Dartmouth’s Finance Committee does to great service to the community and has been issuing a spreadsheet that is very informative about the fiscal state of our town. It includes revenue and expense projections, PAYT report, school funding calculations, reserve fund transfers, etc. Much of their work is the basis for the town’s adoption of the reverse budgeting process. This process is being used to project current spending out to future years to measure the effect of that spending on the budget and our ability to sustain that spending. The news from this spreadsheet is grim. It shows that Dartmouth faces a total deficit of over $18 million dollars over the next five years if services are level funded and school budgets remain at Minimum Net School Spending (MNSS). To date, the Finance Committee has not included a projection of the effects of the proposed override questions on this picture. I don’t think they have been apprised of the full proposal in enough detail to do so. I presume and hope that this will be forthcoming. When apprised of changes such as the Select Boards decision to mandate police budgets, the change was quickly incorporated to the spreadsheet. As with any projections, there has to be assumptions made about inflation, etc. and these are all laid out in the spreadsheet. I point to this information as a model for how to present information to the public about how our town is funded and the need for increasing that funding. The current override questions have been presented as needs, not numbers. While this needs approach may be useful in generating emotion among the voters, it generates more heat than light. There remain questions about the effect of the proposed 7 override questions in the future and our ability to afford them. These questions need to be addressed. What I have seen so far is attacks on those who raise these questions as being divisive and not understanding our needs. I submit that the first order of business is to take a clear-eyed look at our town operations from a fiscal perspective. Funding additional personnel or opening buildings that we cannot sustain from the tax levy is a recipe for future disaster. I feel we have embarked on that course. I have yet to see a full financial analysis, such as the one provided from the Finance Committee, from the town as to the future effects of the current override proposals.
The spreadsheet from the Finance Committee includes an override proposal that I find has merit. This override question would be for $3.5 million dollars and would fund the town at level services and MNSS for the next five years. This $3.5 million dollar override does not include the $2.3 million dollar school question amounts or the $520,000 additional police officer question. But it does hold every department at level services for 5 years. If during that interval, departments can find efficiencies in delivering services and they can take advantage of the revenue available from those savings to supplement staff or increase services. This seems to me to be a common sense approach that both taxpayers and the town departments can live with.
What are your thoughts? Leave them in comments below.
Posts
13 comments:
I like the "suggested override amount" from the spreadsheet. My only concern is that the school department will continue "business as usual" and NOT fund items that directly benefit the kids because they would rather fund higher salaries and perks for staff. Just my opinion! However, it is derived from personal observation over the past four or five years.
This is off subject, but seems equally important to Dartmouth as a whole: Pro-override posters to Curt's southcoasttoday blog are actually using what sound like threats against the CFRG and the Walkers! How far out can people get? I have been middle of the road on the override (slightly more Yes on some things) because I want to gather more facts before the vote. But if those advocating for Yes votes (who also sound like teachers and town employees when reading their posts) are this vehement towards the CFRG it leads me to believe that there is something else going on here. Why are they so afraid of what is being uncovered (or not) and discussed in open, public forums? If everything Barry Walker says is false, do you not trust voters to see that for themselves?
Please anonymous you are clearly trying to mislead people as I have been reading the posts and all I have read is people wanting to know who is behind the CFRG nothing more so stop trying to stir things up! What sad game playing, our town deserves better!
No threats? Here is a threat from Curt Brown's blog addressed to Marianne Walker
Feb-27 - Wits end — Marianne, I feel that Your Neighbor is out of line in his/her comments. But understand this. If the overrides fail and the worst case senerio of recievership etc plays out YOU and Barry will be the target of peoples scorn. YOU, not those alleged to be behind the curtain of CFRG, will feel the wrath of people who care a great deal about this town. I do not advocate the things that you claim have happened to you at your home but this may be a preview of coming attractions.
Pretty clearly a threat to me. Sort of like the gangster who says, "Nice business youse got here, be a shame if somethin were to happen to it?" when extorting.
Marianne...that is not a threat it is someone trying to let you know that you are being used but I am sure you have realized that by now. The people behind you have hung you out there as a target which is wrong. Please don't make that post into something that it clearly is not.
Even you yourself don't believe that is not threatening! Look at the language that YOU are using. Hung out! Target!
Discuss, debate, disagree, but no way is that kind of veiled threat acceptable.
I don't believe that the school department budget is reviewed by the Finance Committee. I will check with them and report back. The school budget is reported to Town Meeting as a single number.
I have to correct my previous comment. I asked Dr. Friedman of the Finance Committee at the meeting tonight and he said they do review the school budget. Although they do not have as much input as with other departments, he felt they have had some give and take recently that was very productive. I have posted before on how school and town budgets are developed here and here
Why do you devalue the schools so much? Dartmouth already has a below average education level (based on percent of adult with a 4 yr degree) when compared to the state. Why so determined to undermine our children's future even more. There aren't enough vocational jobs out there for the current population. We will not attract companies with decent jobs without an educated workforce. Minimum wage retail jobs do not pay rent nevermind a mortgage.
First of all, I value education. We need to have discussions based on reason. I have never said that I devalue education. I have advocated for all students to have good teachers and a rigorous curriculum. The taxpayer is responsible for providing that. Extra curricular activities are just that, extra. I do not question their value, but the taxpayer is not responsible for them. If parents, of booster clubs, etc. want these activities they may have to pay for them. 200 school districts in the state have fees today. In fact, in the paper today, Apponaquet announced they will be setting fees for extra curricular activities.
Then Bill do you support the first overide question for the schools for the fees are a separate question?
No, I do not support either school question. Here's why. The school department will get a $1.6 million dollar increase in funding this year even without passing an override due to the increase in Minimum Net School Spending. The town is required to provide this added money, it's mandated. The $2 million would be on top of the $1.6 million. The schools are likely to be the only department to receive an increase this year unless of course the police question passes. Adding additional employees and opening buildings that we cannot maintain from the tax levy is fiscally unsound. The problem as I laid out here is that the rate of growth of spending exceeds the rate of growth of revenue. Notice that I am talking about the rates of growth of each. An override amount is quickly swamped by the expenses which are outstripping revenue growth every year. This makes an override a very short term solution. The school question adds to the problem rather than solving it in my view.
momof3, follow this link to my posting about the effect of overrides without changing the underlying dynamic. One other thing which I failed to mention before is that frankg is a member of the Budget and Revenue Task Force and is very aware of the effect that our current crisis are having upon all departments, whence his endorsement of the general; government question.
Post a Comment