Finance Committee member Greg Lynam had this letter in the Standard Times. At the root of the letter is a vote by the Select Board to set a target for the Stabilization Fund at 7.5% of the annual town budget. Mr. Lynam would prefer 10%. The Stabilization Fund has a current balance of about $5 million or 7.3% of the FY2011 budget. The town also has reserves of about $2.4 million in retained Undesignated General Fund balance which is another 3.5% of the budget. The Select Board feels the reserves are adequate, Mr. Lynam does not.
I have disagreed with the goal of 10% of the budget as a goal for the Stabilization Fund for some time now. I believe that 10% of the tax levy or a little more than $4 million would be adequate. Of course, one can easily concoct a myriad of scenarios where any amount that one chooses is not adequate. As I see it, the goal is to have enough money to satisfy bond rating agencies that we can weather an unexpected expense or temporary reductions in revenue. I think that 10% of the levy is enough. Opinions vary.
I was somewhat disappointed in the tenor of Mr. Lynam's opinion. We have a genuine difference of opinion on what constitutes adequate reserves. That does not make us, the Select Board, foolhardy, spendthrifts, or crazy. Despite Mr. Lynam's assertions, I am not aware that any Select Board member wants to go on a wild spending spree or even disagrees that one time revenue, such has been used to bolster the Stabilization Fund, should be used to supplement departmental operating budgets. My particular disagreements with Mr. Lynam extend beyond the amount of the Stabilzation Fund balance. Mr. Lynam correctly states that we have managed to build our reserves by shaving down the operating reserves that had been normally budgeted to departments. Which means that the amount of free cash available to fund the Stab Fund or capital needs has been shrinking. I think that we have gotten in the habit of funding operational needs from the capital budget. I also believe this is poor public policy. If the police department needs 3-4 cars every year to continue their mission (I believe that they do, ...
... they run these cars hundreds of thousands of miles in a year) or the school department needs textbooks and technology to stay current, then those items should be accounted for in the operating budgets. Cars definitely meet the criteria to be capital items in most circumstances, but patrol cars are a special case in my opinion. I would like to see 3-4 cars included in the police budget every year. Textbooks and technology are a bit harder to make the case for capital spending, but the Finance Committee and administration have gone along with the designation in recent years. Here is the problem with that scenario. Let us say that for period of a few years, the town does not have the one time cash to fund these items, police cars and textbooks. That means the police department and schools will have to do without the cars and books. Even if town revenues recover, the town is now faced with buying even more cars or books than would normally be the case since we had to forgo that spending in prior years. Not a good situation. Yet Mr. Lynam is an enthusiastic proponent of capital spending for textbooks. I do not think that makes him foolhardy, irresponsible or ill informed. We just differ on the policy.
I will address a couple more of Mr. Lynam's points. Mr. Lynam has not been an advocate of the wind turbine project. Regardless of his concerns, wind turbines have been shown to be reliable sources of energy and hence, revenue. While it is possible that a wind turbine would cost the town, the evidence would suggest that they will be trouble free and generate revenue for many years. That has been the experience in Hull and Portsmouth and many other places.
Lastly, Mr. Lynam hopes that Town Meeting will rein in the "foolhardy" and "irresponsible" Select Board. Well, good luck with that. Having just seen that body spend a million dollars for barn restorations in town despite recommendations from the Finance Committee not to fund them, I do not have a lot of confidence in the fiscal restraint of Town Meeting.
Finally, let me say that Greg Lynam is a fabulous asset to the Finance Committee and the town. His diligence and insight have been invaluable over the years. We all owe him a debt of gratitude for the countless hours he has devoted to understanding and quantifying the town fiscal situation. Mr. Lynam has shared his insights with me and allowed me to have a better understanding of the how and why of town finances. I could not have done it myself without devoting a tremendous amount of time to the effort. Mr. Lynam had done that work for me and was willing to share his knowledge. I thank him for that. On this issue, we have a disagreement. C'est la vie, n'est pas?
