I have posted previously here about a plan for an override question that I feel has merit. I would have framed an override question as one amount for the town (roughly $3.5 million) which would be sufficient to hold the town at level services and Minimum Net School Spending for a period of years. In any case, the override questions are on the same ballot as my name for Select Board. If I am elected, the override questions will have been decided and I will be operating the funding available as a result. It seems to me that the override campaigns have been long on scare tactics and short on the specifics that voters need to accurately assess the requests. I think when asking the taxpayer for more money, the town needs to clearly lay out what will be gained and what will be lost. In their report last July, the state DOR recommended a plan having 7 core elements to accomplish that. I have posted my thoughts about that plan here.
Regardless of the outcome of the override questions, the town is going to have to change the way that we do business. In order to do that, all the stakeholders in the town are going to have to make compromises. Town and school employees, town and school administrators, boards and commissions, Town Meeting, and citizens are going to need to work together to determine the future fiscal course of the town. I advocate a hard headed dollars and cents approach to this task. We need to stop clouding fiscal issues with emotional appeals and start dealing with the real issues. I have posted here as to what I think those issues are, but basically we cannot sustain our current spending from the tax levy because the rate of spending is out pacing the rate of growth of revenue. Pointing to the needs of the schools, COA, library or police department will not provide us answers on what must be done. We need to direct the town and school administrators to prepare budgets that reduce the rate of growth of costs to a specific target. That target being one which will get us to a sustainable fiscal position in a few years. The department heads need to be given specific budget targets for their operations. It is this kind of plan that businesses use when faced with a financial crisis.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Going forward
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
54 comments:
BillT-the school has developed a very long and very detailed plan to back up their override requests. It is short on emotion and very specific. If you have not had a chance to read it I suggest that you get a copy.
You may not agree with the override they have put forward, you have said you dont, but after reading the back up information I dont think you could say the school request is based on emotion only.
If I read the school plan correctly, it says that this override is only the first step and that the money they are asking for won't sustain their plan. In short, the schools will always be asking for more money. I wonder if they know that the athletic director in Fairhaven is a full-time teacher and the secretary is a school secretary that "helps out". In Darkmouth, we pay over $100k to our athletic director plus $40k to the ex-director as a consultant and don't forget the secretary.
Read the article "$2m deficit plagues town's 2009 budget" about Acushnet. The difference in the attitudes of their town leaders compared to Dartmouth is stark. We should give our executive administrator the boot and offer Acushnet's administrator the job.
I was in the new high school gym a few weeks ago with a person from out of town. He was shocked at the size of our gym. He also noticed the smaller size of the library and auditorium at the high school in comparison to the gym. His comment was, 'it looks like the high school was built around this gym!'
He is in and out of schools in the area often and does not live in Dartmouth.
In my opinion, the high school site should have been a new elementary school.
Our high school should have been built in a central location. Some North Dartmouth people have to drive an hour to pick up a sick child at the new high school.
These are only a few of the decisions that have been made without thinking about the entire town. I realize they are done and we can't go back....but people don't forget!
Needs existed at both the high school level and elementary school level. The new high school provided for the secondary needs scholastically, technologically, as well as athletically and is an impressive state-of-the-art facility. It also enabled our elementary school needs to be addressed by providing the Quinn school to accommodate space needs. This was done at a fraction of the cost of what a new elementary and high school facility would have required. To be fully informed of the many decisions made leading to what was put in place system-wide, one would have needed to follow the hard work of others for over a ten-year period. How unfortunate that work has been undermined by the consolidation of our elementary schools. I will be voting to change that!
Yes, I agree! The ten years of hard work so that the Padanaram kids could just drive their Volvo's up Gulf Rd. to school!
I was here and remember well the group (I won't mention names) that spearheaded the HS being built on that site.
That was a selfish move!
In your opinion, which School Committee candidate provides the best policy on addressing the decision to consolidate the elementary schools? Are there any differences among them in addressing this? Should Ms.Britto be held accountable by the voters for the decision made to close the schools last year?
Kim - you, like BillT, continue to perpetuate perceptions and stereotypes instead of discussing solutions. People that live in Padanaram are no different than anyone else and we don't all drive Volvos. Hell, a whole lot of houses are more more expensive outside Padanaram than in it. Those that live in the big places in Padanaram already send their kids to private schools anyway so your argument makes zero sense but illustrates the mentality that is so pervasive in this town.
to 'do something about it'
The plan presented by the schools goes out for 3 years and should the economy turn around increasing the new growth portion of revenues received by the town it could conceivably go further than that. Projections beyond that given the rate of inflation of many things not the least of whihc is utility costs makes longer term projections difficult.
