“You’re either part of the solution or you’re part of the problem.” Eldridge Cleaver or his wife.

Lane: Having spent 20 years in the military, I am familiar how some parts of the government spend taxpayer money without any regard as to where that money came from. Please keep in mind that I retired from the Army in 1988 so I have to presume that much of the fraud and abuse of tax dollars has ceased or at least I hope so.

I was drafted in 1968 but, until I was in a supervisory position, I didn’t have a clue as to how much money was wasted because the so-called system was broken. I am sure some of the following still exists at all levels of government unless someone is watching closely.

My military unit had several types of funding that were allocated for specific purposes. It could spend for the purpose of things like cleaning supplies, building maintenance and sending soldiers on temporary duty to mention just a few. I know for a fact that one thought is still pervasive at any level of government. It is the age-old practice of spending every dollar in every account to justify the amount of funding given.

The biggest abusers can easily be spotted by looking at receipts for the duration of funding. In my case most of it was done quarterly (every three months). What perturbs me is that I have been told it is still being done at the local level, here in Windham. That fear has been handed down for decades. If you don’t spend this money, you will get less for next year’s budget.

On the other side, if it is not spent it becomes part of a budget surplus that never seems to help reduce taxes the next year and ultimately ends up in some kind of slush fund that voters have problems controlling.

Couple that type of wasteful spending along with cost overruns and the money adds up quickly. We all have heard stories of the $600 hammers and the $900 toilet seats for U.S. Air Force planes to mention just a few. Part of that problem stems from the government bidding process that is so precise with its specifications that the opportunity is greatly enhanced for price gouging. To compound that dilemma, many levels of government restrict the ordering of supplies to just one company. I believe it was the state of Maine government that could only get office supplies from one supplier while other office supply companies offered the same products at much lower prices.

State, county and local government can obtain the exact vehicle that they want by using engine specifications that will result in the purchase of the vehicle that is desired. Let’s say that’s a Chevrolet truck. By limiting the engine to 350 cubic inches, it will eliminate Fords and Dodges in the bidding process. That will limit the cost savings on the purchase on vehicles and the town of Windham has purchased trucks in such a manner in the past. I thank God that the code enforcement office and fire department have purchased some vehicles in a manner that has saved Windham taxpayers money.

I am still waiting for the Windham School Board to explain how a bus part could cost the Windham taxpayers almost $1,000 more than it should have, although my personal feelings is this is done across the board at the Windham School Department.

They either shunned a joint workshop with the town councilors on Tuesday, July 17 or were asked to leave by someone because they did, in fact, show up and apparently had a meeting with the town manager outside of the council chambers. What is even more disgusting is that the town manager in an interview with this paper stated, and I quote from the paper, “Plante said there are circumstances where the town would be willing to pay more for a part in order to get town vehicles back on the road in a hurry.” I suggest that if that is town and school policy, the superintendent of schools fork over $5,000 immediately and then fight with the town manager. Someone needs to be fired because the problem is not the government system, it’s somebody in it. Do we fire at the bottom or the top?

Lane and Tommy, of Windham, agree wholeheartedly with those council members who feel a special committee should be formed to look at how the municipal and school sides of our local government spend our money. It falls in place with the quote in the very beginning of this article. Again, do we start reform at the top or the bottom?