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Mr Lynam thinks we're nuts
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
19 comments:
Bill, one of the reasons that Mr. Lynam's conservative approach makes so much sense is the level of reliance the town has upon state funding. Does anybody honestly believe that they can accurately predict funding to the town over the next 3-5 years? Adding the uncertainty of local revenue streams to the mix only makes Mr. Lynam's approach more logical. Whether it is the public sector or the private sector, no one I know is forecasting any significant growth of revenues for the foreseeable future. It would be wise for the town to plan stash away money for at least the next 3 years. If those funds are still there after that, then proceeding with your more risky approach of maintaining less funds would make more sense.
While I respect Mr. Lynam, I find he is very black and white on many issues. As a town, we all need to be willing to compromise. I don't think the SB is being reckless by voting 7.5% instead of Mr. Lynam's 10%.
I would like to start by thanking Mr. Lynam for his hard work and for once again informing the public of our financial situation. From your post Bill, I think we can both agree that Mr. Lynam knows what he is talking about. I can't understand why you would be in favor of reducing the stab fund when you have witnessed how the town's spending can get out of control. Select board members come and go. It doesn't take much to get a majority board who doesn't have a clue, has special interests and is more than willing to fund those special interests. And yes, it has to go through town meeting but we all know how that ends especially when the select board is the one making the recommendations. I do believe we have one of those boards now.
The problem with reducing the stab fund is not what amount is sufficient. The problem lies with what the "extra" funds would be used for. Creating new services? Creating new positions? Creating new depts.? Creating new recreational areas? Increasing school employees salaries? All these sound great except when you consider sustaining them once they are created. Also to be considered are our capital improvements. I agree with Mr. Lynam's views and opinions. I also realize that this majority select board would love to get their hands on this money and town meeting will be right there to give it to them. So the best case senario would be to use these funds for capital improvements like fixing our infrastructure. Has anyone thought about the Pad. bridge? What happens when that needs repair again? What's going on with Southworth? Aren't the costs exceeding what was originally expected? I am not an expert on the town's needs but I think I can safely say that old needs should be addressed before we create new ones. From what I've seen of the majority select board, my guess is they are not considering the town's needs as a whole but their own special interests.
On another note. I'm glad to see the push by a certain select board member to finish that unsightly project in the village has finally come to fruition. Who cares if the funds to make it happen were the stolen life savings of a senior citizen as long as Ms. Dartmouth doesn't have to look at that blight in her village anymore?
I would rather see the money in hand instead of, when we have it, spending it because it is "there." How long, in today's economy, will it remain "there" before the necessities of running the town slowly eat it up?
While a generous action, bus transportation fees need not have been dropped and activity fees need not have been halved. I understand and agree that there should not be fees for the above, but we are not living in the best of economic times and I would think we would look upon any money not currently earmarked for necessity, as a godsend that should be thoroughly analyzed for future needs - - years out - - before handing it out to the first that ask for it.
After turnback money came in, our leadership collectively put blinders on (with the exception of Mr. Jones and Ms. Moniz on the School Committee) and allocated money to compensate the school for the above.
And how quickly FDK found its way into our budget, and the community park. (Can someone tell me who drew up the plans for the community park; who authorized it and when; and who is paying for it? (Never mind the latter, I know the answer to that.)
When did a playground for Cushman morph into a community park, anyway? Complete with room for the expansion of Cushman, as well. So much for keeping Cushman closed out of financial necessity.
I'm probably the "innocent" here, but I could not understand how plans for the community park could be drawn up as if it were a sure thing that Town Meeting would approve the land for the park.
And Town Meeting approved how much to restore a barn?
And that albatross called a wind turbine. Is it correct we still need more money for something or other that was not initially expected?
Unfortunately, Bill, is right. Town Meeting is comprised of an awful lot of individuals who apparently have no problem spending others' money; who have no problem approving something because it sounds good or they have been sold a bill of goods; and who want to look like generous benefactors on someone else's dime.
Don't bother responding in defense of the Town Meeting member. I am one.
As I said, I am not aware that any Select Board member wants to use the funds to support on going operating budgets, such as salaries. That would not be a wise choice. We all agree on that.