There was talk that all the number should be higher to guarantee sustainibility for at least five years. It was decided that the number needed to make that gurantee was too high. Given the sentiment of many on this blog you guys want it all ways.
Make it as cheap as possible and make it last forever cutting as you go when inflation outpaces prop 2 1/2%.
also to 'do something about it'
The only part of the school plan that is a 2 step process is the re-configuration of the grades between school buildings. This is necessary to limit the number of times a student changes schools as the plan is implemented over a 2 year period.
The implication that this is only the first step and will cost more money is incorrect.
Anonymous, I feel that I have been willing to discuss solutions I was under the impression that I had been engaging in that throughout these posts and comments.
Perhaps Kim would have preferred taxpayers pay several million more for property somewhere(?) for another location just to stick-it to the Padanaram folk! Great mentality, Kim! And, so fiscally responsible!
BillT, you have generally discussed solutions and ideas and for that you should be commended even if I do not agree with your solutions. You have been less than willing to dispel the false perceptions about the Cushman School that pervade this community and poison any discussions about school over crowding solutions, and you have not yet, unless I've missed it, discussed what happens under the Greg Lynam scenario spelled out in the ST a few weeks back.
I think people should let Greg Lynam speak for himself. There seems to be alot of people doing it for him.
nope not Greg Lynam, I just respect the research he puts into everything he does. No short cuts from him, no easy 'what you want to hear answers' either. So his article on this issue carries a lot of weight with me and with others in the community so I am interested in BillT's viewpoint on it.
I have the utmost respect for Mr. Lynam and I am awaiting a public statement from him regarding his support the override.
I would like to hear the candidates for SC and see how they differ. I am thinking that I want some change from Joan B.
As far as Cushman school goes. I went to Cushman school and I was not wealthy! Although, when I got to Middle & HS the kids from other parts of town thought I was and I felt like I had to prove that I wasn't. The kids at Cushman are just the kids everywhere else!
I would like to meet and hear from all the school committee candidates as well. Joan Britto has committed to attending the CFRG's candidates night and we are very pleased that she will be participating. We are hoping the other candidates will reconsider and join us as well.
That is so true! My kids were up against the same prejudice - from a single-parent household earning less than $20,000 a year. This ill-conceived perception needs to change! BW is still trying to perpetuate it with his 1978 class- size-figures implying special treatment historically determines class size. Demographics determine class size. Through all our years at Cushman, it was at over-capacity levels! Several years ago the Building Committee projected, based on sound research, that redistricting would need to be addressed at this point in time. We're dealing with crisis-management instead.
BW used figures to imply consolidating schools would not overcrowd them again stating enrollment would be approx. 300 less than year before high school was built, neglecting to state schools were overenrolled by several hundred students at that time! I hope people stay away from the BW/CFRG event. I will be attending the Rotary event as I usually do.
Since you asked me about a specific opinion written by Mr Lynam, I went and looked up what he wrote. The link to his opinion piece is here
As I read it, the jist of his opinion is that state mandated increases in school spending cannot be sustained from the local tax levy. I am referring to this sentence which I believe summarizes his argument and which I excerpt here, "It is clear as day to see that mandated education spending is bankrupting us all, plain and simple. There can be no escape from this fate unless the state steps up to the plate and begins to fund education at the levels that are needed — and allows increased meal and hotel taxes to augment our revenues. This is not an either-or solution; both are needed, and now."
You may disagree that this is his point and I recommend that you read the opinion at the link I provided above. Let me point out that I have been advocating here for an override amount of a similar magnitude($3.5 million). That amount would be used to level fund town services and keep school spending at MNSS for a number of years, perhaps 5, probably less. In the intervening period, the town would have to aggressively pursue cost cutting measures. Any savings available as a result of those measures would be available to increase funding to various departments or to extend the time that the override amount carries us through. This cost reduction program will be necessary whether the override questions pass or fail. Let me anticipate the next question, what gets cut? I have said we need to prioritize our spending and cut from those programs with the lowest priority. This needs to be done by both the town and school administrators. We are obligated by law to do certain things and they have the highest priority, paying debts, assessing and collecting taxes, maintaining public records, and funding the schools. All other spending needs to be looked at to see if it can be reduced or eliminated. This may require reduction or elimination of services. Unfortunately that is the situation that we face. I don't welcome it but we cannot shrink from it either. Once the town and schools have shown that they are making every attempt to live within our means, I believe that taxpayers can be convinced to make up some of the shortfall with overrides. As we have seen in recent months, the electorate has little enthusiasm for such measures. I am sure this comment will be met with howls of protest that I just want to cut and don't understand the needs. Perhaps I don't understand all the needs but I fully understand the numbers. If we fail to make the needed adjustments, we will be bankrupt and in receivership.
