The budget information is contained in the 21 pages (not 12) pages of the Annual Report. This report is available online. The thousands of pages requested do not contain the budget. These contain a chronological listing of all the transactions made during the fiscal year, just like the running register you make of your checks whenever you write a check. Perhaps if we could get an idea of what Mr. Ferguson and others are trying to research, we could help by responding to their questions and providing information on what they are looking for. The town and the District do not need to incur all these costs for copying unnecessarily. Margaret Watson View Comment

Information regarding the Wachusett District's budget is readily available. A booklet entitled "Annual Report and FY 13 Appropriation" (hard copy) was sent to the town administrator, and another copy was sent to the Gale Free Library. The budget information is also posted on the WRSD website (wrsd.net). The budget is listed line by line, even to the amount spent on textbooks at the individual schools. Any person can examine this information. If there are further questions, then pose them at a School Committee meeting during the public session. There was no need for the type of posturing that occurred at the meeting of the Holden Board of Selectmen on Nov. 19. The Holden Board requested that the Chair of the Wachusett District School Committee give monthly reports for better communication, and Duncan Leith was there to do only that. Duncan has been given a bad time by the Holden Board and also by the Regional Board of Selectmen (an unofficial organization). One cannot request better communication and advocate better cooperation and then behave in a rude manner. The Holden Board should function in good faith. It needs to do its homework and take a look at the data already available. It also needs to extend its sincere apologies to Duncan Leith and the Wachusett District School Committee for the behavior of its members. Margaret Watson View Comment

Congratulations to our excellent Holden Police Department. They are wholly deserving of this award. Margaret Watson View Comment

Hello--Sorry, the name of the fraud assessment auditor mentioned in my earlier posting is Patricia Jones (not Smith). Her firm is located in Worcester under her name, and the report she issued should be on file in the District office in case anyone is interested in reviewing it. Thanks, Margaret Watson View Comment

Hello to all, Following the issue of the Inspector General's report, there was a Fraud Assessment Audit of the District books done in the summer of 2005. The name of the auditor (and owner of the auditing firm) was Patricia Smith. She made some minor suggestions, which were followed up on, but did not find anything unusual. Also, Peter Brennan was working in the District administration before his sister was elected to the School Committee. He worked as Comptroller before becoming Business Manager, and his sister left the committee before he became the Business Manager. These facts are offered just to set the record straight. Margaret Watson View Comment

Hello, I feel obliged to correct the misinformation in Mr. Meyer's latest posting. I was not "soundly defeated" in any election but have served continuously since March of 2002. Another slip in Mr. Meyer's memory. Margaret Watson View Comment

Hello again to all: The Regional Agreement defines the relationship between the towns and the school district. In the middle and elementary schools, the District hires and pays for the custodians while the towns do the plowing, raking, etc. The custodians clear the doorways and adjacent walkways of snow and do some cleanup of flower beds, etc. At the high school, the custodians take care of the grounds and the fields in addition to cleaning and maintaining the interior of the building. The District pays the costs of electricity and water to the towns. The Regional Agreement explains how the costs of maintenance and repairs to the individual schools are made. This Agreement can be accessed on line. Also, the Agreement will be reviewed this year; the Committee will be inviting input, and any proposed changes will be voted on at the May town meetings in all five towns. You are welcome to address any suggested changes to the Regional Agreement Subcommittee. At this time, I will not make any comment regarding the advantages of regionalization, as that topic is not part of the task of the Mountview Building Committee. I hope this information is helpful. Margaret Watson View Comment

Hello to all: The Town of Holden owns both the school building and the grounds. Renovating or replacing the present Mountview Middle School has nothing to do with the WRSD budget. The taxpayers of Holden need to decide whether to support renovation or new construction as they do with any other town construction. However, the State of Mass. will subsidize about 53% of this project if the taxpayers vote to support it this coming May. This subsidy comes from the state sales tax; one penny of the state sales tax is devoted to school construction. If the Holden taxpayers agree, then we would have what is called a debt exclusion. Again, this has nothing to do with the WRSD budget or debt. Since all five towns send students to the high school, that situation was quite different from the present one dealing with Mountview. Margaret Watson View Comment

One more point: Duncan Leith was not a member of the School Committee at the time that the Inspector-General's report was issued. He was off the committee for several years and so had no part in any of these deliberations. Margaret Watson View Comment

