Friday, March 10, 2006

06/07 Budget

Hot off the presses... the Town Manager’s proposed budget:
Tax increase = 3.75% (1 mill)
Spending increase = 5.09%
05/06 budget = $84.0million (adopted)
06/07 budget = $88.2million (proposed)

Both the 5% spending increase and the 3.75% tax increase concern me. However, this is a starting point. The real key is reducing spending. But I think keeping a tax increase below 3.0% would be a step in the right direction. Anyone know what the social security increase was this year? And for a bit more analysis of the budget, check out this week's Herald (http://www.cheshireherald.com/NC/0/301.html) or Saturday's Waterbury paper (http://www.rep-am.com/story.php?id=3985).

Tim White
Town Council, Budget Committee
TimWhite98@yahoo.com

FRIDAY MARCH 10: I'M POSTING REPLIES FOR THE PAST WEEK. SORRY, BEEN BUSY.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

A common theme has been developed over the years by the political parties to "get to" a specific budget increase number they will be tolerated by the residents. This is the wrong way to approach a budget, although it is th easiest way. Focus needs to be on spending reductions, not minimizing the increase and there are diffences. Since the start of budget season the talk has been what amount can we get away with, what amount will the residents agree to. expressing the increases in a percentage is a joke. This year the increase may be a lower percentage but a lower number of a bigger number is .....? A single mill last year was equal to 2.4 mil dollrs. To say we are only increasing 1 mil, that is equal to 3.75 mil dollars is a not an apples to apples comparision. This year the 1 mil increase is equal to a 1.5 mil increase from last year. Speak in terms of total dollars increase, people understand that. Focus on opportunities to reduce expeditures, we know where they are; medical insurance, the pool, the barn, the pool consultant, energy and more. The elected should do the job they were hired for; provide mangement and financial leadership. Set politics aside and do what is best. I know it is a strange thought, but just as teenagers appreciate and expect parental discipline, taxpayers expect and will reward common sense, tough decisions by their elected officials. Having the minority party standby, watching and maybe even hoping for large tax increases from the majority, thinking this will help the minority get relected to the majority in the next election is wrong.

Anonymous said...

Social Security increase was 4.1%, but after the increase for the new drug programs there was net loss to most recipients. So using the SS increase as justification or a measurement tool is wrong. Don't go there.

Tim White said...

anonymous 6:26am... I agree. As I said in my post, spending (not taxes) is the key. And I won't be standing back and waiting for unmitigated spending and taxing to occur this year.

as for spending related to medical insurance (one of the biggest items in the budget), Councilman Tom Ruocco and I have spoken on this topic several times. I think he's got some good ideas for saving money on healthcare bene's.

Tim White said...

anonymous 2:05pm... "don't go there." ok. point made.

Anonymous said...

I find some people a bit off key here.

The first priority should be to establish priorities. If they can be funded without a tax hike, great, if not, keep it reasonable.

We could "cut spending " and "cut taxes" by foregoing building maintainance, only to get whacked twice as hard later

(I can think of other examples. if you cut special ed the next year's legal fees would eclipse what the teachers cost)

We've seen too many examples of this already. We "saved money" on the pool by using a bubble. Right. It should have been built properly or not built at all.

And on priorities, when some local pols hammer the school budget in '04 and the same ones want to spend a million on an unecessary Linear Park extension in '05, don't be surprised to find your credibility is what has a deficit

Anonymous said...

I hope the time comes when the local politicians start to correct agendas. Your right, you cannot give the school system a zero increase, then ask to spend some anout of money on a asphalt path. The path was a in my opionion a personal agenda to attempt to offset the "North End Village" by the Dems. Properly explained at the start of the budget and election season the defeat of the "R's" may not have happened. The "R's" should have come out and said, we want the public to decide on the value of the Linaer Trail. Oly after the "D's" hammered them on the spending side of it did the "R's" come out and say we want the public to decide. It was too late at that point, they got one up'd on it. Lack of foresight and teamwork.

I agree creditability is the issue. When one of the two parties in Twon starts to conduct business and establish goals based on common sense, a logical thought process, rooted in what is best for the Town, not special interests, is when we will have a decent government.

Focusing on spending reductions, eliminating special interest; turf field, barn and who knows what else. Concentrating on fixing the current problems; a dismal pool facility, infrastructure in the schools and municipal buildings, windows, heat, energy savings. Only then when we have fixed what is broken can we have intelligent discussions about what we should do for ideas. If its broke, fix it.

Tim White said...

anon 8:38pm... going back to last fall when the linear trail came up, did you feel that I wanted to spend a million dollars for the linear park?

Anonymous said...