I remember that red-printed flyer spread all over town before July's election. People aren't critical about him without reason. I, too, will be attending the Rotary's forum.
BillT,
Those of us with children now in the system do not have 5 years to wait while the schools cut and cut to stay at level funded, minimum net school spending. The proposed override allows the schools to repair damage done by past years of minimum net school spending while the town and schools lobby for the very changes that Greg Lynam listed in his editorial. There still has been absolutely zero documentation that Dartmouth is the down at the heels, destitute community that some like to portray it. A small increase in taxes is very much worth the cost to restore what has already been lost throughout this town without the spectre of still more cuts for the next five years to get us to within some fictitous level of affordibility.
Hey, What do all you pro-override folks think about that our athletic director situation? None of you gave an opinion on that one.
They do an excellent job! Walk in their shoes and then decide if they deserve their earnings.
I am unable to attend the Rotary night on Thurs. the 27th. I would like to hear the candidates running for SC. I am planning to visit one of the schools soon.
Also, I would like to hear the SB candidates. I have heard that they will be in Russells Mills Village at the Grange on Sat. the 15th. I plan to attend.
So many anonymous commenters, but here goes,
I think that you missed a very important sentence in my reply comment. I said, "This cost reduction program will be necessary whether the override questions pass or fail." I believe that this statement is a fact based on the financial forecasts. It has nothing at all to do with whether I got mine. It is due to the imbalance of the rates of growth of our expenditures and revenues. An override kicks the can down the road a year or two and if the added expenditures are not carefully considered for future impacts can make things worse. I would urge you to hold the school department accountable for making every dollar available for direct education in the classroom. Advocate for those funds to go to instruction and curriculum so that we can get the best education for our students that the funds can supply.
Please note. All the information on the flyer with the "red print" was vetted by the finance committee prior to being released to the public.
Boy, it sure is evident that the override Moms are the sqeakiest wheels in town. I'm voting no on everything except the debt-exclusion. Not that it matters, they will only come at us again with another override when this one fails.
Bill-T, You're probably an ok person just mixed up with the wrong crowd. Unfortunately you will be judged by the friends you keep. Your mentor Diane Gilbert's refusal to applaud Bob and Nat's heartfelt speeches last night was shameful. Her vote on Gitmo was another example of how she puts her own views ahead of those she serves. She is a disgrace. Is this how you intend to draw people together. To unify the town as your endless dialogs claim to be your plan. That was Diane's platform when she ran. She has just turned out to be a joke.
BillT: On March 7th you wrote the following:
"What are the dire consequences of openness, transparency, and fiscal responsibility? It seems to me that the consequenes are an informed electorate who knows what their government is doing on their behalf and with their money. If the voters don't trust their government, we cannot get things done.... Our town leaders are mistrusted because they have not been open, transparent, and fiscally responsible..."
Last night a question was asked here on your site for the 3rd time about what if any affiliation you have with the CFRG. Somehow it got deleted.
I apologize again but I can't find an answer to this question. Therefore, please address the issue.
Thank you for being honest.
Some who comment here don't feel the need to advance ideas or join discussions. It seems their purpose is to tear down others, mock their comments, or vent their spleen. I don't really understand why they bother to comment. I accept that this is a common occurrence on blogs and we have to live with that. Bloggers even have a name for these individuals. They are called trolls in the blogosphere, lurking on the edges of discussions. If you are new to blogs, you may feel that you should respond to these comments. I think the best policy is to ignore them. The trolls are looking to get a response to their nonsense and, if ignored, soon grow tired of talking to themselves and leave.
I find this blog informative and very helpful. It upsets me to read attacks on groups or individuals which only divide the town more.
What we need here are ideas and discussion from both sides on how to make our town healthy again.
I have read opinions from both sides and agree with some of both.
Please continue to help move the discussion forward and not back.
I was wondering if the schools or other departments (elderly) have considered going to businesses around town for help. I noticed that 99 Rest. is having a silent auction to help Dartmouth schools. What about some of the other big box stores or maybe some smaller ones. Please don't use the split tax to argue that 'why should they' because the big box stores didn't even feel the split tax.
They are part of the community and might want to get some positive advertising like 99 Rst. I will be going to 99 Rest. to help the schools.
