Three members of the Select Board met briefly today in order to approve and sign $2,186,000 in short term notes at an interest rate of 2.5%. These notes will provide capital primarily for sewer and water projects. The meeting lasted about 10 minutes. The bond issue was the only motion entertained. I did ask about the financial forecast that has been mentioned here. The Executive Administrator gave me a copy of the current draft. While it is a start, ...
... it is still obviously incomplete. I am told that the forecast will be worked on with completion sometime this fall. There is an introduction which contains a few items of note. First, "No new services have been incorporated into this forecast", and "Annual cost increases for the town's general fund averaged seven percent per year while total general fund resources grew at four percent." and "Net school spending requirements of the State Department of Education (DOE) is a major cause of concern for the Town of Dartmouth. It is also projected that spending requirements per student from the DOE will continue to grow, coupled with the enrollment, the projected school department appropriation levels could reasonably be above our estimated available resources."
After the introduction, there are revenue projections and assumptions, followed by expenditure projections and assumptions. This is where the report starts to get sketchy. More work is needed in these sections. This was given to me with the caveat that it is an incomplete work. The final couple pages are where the rub is. They show that the projected revenue is less than the projected expenses from FY09 on out to FY17. In FY17, the projected shortfall is $22 million. Actions needed to close this gap are not developed yet.
Monday, June 23, 2008
A beginning
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
20 comments:
I'm glad to hear that there is a document and we can go forward. I hope the town can view it on the website soon.
Bill, Thanks for providing so much information here regarding our town's day to day happenings. This is what the public wants.
Bill, I would recommend you exercise a little professional etiquette when it comes to incomplete reports or information in the future. Did Mike state it was ok to share this information on the blog site? Your role as an elected official is to represent your constituency in a fair and honest way. It is also to be a professional member of the Select board committee. With that comes the responsibility of not jumping too quickly on comments or statements or new developments before they have a chance to formalize or finalize the finished product. This can be misleading to the public. The team that you are a member of needs to feel they can share any comments or opinions without you going right to the blog site and publishing whatever you heard. This can be a very divisive approach. I ask that you exercise caution and become a valuable trusted member of the board.
This meeting was not held in executive session, therefore it was open to the public. Anything that was discussed at this or any other open meeting is public. Just because these afternoon meetings are not televised, that does not mean that the public should not have information about what goes on. These are not secret meetings, where the board gets to discuss sensitive issues they do not wish to talk about on TV. That is called executive session.
Thanks, Bill. This is all about open government. Concerned voter obviously does not believe in open government. Thank you for your honest, open information about the meeting.
To concerned voter, Public meetings are just that...PUBLIC. I don't know if any of the public attended this afternoon meeting, but any information discussed is public. Maybe, concerned voter is trying to protect someone. I wonder who that could be???
The document that I have posted about here is required by the Town Charter. The fact that is has not been produced has been a matter of public controversy and letters to the editor. The Town Administrator has addressed them in a letter to the editor himself. I have discussed it with the Town Administrator in open public meetings. There are no privileged communications involved here. There is a very limited number of exemptions that require items to be discussed in executive session. The Attorney General has a pamphlet about those which you can find here. The document in question does not fall under any of the exemptions. I am not sure what it is that you are concerned about. The Town Charter has been in effect since 2000 but we have not had a document produced that is required by that charter. I have inquired about that and I have informed the public about my findings on this blog which is read by a few individuals. How has that mislead the public? Why should I not share what I know about the workings of the town government with the exception of those covered in executive session? Anyone could have attended the meeting and heard what was said, anyone can request a copy of the document which is a public record. I am not on the Select Board to play nice and keep the status quo. I am trying to shake things up. I am trying to point out that we do not have a completed financial forecast. I am trying to focus attention on our fiscal plight. As I see it my team is the taxpayers of the town, not the employees or other Select Board members. Individuals can share their opinions with me or not, that is their choice. As a Select Board member, I can and should ask for production of this information. I think that is what will make me a valuable member of the board.
Bill, Keep up the good work. don't let a few who like closed gov't to bully you into being quiet. That is what caused this mess in the first place. Stand tall many support you and your efforts !!
Bill:
Thank you for helping us have some transparency in our town government. I, and many others, support you 100%! Keep shaking things up!
Thanks Bill, You serve the public first. I wish other elected officials understood that as well.
You don't need permission to share information from a public meeting.
How long have we been waiting for a plan, anyway? The public is suppose to wait until M.Gagne has a finished product, when we should have had it years ago! No way!
I was not particularly concerned about this document being shared, but the perception of you running to the blog everytime you hear something that would stir the troops up whether it is was factual or not. Your answer says it all. "I am trying to shake things up". Not everything needs to be shaken up. It can be challenged, but in a respectful, professional way. In my opinion, I would rather have a cooperative value added member of the select board than a person who is trying to start trouble. As you are well aware, alot of wasted time will be spent on defense communications rather than a group focused on an objective. I guess the path to solvency will take much longer.
Amen concerned voter. I share your concerns and understand the point you are making. You will get little in the way of support here however.
To concerned voter: As I see it, "defense communications" should not be needed if the Charter's mandates had been followed these past eight years. Perhaps all involved (excluding Bill) are counting on no one challenging them or requiring them to fulfill the mandates of the Charter and their own job responsibilities?
