More bad news on the fiscal front. In this article in today's Standard Times, the state Secretary of Adiminstration and Finance, Ms. Leslie Kirwan, says, "the first area of local aid the administration might trim is $124 million from the general fund that is being used to cover a shortfall in Lottery aid." Dartmouth's share of that additional aid was $416,585. Elimination of that aid only makes up for 1/8th of the required $1 billion shortfall that ...
..the state needs to cover. More cuts are likely.
The timing of the cuts to this year's budget really puts towns and cities in a bind since they budgeted for the money and now half way through the fiscal year, it is not going to be there. The funds have already been spent in some instances or at least are half spent. Now the town has make up the expended portion and cut the entire amount from the budget. That is what Mayor Lang was referring to when he said in the article, "The problem with the mid-year cut is it's a double cut, which makes it very, very tough."
To quickly illustrate, let's say that the town had decided to use state aid for to hire an employee for $40,000. We hire the employee, spend the $20,000 so far this fiscal year, but then the state aid is cut. Now the budget is short $60,000 because we have expended $20,000 and are not getting the $40,000.
The bottom line is that we are going to have to either spend our reserves or cut from this year's expenditures to get through this year. One possible bright spot is that a $300,000 grant from the state for this year has not been appropriated and is available to plug the gap. Assuming of course, that it is not included in the additional cuts that are being considered.
CORRECTION!!!!!!!!!!!! Error in my comments below.
I have been corrected on my statement in comments here that no additional money was put into the Stabilization Fund in anticipation of state aid cuts. Mr Lynam reminds me that $500,000 was added to the $1.1 million appropriation to the stabilization fund for that reason. That money would be released in the spring for capital needs if not needed. Thank you for setting the record straight, Mr. Lynam.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
State will cut THIS YEAR'S aid
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
33 comments:
Is this the $300k 'pothole' money earmarked for educational purposes? Did we not put some 'extra' money into the reserve fund this year in anticipation of state aid cuts-I remember something to that effect but could be wrong. The state's profligate ways are coming home to roost and the local municipalities will bear the brunt of the pain. Where are our state reps, senators, congresment in all this? Who speaks for us?
Yes, that is the pothole money. No, we did not put any extra away, we gave the remainder of last year's Reserve Fund to the school department. As for our state reps, they are the ones who got us an extra $300,000 in pothole money which only Dartmouth was eligible for and got us extra money 3 of the last 4 years. As you may be aware, our economy is in big trouble do to laissez faire regulation, poor corporate decision making and the collapse of the housing bubble. The only government around that isn't required to have a balanced budget are the feds. I hope they spend tons of money for infrastructure and give grants to the states. If you are familiar with Keynesian economic theory, you know that theory says the economy needs stimulus to avoid a depression. The federal government are the only ones that can provide that now. I hope they spend it for public works and forward looking investment in infrastructure and not fork it over to corporations that do not have the taxpayers interests in mind.
Government can't inject money into the economy without taking money out of the economy. Right pocket from left pocket, same pants. Keynsianism doesn't work. This situation has been fueled by Keynsianism. Look at Japan in the 1990's. We need a new approach.
Not so with the federal government. They can and do create money. It's called deficit spending and is how the debacle in Iraq has been funded, how we have 350 billion to give to banks which they now won't tell us how was spent. Come on, Jan. 20!
CORRECTION!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have been corrected on my statement in comments here that no additional money was put into the Stabilization Fund in anticipation of state aid cuts. Mr Lynam reminds me that $500,000 was added to the $1.1 million appropriation to the stabilization fund for that reason. That money would be released in the spring for capital needs if not needed. Thank you for setting the record straight, Mr. Lynam.
Thanks for the info Bill and Greg, I thought I remeber some amount being set aside in anticipation of state cuts to local aid. The government has not had a good track record of late, whether its the fannie/freddie debacle followed with the billions of unregulated bail out dollars to banks and financial institutions I have no faith the gov't will do better come Jan 20. Lest we forget Congressman Frank took great pains to let us know how he put the bail out package together and now, like his refusal to admit invoilvment in freddie/fannie, he is indignant the banks tell us to 'f' off when we ask where the money went. Rely on oneself is the only way to go these days.
I don't get why these delusional people think that Jan. 20 an epihany is going to happen. It is the same government. The congress just gained more of the problem liberal members. So, if think Obama is going to be able to change anything, good luck. Your stuck with Pelosi and Reid. God help us all.
