Skip to main content

Revisit Warrant Article 4

14 Comments

M
Mike Stewart
6 years ago Featured

The numbers just dont add up. How can a contract that costs more be sold as a saving? The whole thing is misleading and we deserve a redo.

D
Deena Higgins
6 years ago

Please add my signature!!

M
Michael Roche
6 years ago

Please take a closer look.

B
Brian Monahan
6 years ago Featured

This warrant needs to be brought back to the town based on factual information and clearly explained by the School Board.

C
Charles Burnham
6 years ago

Time to revisit

J
Jeffrey Tilton
6 years ago

Please grant request.

B
Bruce Reed
6 years ago

I am interested in the board's reply.

G
Gregory Litsios
6 years ago

Revisit this warrant. Greg Litsios

T
Tony Fallon
6 years ago Featured

It is of course warranted that warrants be presented with correct information. To have such a disparate distance between savings claimed to be gained moving from the existing contract to the proposed contract which actually will cost more with the difference of 186K or so voids the validity of the vote on Article 4 on 7 March 2020 at the Strafford School District meeting.

E
Eric Almanzan
6 years ago Featured

I believe false data being presented to the voters, warrants this being revisited.

E
Eric Almanzan
6 years ago Featured

I believe false data being presented to the voters, warrants this being revisited.

W
William Hill
6 years ago

Please do the right thing and grant the request

W
Walter M Unger
6 years ago Featured

Unintentional or on purpose, there was false misleading info used. It needs to be fixed by the school board or I will have to assume fraud.

D
Donna Darnell
6 years ago

Please grant this request.