Just a thought.
Why the attacks on Diane Gilbert? Last night at the select board meeting, she was the only one to ask any relevant questions to the personnel board. She wanted to know if they have established any timeline for when they might actually have something worth reporting. It seems that in the 8 months that we have been hearing about them they now have finally decided how to "proceed." Needless to say, they could not give any timeline for actual progress. They were given many thanks for their service to the community. It seems to me that the CFRG has accomplished far more concerning personnel issues than the personnel board has. They got a little less than thanks for their hard work and service to the community, especially from the selct board chairperson.
nd voter,
After reading your post, I realize I was hurt by things that happened in the past.
We do need to work together to find solutions.
I think it's a great idea to check with some rest./stores in town to see if they want some positive advertisment.
marianne walker - What exactly do you mean by "vetted by the finance committee" in reference to red-print flyer?
Bill T. - There have been many posts raising issues relative to misrepresentations and misleading the public on the part of the CFRG with supported arguments. It seems this group is not interested in whether their data has been accurate or not. It also appears you are part of this group, and when cornered resort to tactics like your last post.
I for one would like to thank the CFRG for there hard work and service to the community even if the select board won't. waching from the indide id right, they have done more than the personel board.
CFRG contributes to supporting inaccuaracies and unfairness in reporting of salaries. And, members of the SB are well aware of that. Why is it that the Standard Times can obtain a list of accurate salaries for town employees that includes a breakdown of how final totals are reached and why SoCo (continuously sited by the CFRG) did not print an accurate and fair list. Why doesn't it matter to the CFRG who have been made aware of these discrepancies that fueled public mistrust and enflamed public sentiment against our town employees? In addition to inaccurate data, the SoCo list did not reflect any years of service, level of academic and professional certification, and falsely stated that all of the units were in line to receive increases.
And don't site SoCo's arrogant refusal to make a retraction or correction once it was brought to their attention based on the premise their data came from the town. The fact of the matter is, the data was incorrect. That's what should matter to the CFRG, but it clearly doesn't. Some very good people have been harmed by this - neighbors, friends, family. Issues like these and others commented on in this forum are the foundation on which the CFRG was built. The CFRG is clearly working, but that's not necessarily an indication of service to their community.
Instead of being defensive about it, they could actually gain some understanding about it and realize alot needs to be done in order for them to gain public trust (as ironic as that is).
Negotiating personnel contracts is the charge of the Personnel Board. And, as Frank Gracie has posted is a lengthy process.
Lengthy process indeed. We found out last night that the personnel board has taken 8 months to figure out how they want to start proceeding. OUTSTANDING!!! Even Joe Michaud admitted that the work the CFRG did was useful. What was there about the personnel board's presentation that showed something useful has been accomplished by them? The people bashing the CFRG are the very vocal minority. The support for this group is obvious. Why else would there be such an effort to discredit them?
Actually it is only the vocal minority that support the CFRG, the silent majority of the Town have seen and are aware of the motivations of this group and their attempts to destroy our Town. Bill T. is not a bad guy but I question his affiation with this group of unkown people who are afraid to identify themselves. All we here from Barry is that the group is comprised of "very intelligent people" that he is "proud to be associated with" but it appears that they are not quite so proud to be associated with the Walkers and the Committee.
In fairness to the Personnel Board they have recently had members added, and have been trying to figure out exactly what is expected of them. They were a bit shell-shocked at first, and were also trying to fill the seats.
Let's also be clear about who does what. It is not the PB's job to create or negotiate contracts, their job is to examine contracts for parity across bargaining units and also non-union. As you heard them say, they will be looking for a balance between efficiencies for the Town and fairness to the employees. They WILL point out things and make appropriate recommendations. They are contract examiners not contract creators.
What takes a long time is the creation of the contracts, primarily the union ones. The Town still needs to hire a negotiator, and then the process will start. It can take the better part of a year to handle the negotiations, especially if there really is give and take involved.
That part of the process hasn't started because the current contracts are not due for a renewal just yet, but should begin shortly. What the PB will be doing in the short-term is getting acquainted with current contracts, and also looking at some non-union ones that have expired and need to be dealt with. They are also getting acquainted with the Town structure, and who works for who. This can be pretty convoluted and confusing.
Frank, I'm the person who mentioned you in my post. Thank you for clarifying the role of the Personnel Board with respect to town employee contracts. Also, do you know the status of the hiring of a negotiator? I thought the SB had conducted interviews. Is that so?