How about this novel approach to the 06/07 budget: For example with the BOE budget - Start with the 05/06 total budget number and add in the amounts that we're stuck with - like contractual salary increases and increases in benefits (although I truly hope Mr. Ruocco's idea can save $$ here). Also add to special ed the amount necessary to meet the mandates handed down(maybe it's not the $300K I believe they're asking for-maybe it could be less). Determine a more accurate number for heating/utility costs (for some reason the super didn't include the huge increases in his 06/07 request). Then go through all other accounts and "cut the fluff" (Tim White has already pointed out where some of that is). Just because an amount is budgeted to an account with the explanation that it's in keeping with past expenditures, doesn't mean that it can't be reduced. For those few that have really taken a good look at the BoE budget, you'll see that many accounts, going back the two previous budget cycles, were "underspent"...so it makes no sense at all to keep budgeting at that "higher" number when you don't need it!...unless of course, you're looking to "pad" the numbers to help come out to the "zero" balance at yearend. In other words what I'm trying to say is figure what numbers we're stuck having to pay, decide on any absolutley necessary repairs, and figure how much can be reduced out of all other accounts. I agree that it's important to determine priorities, but the Boe's main priority should be to deliver a decent education to the students at a price "affordable" to the taxpayers. Don't look at it as "let's find a number or an increase that the residents can tolerate." And finally - forget the turf field (it's going to cost more than the 850K and the Boe doesn't need anymore increases in expenses), just knock down the barn, and give me three good reasons why we need to pay a pool consultant??

Anonymous said...

How about this novel approach to the 06/07 budget: For example with the BOE budget - Start with the 05/06 total budget number and add in the amounts that we're stuck with - like contractual salary increases and increases in benefits (although I truly hope Mr. Ruocco's idea can save $$ here). Also add to special ed the amount necessary to meet the mandates handed down(maybe it's not the $300K I believe they're asking for-maybe it could be less). Determine a more accurate number for heating/utility costs (for some reason the super didn't include the huge increases in his 06/07 request). Then go through all other accounts and "cut the fluff" (Tim White has already pointed out where some of that is). Just because an amount is budgeted to an account with the explanation that it's in keeping with past expenditures, doesn't mean that it can't be reduced. For those few that have really taken a good look at the BoE budget, you'll see that many accounts, going back the two previous budget cycles, were "underspent"...so it makes no sense at all to keep budgeting at that "higher" number when you don't need it!...unless of course, you're looking to "pad" the numbers to help come out to the "zero" balance at yearend. In other words what I'm trying to say is figure what numbers we're stuck having to pay, decide on any absolutley necessary repairs, and figure how much can be reduced out of all other accounts. I agree that it's important to determine priorities, but the Boe's main priority should be to deliver a decent education to the students at a price "affordable" to the taxpayers. Don't look at it as "let's find a number or an increase that the residents can tolerate." And finally - forget the turf field (it's going to cost more than the 850K and the Boe doesn't need anymore increases in expenses), just knock down the barn, and give me three good reasons why we need to pay a pool consultant??

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Tim White said...

anonymous 9:39pm (comment deleted)... This is intended as a forum for public debate/discussion... one in which people have an opportunity to share their views anonymously. However, you must be respectful of others. If you're not respectful, you're comments will be deleted. Please understand, this has nothing to do with politics, this has to do with showing respect.

And for anyone who is interested in the comment that I deleted, feel free to call me (439-4394). I'd be happy to discuss it, but I simply felt it was inappropriate for me to leave it posted here.

Anonymous said...

Tim, It kills me to drive by different "areas of beauty" around town and see a town worker there all day pulling weeds or rearranging plantings, flowers etc. The corner of Maple Ave and Rt 10 (across from the Academy) is a perfect example. I have seen a town worker there(sometimes 2) for hours on end sprucing up the place. I have a lawn service that services my yard that could do the same job in under an hour or two. Have we ever thought about the savings we may gain by hiring a contractor to take care of these plots instead of higher paid veteran town workers who are in no rush to complete the job...

Anonymous said...

One item in the budget that gets little attention is the price of health care. The proposed cost of providing medical insurance for town and school employees is around 8 million dollars and represents ~10% of the next year's operating budget. More troubling, the projected increase in medical insurance is 8% to 15% per year. The increase for next year is anticipated to be ~ $750,000, which is nearly double the pool subsidy. To pay for this increase in health care insurance would require an increase in the mill rate of 0.3. It's difficult to keep tax increases low when one begins every budget knowing that the mill rate will have to go up just to pay for health insurance.

Tim White said...

Emma’s dad… you hit the nail on the head… I believe that besides utility rate increases, the highest increase this year is in healthcare bene’s. It’s a huge issue. But at a town level, with bene’s largely covered by contracts, I don’t think there’s much the town can do other than staff reduction. Although I think the idea of offering HSAs is a good one. It may not work well for everyone (as you need to “float” the cash), but I think that offering the option is a step in the right direction.

Do you have any specific suggestions for saving money here? (I have had one resident give me some ideas. I still need to sort through the info.)

Tim White said...

Breachway… I have heard your sentiments echoed by others in town and I share your concern. And while I cannot speak to your particular example, I want to give you my own example of a job performed by our DPW.

Just last year, DPW was fixing the curb in front of my house. (It got torn up by the plow.) And I noticed them working outside and went out to chat for a minute. And when I did that, the only thing going through my mind was that I didn’t even want to walk down to the curb as the temps were in the 90s with high humidity. How the PW guys could work at all was pretty amazing, I thought. Again… I can’t speak to your specific example, but there are times (particularly July/Aug) when I’m amazed that they can do any work.

Please understand me though... I don't mean to discount your example in any way. It's just that I would need to more fully understand the situation before passing any judgement.

I think though that the best way to address your concern is if you see something similar happening, I encourage you to call town hall and ask for an explanation.

As for hiring a contractor to do some of the work traditionally performed by DPW, the town does do that. A specific example… just last year, the town hired an independent contractor to replace sidewalks on Long Hill. So it is something that does happen.