, the amounts required to pay for the bond issued in order to fund road improve-
ments including constructing, and doing major repairs to roads within the Town of Reading,
including the costs of engineering fees, plans, documents, cost estimates, and all related expenses
incidental thereto and necessary in connection therewith?
Pct 1
Pct 2
Pct 3
Pct 4
Pct 5
Pct 6
Pct 7
Pct 8
Total
Yes
616
453
492
683
554
625
645
544
4612
No
696
670
652
689
612
716
637
662
5334
Blanks
129
127
116
123
135
96
122
138
986
Total
1441
1250
1260
1495
1301
1437
1404
1344
10932
A true copy. Attest:
Z
if "-i
,/dheryl A. Johnson
Town erk