Bill,
Where is the town in implementing the local meals tax the Governor has approved?
Is this being delayed by Gagne as part of his "Lame Duck" tactics as his career is about to close? Another strike to his incompetence?
Seems the highest "eating out" season has past as we enter the Winter doldrums, more missed opportunity for Dartmouth...
Lord knows we did do so well under almost 8 years of complete Republican rule in this country. Let's all just face the facts our national credit card is maxxed out. Thank you Ronnie RAYGUN for teaching is all the wonderful world of Trickle Down economics and deficit spending. It took thirty years to destroy what took generations to build. Heck while we are at it lets finally kill the "NEW DEAL" and finish off our once great country. Brush up on your Spanish, your going to need it.
While I'm at it hows that "Project for a New American Century" working for all you conservatives out there. You got Bamboozled by Newt and the Crew, he and his pals are laughing all the way to the bank with our tax dollars. There are no true conseravtives in the Republican party anymore and there hasn't been any for a long time.
Democrats, Republicans, they are all crooks. Barney Frank had no part of the banking collapse. Yeah Right! George Bush didn't make his buddies at Halliburton a fortune with no bid contracts in Iraq. Yeah Right!! The stench of corruption and nepotism in politics is so pervasive that even on the local level, it is not uncommon for people to ask what's in it for them if they support a candidate.
People in this country had just better get used to the fact that the party is over and it ain't gonna be startin back up again anytime soon.
To Anon 5:58, try to put your hatred for Mr. Gagne aside before you acuse him of wrong doing. The STATE has not passed the local meals option tax. Talk to Sal DiMasi and ask him why HE is sitting on his butt and not moving on this item. It is NOT Gagne's doing. Try and get your facts straight before mouthing off about stuff you know nothing about-start by reading a newspaper.
When Governor Patrick visited Dartmouth about 2 years ago, Mr. Gagne took the opportunity to encourage action on the meals tax. He also encouraged we citizens to call our reps and cal others outside our area since our reps are on board. There was an opportunity to vote on it that the State legislature did not use.
I see they are looking into raising sales taxes now. To me, sales taxes are much better than property taxes. People who can afford to spend more will pay more. Property taxes are levied on people's homes, not their ability to pay. It is also a lot harder to cheat on sales taxes than income taxes thus eliminating the need for revenue dept enforcement people.
Bring on the Value Added Tax i am all for that. Also how about a nice big gas guzzler tax.. Wanna drive that Escalade you are going to pay..
With so many restaurants in Dartmouth, a meals tax would be a big plus, but we would have to share that tax with other towns who don't have many restaurants. If we don't, their political leaders won't vote for it. Why would a place like Rochester or Westport put much effort into a meal tax. I still think a meal tax is a good thing for us, even if we have to share with other towns.
I think there would be a formula developed by our illustrious leaders in Boston that would allow for sharing of the meals/hotel tax. Provided it's not iving away the store why not-somethingis better than nothing. The Cape already has a hotel tax if I'm not mistaken and they manage to bring in significant money for themselves through this tax. How do we get it done?
I thought people on here are anti tax what's tis meal tax stuff all about. No New Taxes for you!! The Tax Nazi said.
The folks on here don't go out to eat so it won't be money out of their pockets! Don't forget Dartmouth is a poor town with barely enough money to keep the lights on and heat the house, eatin' out is for the rich folks from out of town.
So thats why I never see my neighbors when I go out to eat at mcdonalds. the value menu is just so yummy. If I save up enough I can get the cheeseburger and fries next time cause these property taxes are killing me. I mean how am I supposed to afford $2000 this year!
Holy Jeepers,we have Robim Hood among us. Steal from the rich to give to the poor. How noble!! What a crock, everyone here is more like the seagulls on Finding Nemo. Here have a look see what i mean.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOCga5VzXJc&feature=related
All the analysis and ranting that Dartmouth's taxes are too high and should not be considered as a source of additional revenue until the town is broken and bankrupt is so selfish and narrow minded. One only has to look at today's (Saturday) Standard Times real estate insert. The house of the week is a nice, older North End New Bedford home. Well kept, on a modest 11,ooo s.f. lot in the 'suburban' part of the city. The price of $289,000 is thousands lower than what a simlar house would be listed for here in neighboring Dartmouth, but no matter, the taxes for that house in New Bedford are $4,046. The same house in Dartmouth (assuming the same $289,900 price which of course it would'nt be) would be assessed at $2,257 or some $1,788 lower than New Bedford. Let's even the price a bit to make up for Dartmouth's supposed 'benefits' and say that house might be worth $389,900 - the taxes would still be a low $3,038, or 75% that of neighboring New Bedford. Were Dartmouth to even split the difference and raise taxes we still would have lower taxes than our neighbor and not lose what has made Dartmouth the place it is. Simple huh? Sometimes the answers are as close as the noses on our faces and we look everywhere but there for the solution.