To ND Mom, Kim and all that think the solution to our problems is to ask for money from the businesses in town here is something you probably don’t realize. Most small businesses if not all small business (especially restaurants) in town donate and sponsor many town, school and athletic league activities regularly and have so for many many years. All you need to do is to look around the DYAA (Crapo) field to see the sponsorship signs from almost every local business in town as an example. The problem is that now all the local businesses are being hit by a 40% increase in their taxes due to the split tax vote. While many of us understand that the intent was to hit the big box stores, it is the small businesses that are being hit the hardest which many do not meet the small business exemption guidelines that would have given them a small relief. So to think that you can fix the problem by now targeting those businesses for donations yet again is not a new solution for they have already been donating and supporting the schools and the town (for example look at the long list of donations made to the upcoming library fundraising event) all along. This is our problem, we as taxpayers need to do our share to solve the problem and once again asking the businesses in town to contribute on top of their already generous contributions and their increase in taxes is in my opinion unfair and by no means a plausible solution.
The definition of irony:
An anonymous comment asking for those associated with the CFRG to identify themselves.
I asked the question about the negotiator last week. The HAVE held some interviews but I don't know if they want more choices. Personally, there was 1 candidate that I thought would do a great job, AND at a better price than some of the others... but I don't get a vote. The guy impressed me by doing his homework and research about our town. He was also familiar with the pros and cons of the GIC. I thought some of the others just gave a "canned" presentation.
I was assured that they would be getting back onto that project soon... they have been "distracted" with other things.
Of course, they also have to have money to pay someone to do the job too. There will be many hours involved.
I don't want to get into a big discussion about the split-tax rate here, but everyone should recognize that the tax bill the businesses get this year is not the highest they have every paid in our town, unless they are brand new. It wasn't that long ago when our tax rate was about $11, and another year when it was still over $10, so since the valuations never seem to change they are still paying less at a rate of $9.70.
That is not true for residents. Last year's bill was the highest they have paid, despite the low tax rate.
I would be glad to provide more details but I don't want to hijack Bill's Blog.
I think that money from the reserve fund would be wisely spent on that contract negotiator. Funny how the personnel board said that the personal administration contracts were a good place to start with no objection from Mike Gagne. He seemed to have quite a problem when the same thing was said by the CFRG two weeks ago. It's a dog and pony show, I tell ya!
Rumppumppudadadadada!!!
Yes it is quite the three ring circus on the slocum road hill. Every time some insider posts anonymously trying to discredit the CFRG, their stock goes up, up, up.
Lets see, there is a distinct difference at wanting to be anonymous on some blog post spouting off ideas and thoughts and wanting to have a say in how the town runs its affairs, from dictating contracts, to appointments on town boards and committees, to employee salaries and school department issues the CFRG is demanding a seat at the governing table yet refuses to say who their 'experts'are that we should give them so much attention. So I still want to know who these people are and why i should pay any attention to them at all.
BillT - still no response on your relationship to the CRFG? Your response after the last inquiry seems a sidestep to the question. Why does'nt anybody besides the Walkers want to acknowldge their allegience to this groups agenda and strategy?
My own thinking on this is that should the CFRG agenda prevail and the overrides fail, and the town sinks further into fiscal insolvency folks are going to be pretty upset at the bill of goods sold them by CFRG and they don't want any share of the blame. They'll have their anonymity to hide behind.
Frank I never negated the need for the split tax what I said was that the businesses are already doing quite a lot to support the town, athletic leagues, etc. so to just say let's go ask the businesses for more money when residents have had their tax bill recently lowered at the businesses expense is not a viable solution.
to anonymous,I don't think you are giving the public enough credit! The public is the CFRG! We want to know what is going on in our town. No sweetheart deals ! We want open government and accountability.
All I heard for months is how the SB energized the personnel board.
They're STARTING to look into contracts!!! That is the joke!
Thank you Barry!
oh please sick and tired - the CFRG line is tired and leading us down the rabbit hole. Barry and his 'steering committee' are not the people I want running my town.
Drafting up a 'personnel bylaw' without so much as any input from anyone but Barry and his crew is laughable. Transparency? Does not exist in the CFRG world. Take their word for what makes good personnel policy? Not a chance. The CFRG will be the ones to look for for answers when the overrides fail and the town gets further behind. Hopefully Barry and his 'steering committee' and BillT will have the solutions ready come April 2.
Pull Together Bill? Don't see it happening when all we get from CFRG is 'our way or the highway'. At least Barry and crew will have plenty of room to operate once Town Hall clears out after April 2.
Post a Comment