I would like to see the town start to put away money for large scale capital projects. The Padanaram Bridge is one example, but you could also include reconfiguring the intersection at Tucker Road and Route 6, building elderly housing near the COA, a community center/library/ senior center in North Dartmouth, maintaining and upgrading our roads, and many others.
A note about school transportation fees. Those fees went to the school department and were not necessarily used for transportation. The town has always paid the transportation bill for school children. The town did not reduce the transportation budget which had to be made up by fees. The School Committee instituted the fees and used the money. It was not needed to transport children to school.
Who drew up the plans for the community park; who approved doing so; and how much did that cost taxpayers?
In today's S-T, we see Mr. Watson's response to Mr. Lynam's observations and concerns. According to Mr. Watson, everything is just fine. Lots of SB accomplishments, lots of available funds, playing with the reserve fund allocations formula to arrive at the suggested 10%, pointing fingers at previous SB for not funding capital projects etc. What is wrong with these observations? Elementary my dear Watson. You simply ignore the current and, at least short term, economic realities. You sight not spending money to upgrade the AC at the main library. How many years did Dartmouth have no money to fund projects like this? Another example is the windows at the Quinn school. Spending beyond our means has been a tradition in Dartmouth Mr. Watson. We got away with it for decades because of increasing revenues. Reducing fees is something that should be done whenever possible. They are substitutes for new taxes only and should be considered temporary. My response to their reduction is "so what". That should be automatic when the opportunity arises. While I do commend Mr. Watson for his willingness to volunteer for this essentially thankless job on the SB, his lack of experience and knowledge continues to severely handicap him as it does to Ms. Stone. This is no time for reckless spending. The taxpayers deserve better than that.
At last night's Select Board meeting, Lara Stone was completely right when she said she was disappointed to discover that the computer program to simplify the town clerk's work was not adequate because it took too long to input information regarding the town calender, requiring too many keystrokes before entering it to input information (as I understand it.)
That being the case, shouldn't this have been discovered before the current program we have for the town clerk's use
was installed and no doubt paid for, not to mention any man-hours for our IT person to do so, that either took away from his daily workload and/or required extra pay for?
Now, unless I heard it incorrectly, we will have two programs, the second which will bypass the first?? Again, maybe I understood part of Ms. Medeiros' explanation, but it sounds like someone didn't get it right the first time.
Didn't anyone realize that the current program was inadequate? Was there any trial period of usage before we had to accept the program, to discover if it were of value to us? Apparently it is not that valuable if it is too time-consuming to work with.
The Town Clerk had input in selecting the original program. At the time, there were no issues with using it to post information. I was under the impression that the new program was to be used to process credit card payments and archive town records. It seems to have morphed into more than that.
I found it humorous to read dear Watson's accusations of Lynam being divisive. Although Watson behaves better when the cameras are rolling, his bully debate style of talking over anyone who he thinks is not in lock step with his thinking is causing quite a stir among many engaged public officials around town.
Sorry Mike but being the loudest, rudest person at the table doesn't make you right. You would do yourself and our town a great service by ratcheting down your arrogance and sitting with your mouth shut while other people speak.
That being said, I also think it is time for ALL of us to take a long breath and release it slowly before relatively small annoyances escalate into something more.
I guess we figured out finally "Popcorn" is an inside the government voice. Afterall, he must have seen Watson "without the cameras rolling".
Popcorn..just identify yourself rather than sling mud at an elected official under some silly screen name.
Dear Mr. Watson
Don't ever believe that you can walk on the same financial ground from where Greg Lynam speaks. I'm sure you were a little boy picking the part of the face above the mouth, when Greg Lynam was warning town officials about our towns financial bleeding. He pointed out the dark financial clouds gathering on the horizon. Greg Lynam knew, and understood, our elected school committee is a licking dog for the schools superintendent.
Your DYAA pal's put you on the select board. Your big mouth will vote you off the select board.
Greg Lynam is on the money, no pun intended. I enjoyed your letter to the readers and agree with your analysist of selectmen overspending, as it relates to unnecessary town related projects. Your comparison to a former select board mentality, for saving rather than spending, is worth mentioning.. The former select board members were fiscal conservatives, while the new elected are all softy, and touchy, with a spend now mentality. The more money spent on foolish town projects, will require more money to continue these projects.