I would like set the facts straight on the actions the School Committee took following the issue of the Inspector General's report of seven years ago. 1. The School Committee voted for a forensic audit at that time, and I, as a member, also voted for it. The chair at the time (no longer with us) contacted an outside firm that did conduct a preliminary audit, not a forensic audit, as the findings of the preliminary audit did not seem to warrant such an extensive investigation. She (the auditor) and her staff did make some rather minor recommendations that were taken seriously and put into effect. 2. We hired an independent counsel, a lawyer from Boston named Elizabeth Valerio, who told us that the District had to pay for unused vacation days. This is the law for both public and private companies. The payment for unused vacation days was the bulk of the amount cited in the I G report. Most of the vacation days spent by the the then Supt. and his staff were spent in unforeseen contract negotiations that summer. 3. As a result of the IG report the chair spent a good deal of time that year revising the District policies, which helped to clarify business procedures and also tightened procedures regarding taking of vacation days. 4. About $9,000 plus of the money cited in the IG report went to "business lunches" taken by the then Supt. as he continued to work with colleagues over a normal lunch break midday. This amount was spent over a three year period, and following the IG report, he discontinued the practice of business lunches. All of this information (except for the comment on the lunches) is contained in official minutes taken by the School Committee. You can find these minutes posted on the Wachusett District web site. Margaret Watson View Comment

There appears to be a major misunderstanding of the role and responsibilities of the School Committee member as reflected in a comment given earlier. The students in Holden should not be penalized for the financial difficulties other towns are experiencing. The proposed budget would be a disaster to the education given to all students, regardless of the town in which they reside. To agree to such a proposal would be an abdication of responsibility. Let us hope that the Revenue Sharing Committee will come up with some solution so that the present situation does not recur. Let us hope that the appointed members of this committee, along with their designated facilitator, will operate in good faith, with objectivity, and with an earnest desire to reach a solution that will benefit students and also be agreeable to the towns. Margaret Watson View Comment

Hello to all: The Mountview Building Committee continues to explore all options, and that is one reason the charrette was held. We are required by the State of Mass. to consider all options, including "going green" and looking at alternate sites for building a school. The State will subsidize about 53% of the total costs, and the Committee will be continue to be concerned about the impact to Holden taxpayers. Already, one site has been rejected because of the presumed costs. At this point, no decision has been reached, however, regarding renovation of the present school or constructing a new one. I would encourage members of the public to attend the public hearings of the Mountview Building Committee to learn about the progress of the planning. Decisions will be made in the very near future, but voters at the town meeting will determine whether to support any recommended action. Margaret J.K. Watson View Comment

Hello nielsbohr: Try this then. Enter wrsd.net for the District website. This will take you to a page with the budget link. Again, clink on the yellow sign that says FY 13 budget updated. On my computer, I have to click on the tab that says "no links" and that takes me to the budget spreadsheet. I hope this works for you. See you tonight. Thanks, Margaret Watson View Comment

Hello, The District budget proposal for FY 13 is on the website www.aim21. Just clink on the yellow link indicating "FY 13 Budget proposal UPDATED." Thank you for your interest. Margaret Watson View Comment

Hello to all: Once again I shall attempt to put to rest some of Mr. Meyer's concerns about the District budget and its history. Dr. Thomas Pandiscio was once principal of the WRHS. His salary as of July 1, 2005, was $113,917.78. On Oct. 1 of that year he accepted the position of superintendent of the District for a salary of 140,000. Because he worked nine months 2005-2006, he received 75% of that figure, which was $105,000. The School Committee would have offered a salary in the area of 140,000 per year to any successful candidate with no experience in that office. The acceptance of a totally new position, of course, merited a new contract. This cannot be construed as a pay raise. The claim that Dr. Pandiscio has received over 100,000 in pay raises as superintendent is (as I said before) pure nonsense. Now Mr. Meyer would like us to go back in history and review the Inspector General's report issued when Dr. Albert Tutela was superintendent of the District. While this is ancient history, I am not necessarily opposed to a little archeological digging. The Mass. state law requires that employees who work during their vacation time must be compensated for those vacation days. This law applies to employees in the private and public sectors alike. One summer Dr. Tutela was required to work because of extended and difficult negotiations with the unions. Two District directors were likewise affected. The problem had not been anticipated, but the District had no choice, under the Mass. law, except to compensate Dr. Tutela for these vacation days. Upon inquiry, Counsel advised us that we did not have any choice. There was therefore no abuse. Dr. Tutela could not be required to pay back any money. Such emergency situations do occur, however rare, and simple inquiry on the part of Mr. Meyer might have spared him the effort of appealing to the IG's office. I stand by the facts as I presented them in my letter concerning rumors about the Wachusett School District and hope that myths and rumors will not continue to be created unnecessarily. These myths are counterproductive and cause only confusion. Margaret Watson View Comment

Ed Meyer has a history in opposition on many issues. . He writes "anonymous" vitriolic letters to people who take stands with which he does not agree. He takes photographs of people standing out at the polls holding signs when he does not support that candidate. He has all this time on his hands because his wife works for the state and makes over $105,000 per year, so he does not need to seek gainful employment himself. He knows very little about the school situation but manufactures "facts" deliberately distorted and intended to deceive. EG. The superintendent has not received over $100,000 in pay raises in the five years that he has worked for the District. Don't jump on this man's bandwagon. An Old Hand at this Game View Comment