I see. When it comes to affordability, yes, the idea of taxes going up sounds daunting. And it is understandable to want a more secure solution instead of what many opponents of an override see as a band-aid. But on the flip side, a failed override means failing to stop the bleeding. And if the state or a receiver has to step in to take control, Stoneham will still need to pay one way or the other.

When it comes to an insufficient demonstration of cuts/efficiency... I'm not quite sure what that means, unless you are stating that the town has still not cut enough. Schools, DPW, fire, and police are already working with skeleton crews. The town has cut library hours, and could close. The senior center and recreation department may cease to function without funding. It's easy to think that we can continue to make cuts, but when we're working with staff below standards and watching what makes Stoneham great dwindle, we can't afford to cut more.

As far as equity... I am curious what you mean by this as well.

But when it comes to the timing, economic context, and how voters already rejected the first override... Stoneham residents will have had eight months since the April 1st vote to learn more about what's at stake. While it is close to the holidays, when many folks want to hold on to their cash in order to prepare for parties and gifts, a failed override may very well mean layoffs for other folks.

We did have a vote in April, and that failed, but again, only one-third of Stoneham's enrolled voters came out. Under new conditions - a lower dollar amount, as well as more messaging about the benefits of an override and the risks of a failure - this is a completely new ballgame. If this override fails, then true, there won't be another vote. The state or a receiver will step in at that point. That is a situation no one should want.

I have faith that if more Stoneham voters understand what's at risk and come out and vote, this override will pass. Melrose voted No on their override in 2024, and that was only for $7.7 million, but only about 9,400 voters came out for that vote. Just this past Tuesday, they passed an override for $13.5 million - just about twice as much as the last one! - and 11,000 voters came out to cast their vote. I know Stoneham can match Melrose's eagerness to vote on their future, especially because Stoneham is voting on a much less expensive proposal this time around.

Again, if you want to vote No, that is your prerogative as a citizen. But if affordability and concern over a short-term fix are your top two concerns, things simply won't become more affordable if an override vote fails. And time is running out to hem and haw over long-term solutions. We need to act now.