You finger point but never mentioned the names of the selectmen who are of the spend, worry later mentality. Personally, we have never met, but I respect what you and most of the fin com members have done for our town. Truly, you are not a politician. FDK money will dry up and than what? A new town park at the Cushman school location and than what? Selectman Watson threatens to spend 35,000 thousand dollars of town money to finish a senior project, and than what? The selectmen appoint a town police chief and all I hear is more promotions, new police executive administrator, provisional lieutenant appointments, new SRO officer at the Middle school. Where is all the money coming from? .
In my opinion; Selectmen Joe Michaud, Bill Trimble and Shawn McDonald ask, where is the money?Lara Stone and Mike Watson say nothing about the money, just spend, spend, and more spending.
It's all in the name of politics.
Don't give up the fight. You have a lot of people reading your worthy articles, and thanks for keeping the public informed, along with your excellent few of the fincom meetings. What's up with one of your own fincom member who voted 750,000 thousand dollars from the CPA account to fund the restoration of the old stone barn, on property own by the state Audubon society. This building will be used to house the caretaker and family. Are we in the town business of housing restoration? What a price tag.
On behalf of the Finance Committee, I would like to thank Mr. Lynam for his service to Fin Com and the Town. He will be greatly missed.
Mary Louise Nunes
As it relates to FDK money, the fincm, selectmen, and the school department, made a “contract agreement” allowing all school department unspent budgeted mony for 2010, to go into a special account, for funding FDK.
This is like making a pact with the devil, in which the devil has been given too many souls to capture, but agreeing to return enough souls to be put into a special soul account, so the devil can continue the capturing of souls. This is a win, win, for the devil. The captured souls are never released, but returned for the use of capturing souls.
The analogy may be poor, but you get the drift. The school department has been given authority to put all unspent school department money, into a special account, for the use of FDK. This would be the same as allowing all town departments, who return unused budgetary money, to be put into a special account for the same department. Departments, such as the school department, are allocated more than 50% of all town monies. This is more like 53 cents on a dollar taxed. When a department is allowed, or mandated a minimum of 37,000.000 million dollars, one can always find enough money to be returned for a special account to be used for a specific use, such as FDK. This is a good political move on the part of the selectmen and the school committee, who are all elected. The question is.....will the town continue to afford all these new programs??? DO YOU REMEMBER WHERE YOU WERE, WHEN THE LIGHTS WENT OUT IN DARTMOUTH??
Is it true? Greg Lynam is no longer on the fin com? Why did he leave? Now we will be in big trouble as far as I am concerned he is the most knowledgeable and honest person in the town of Dartmouth. We will miss him. I hope that he continues being involved in the town. Greg we could sure use you on our selectboard. Sure hope that all the new rookies on the fin com. know what they are doing. The town will be in BIG trouble by 2012.
Yes, Greg has left Fin Comm. Frank Gracie and Mark Eisenberg are the new members.
FYI -- we will begin on September 9 meeting every Thursday evening at Town Hall (Room 315)until the Fall Town Meeting. Most meetings will begin at 6:30 -- except for September 16 which will begin earlier (5:00 p.m).
We have a lot of very intelligent people on the Finance Com. Mr. Lynam was certainly the most vocal. He will be missed! I want to thank him for his years of service to Dartmouth.
I hope Mr. Lynam stays active in the town!
As it relates to fincom members, I want to thank Greg Lynam for his services. Greg has been the most out spoken fincom member. In my opinion, Greg has been the most informative financial predictor, but not necessary the most accurate. Most humans have the problem with understanding that we are all mortals. We want to live up to the expectations of others, but in reality we can only do our best. Greg has done his best and I've noticed his frustration with some of his fellow fincom members, and members of the select board. The first step toward making the commitment to become a candidate for selectman is to divorce once shelf from all committee's. Good luck to Greg Lynam, and thanks for the memories. You shall be missed.
Post a Comment