
REGION — Four questions passed easily with light voter turnout in Jay, Livermore and Livermore Falls for the Regional School Unit 73 budget referendum vote Tuesday, April 27.
Article 1 asked to appropriate nearly $20.75 million and raise $10.16 million. In Livermore Falls the vote was 35 to 11, in Jay 196 to 76 and in Livermore 58 to 19.
Last year, voters approved appropriating $20.2 million and raising $10.2 million.
Article 2 authorizes the school board to transfer amounts exceeding 5% of the total appropriation for any cost center to or among other cost center(s), provided the budget isn’t increased. Livermore Falls found 35 in support and 12 opposed, Jay 212 to 62 and Livermore 65 to 12.
Article 3 asked to appropriate $862,229.33 and raise $240,000 ($80,000 for each town) for the food service program. In Livermore Falls the vote was 35 to 12, Jay 229 to 45 and Livermore 64 to 13.
Approved last year was appropriating $844,665 and raising $206,965 ($68,988 for each town).
Article 4 asked to appropriate $373,267.48 and raise $198,000 ($66,000 for each town) for adult education. The vote in Livermore Falls was 36 to 11, Jay 221 to 53 and Livermore 60 to 17.
Voters last year supported appropriating $387,939 and raising $195,000 ($65,000 for each town) for adult education.
In Livermore 16 votes had been cast around 12:30 p.m., Town Clerk Renda Guild said.
A short time later, 13 votes had been cast according to Livermore Falls Register of Voters Amy Byron.
In Jay soon afterwards, 128 votes was the number Town Clerk Ronda Palmer read off the voting machine.
“Quite a few of those are absentees,” she said. She later said there were 50 absentee ballots submitted.
In all, 276 people voted in Jay, 77 in Livermore and 47 in Livermore Falls.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less