Fiscal reasons for change

For the past few years, the budget process in Dartmouth has generated quite a lot of turmoil, as is the case this year as well. The reason for this turmoil is that the town does not have sufficient revenue to support the expense of its operations.

In reality, that situation had been going on for some years prior to it becoming as salient as it is now. As the rapid growth of the town slowed in the early part of this century, the town first cut funding for needed capital improvements in order to fund yearly operations. As the gap between revenue and expense widened, the town used some funds from its enterprise accounts to plug the gaps. The state took a dim view of that and stopped the practice. Then two years ago, the town instituted fees for trash pickup. Finally the town asked for and got an override last year. But the gap between revenue and expense keeps growing and the trash fee and override funds have been swallowed up by the ever widening gap between revenue and expense. Dartmouth’s revenue will fall short of expense for the foreseeable future. The point is that the budget woes are not a temporary situation caused by the recent economic downturn, but are a persistent and systemic imbalance.

The root cause of this situation is that the rate of growth of Dartmouth’s expenses exceeds the rate of growth of revenue. Notice that I stated the problem as rates of growth rather than specific amounts. That distinction is important because it points to the solution. Increasing the rate of growth of revenue requires increased development of the town or yearly Proposition 2-1/2 overrides, neither of which the townspeople have shown a propensity to support. That leaves the expense side...

... and reducing the rate of growth of expenses.
Now some will point to health care, energy, or other factors as the culprit. Those items have contributed to the problem but some 70% of the town’s expenses are due to the people that we employ. The cost of health care, energy, etc. are also outside the town’s control. Any solution on the expense side must address the cost of the services that the town provides as it relates to people costs. Over the past few years, the town has reduced personnel costs by not replacing retirees and some limited consolidation of tasks. Those measures are no longer sufficient as the gap between revenue and expense widens each year. Dartmouth is now faced with layoffs of the people who provide town services and the loss of those services to the taxpayer. In addition, every year going forward will see a further reduction in our workforce and further loss of services. All the while, the taxpayer will pay the same amount (actually 2-12% more each year) for less and less in the way of town services.

Something must change. The choice is to slowly wither away or do things differently. Mr. Michaud, Ms. Gilbert and I have been pushing for consolidation of town departments which reduces management costs, privatization or contracting out town services which can reduce our long term costs for health care and pensions while also reducing the cost of the service through competition for the contracts, and regionalizing services with other towns which can result in increased efficiency. Some have labeled it the CPR approach.
This CPR approach has itself generated controversy. I am not surprised that it has. By their nature, bureaucracies try to maintain the status quo and grow their funding. The current Select Board majority seeks to change the status quo and reduce funding. The push by town departments to maintain the status quo is self defeating. If departmental appropriations for the library, Youth Commission, crossing guards, Parks, Recreation, Conservation, Natural Resources, and others survive this year’s budget, next year will find them on the chopping block again. That cycle will continue year after year.
It is in the interests of the town departments and their administrators to find creative ways to reduce costs. All the town departments must be enlisted in the effort and understand that they will have fewer direct employees. The same is true for members of the Select Board.
Dartmouth doesn’t have sufficient resources to fund the town’s operations on a continuing basis and the town must find different ways to deliver services. That is the message I want to convey to the voters, taxpayers, town employees and town departments. The town government must become more efficient and lower costs at every opportunity including reduction of personnel. Failing to do so will result in jobs AND services provided being lost. Not one or the other but both.
What I have said so far is pretty grim but there is reason to be hopeful. The first step is to get our current operations to a sustainable level. Budget reductions in the town departments have slowed the rate of growth of expenses. This has required some layoffs and more will probably be necessary. If we continue on the path of fiscal discipline that the majority of the Select Board support, if the town consolidates, contracts out and regionalizes where we can, if we use information technology to improve productivity, and if we spend one time revenue wisely, the town will soon have a sustainable operation. But the things that I have listed must be done or the the town will continue in financial crisis.
This year's election is as important as any in my memory because it will determine whether or not the town finds fiscal stability. That's the reason that I support Frank Gracie and Diane Gilbert. Both have the knowledge, experience and fortitude to stay the course and bring a brighter future.