Anonymous - why not pursue opportunities to provide the same services at reduced cost? Would that not obviate the need to pay more tax? Getting the voters to agree to pay more tax is unlikely anyway. The case you make has been tried and failed, hasn't it?
There ain't no free Poor Policy. That was my point in posting the New Bedford comparison. Of course pursue cost saving opportunity just as New Bedford has and continues to do that only makes sense. Atthe same time it is clear to me that a tax increase is also part of the solution. Hey, what do I know I like having cheap taxes and services as much as the next guy and I'm fairly mobile so when things start looking too bad here in Dartmouth I can move on-not born here so no real ties like all the 'old timers' here. It is just very interesting to me all the people that stubbornly refuse to accept that our taxes are in fact too low, and all the politicians and others that continue to claim they are not against overrides yet refuse to acknowledge that they will be necessary no matter the magnitude of cuts that will be made.
Hope you get to pay more taxes in your new home. Maybe you could just make a substantial gift the general fund in the meantime.
to anon 1:21pm-SEEE YAAAA
I don' think anyone has said that we will NEVER ask for another override. I think it is clear that overrides will not solve our problems. We need to change the way we deliver services. This is not going to happen overnight,but we need to move in that direction whenever possible.Team up with other communities who are having the same issues. It can happen!
Hey! Not leaving yet so I guess you're stuck with me for a while longer. But your attitude about people with different opinions is part of the problem. Makin Dartmouth THE place to be for the lowest common denominator as far as lowest taxes goes will write the futurre script for the town. It still surprises me how broke everyone claims to be in this town. Can it really be true, or is it just a convenient excuse to save a buck? I wonder.
I for one am a business person who is in strict "survival mode" right now. The past year has been very difficult and I don't see much better prospects for '09. All we can do is hope. It would really surprise me if those people supporting tax increases above prop 2 1/2 true identities revealed that they were not public employees or related to them.
No, not a town employee or related to anyone that is, that old saw should be put to rest. Actually not even looking for an override in the near future, don't live in a cave and have to live through our current economic downturn too just like everyone else. I do recognie that any type of planning to resolve our problem will take years to implement. All the talk about regionilization and privatizing and what not will take years to make happen. The absolute refusal of those in charge to acknowledge that the revenue side (i.e. higher taxes) also need to be studied simultaneously with these other measure tells me we will not be successful. It has been shown time and again that our taxes are not exorbinant-the New Bedford real estate example is just one- and yet our leaders and many on this blog simply refuse to acknowledge - besides lip service that they are not oppopsed to overrides- or include an override in their planning or forecasting. Like I said, one person's opinion but I think we are headed in the wrong direction to coin a newly popular phrase.
To anon 6:34, Did you read anon 2:45? I happen to be related to a town employee and he agrees! You are the only one here that keeps talking overrides and how no one wants them, ever! No so. Any changes will take time and I also think most people know that as well. Maybe you are 'in the money' right now, but I think most people I talk to are tightening their belts. Time to brainstorm with other communities.
So, your direction would be overrides every year? We need to think beyond overrides every year.
Really who is he,what Department does he work in?? Will he be grandfathered in too?? This is getting very funny around here. "No soup for you, just for me" the Tax Nazi said.
Anon 10:21 you miss my point entirely but around here that does not seem to matter. Carry on.
The whining amd moaning about the taxes in this town is embarassing. The above post illustrate the difference in tax cost between Dartmouth and New Bedford yet so many in this town continue to complain. Another consideration is that auto and homeowner insurance as well as water and sewer cost are much higher in New Bedford. I guess if it weren't for their good fortune of living in Dartmouth some of the tax complainers would be out on the streets if they were from New Bedford.
Quit whining, pay your fair share and try to enjoy the fact that you have the good fortune of living in one of the finest towns in the state.
If you don't like it here you could move to New Bedford, but then again you probably couldn't afford it.
Post a Comment