"Defense communications," if needed, are not wasted. They are called taking responsibility and being accountable to the public, both which our leaders have promised they would do, along with transparency (which, by the way, is precisely what Bill is doing by blogging the information he knows. In this instance, it is that a "plan" should be expected in the fall.)
Our leaders should have no problem justifying their actions. Too bad if this justification looks like or takes a "defensive" stance. You "defend" if you feel you are incorrect; you "explain" when you know you are correct.
A plan should have been in existence for 8 years now, or at least 7 years, as I would imagine it takes time to formulate all this information.
The public needs to know what is going on in our government and what our leaders are doing, even if it piecemeal, and/or incomplete, as long as it is public information and not sensitive material exempted under the Freedom of Information Act. That's where the transparency comes in.
Also, our SB in the past, prior to Bill's election, even agreed that more information needs to be publicized with regards to what our leaders and officials are doing.
Unless the material in the documents Bill was given are sensitive in nature, they are in the public domain.
I don't know the policy for providing incomplete information to the public. I would imagine it is not often done, but - - Bill was not representing the document he received as being complete.
So - - how is this "misleading to the public"?
You should, in fact, be pleased that some "action" is being taken to provide the long-mandated "plan," if it comes about that the Charter mandates for the "plan" are adhered to and the information in it is complete. There is still a ways to go before that occurs.
In what way have I been failed to be respectful and professional? What have I said that was not factual? I have posted about an issue that the public, Select Board, and Executive Administrator have written about in the newspapers and discussed in public meetings. I hope I have brought more light than heat to the issue here, but that is your call.
If you want the status quo, then I am sure to upset you. I said when I was running that we can not continue as before and I am now going to push for things to change. The first thing needed is a clear vision of where we are and what the future holds. Then we can begin to address the fiscal issues. To do otherwise is folly. That is why I want to get this financial forecast. How would you approach getting it done?
What would be your objectives if you were in my place?
What specifically would I do to be a cooperative value added Select Board member?
Thank you Bill for all you are doing. The silent majority support you and appreciate your efforts.
The first thing I would do is recognize your fellow board members for their hard work as public servants. The second thing would be to let them know in person what you attempting to to accomplish rather than use the shield of the written blog to state your case. They would respect you more for doing so rather than chastising and airing all the dirty laundry from every meeting. Third,show the general public that the Select Board is a cohesive unit working towards the same goal. The general public will rally behind the effort if that is the case. Good luck in your quest.
Bill, You are absolutely right to disseminate public information. Concerned voter is probably just someone with a special interest who wants everyone else to just shut up and pay. It is clear to the public that the Select Board is not a "cohesive unit working towards the same goal". This is not your fault. There are still two members on the board who represent special interests and employees rather than the taxpayers and one of them is up for re-election next spring. Hopefully, he won't get re-elected and someone else will.
I have no problem acknowledging the service of others. Thank you to all who serve the town as volunteers on various boards, commissions and committees. Especially those who serve with me on the Select Board.
You seemed to imply that I do not raise my issues when the board meets, but I do. Then I write about what I learn. I don't think that I have attacked anyone personally or tried to chastise them. Can you give me an example of that?
Once again, these are public meetings. Why do you think I should not write about them? What do you feel is the dirty laundry that I have aired?
As far as the Select Board being a cohesive unit, it is not. It is comprised of 5 individuals with differing opinions. Sometimes we all agree, more often we do not. I try to represent my views and convince the others through logical argument that my course is best, they do the same. In the end, we vote and the majority rules. Requiring unanimous consent would lead to gridlock and give each member veto power, which is a recipe for paralysis.
Our town is in fiscal trouble. I have not seen a financial plan that looks at future years, forecasts our deficits and lays out a plan of action to eliminate them. I think that our town administrators are tasked to do that. We recently passed an override that will hold us over for this year only. Don't you think we need to be planning for next year's deficit right now? I do!
Bottom line is we need unity at this time. Not divisiveness. It should not be propagated by a select board member. I personally expect more of our elected officials. Last Post. I appreciate your participation in public service.
I couldn't agree with you more, concerned voter. Let's hope that the rest of the SB support Bill in getting a plan as soon as possible. I'm sure you agree since unity is bottom line important to you personally.
I'm so glad that Bill has taken the bull by the horns to address the town's plan.
We certainly don't need Board members who just sit around and smile at one another. If there is something that needs to be addressed, our Board should speak up. The Board works for the public and to be silent when our town needs leadership would be a mistake.
We pay our leaders good money to work for us and they should be accountable to the public. With the previous Board, the path to solvency would be by way of overrides.
I'm glad we are on the right path now.
As far as concerned voter, I think the public can handle a lot more than she/he gives us credit for. The truth is never a mistake.
Dirty laundry??? If there is dirty laundry to be aired I certainly think the citizens of Dartmouth deserve to know about it. Questioning the status quo and trying to change it is not being divisive. It is exactly what we need from our town leaders and the reason Bill Trimble was elected. Keep up the good work Bill! Concerned voter sounds a little bitter. One can only guess why.
Post a Comment