CLT UPDATE
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
A raging elephant in the living room
With little relief anticipated from Beacon Hill, 50
Massachusetts towns are considering property tax hikes to close budget
holes brought on by increased health insurance premiums, special
education costs, government salaries, and other local expenses.
Voters this month will be asked to approve property tax hikes ranging
from $750,000 in Dartmouth to pay an injured officer's medical bills to
$5.2 million in Saugus to save the library, 18 teachers, and four police
officers from the budget ax.
The state's Proposition 2½ law, passed in 1980, limits annual increases
in a community's tax levy to 2.5 percent, requiring voter approval for
property tax increases above that level. Across the state, the limit
puts into focus two deeply contradictory themes: the steadily increasing
demands of local governments to pay for services, and the weariness of
property owners fed up with their taxes, which averaged $4,007 for a
single-family home in the current fiscal year....
"Proposition 2½ is failing us," Joseph Denneen, chairman of the Walpole
Board of Selectmen, had said earlier in the day. "The increase that is
allowed by Proposition 2½ does not even cover the increases in medical
insurance premiums for our employees....
Barbara Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited
Taxation and one of the state's leading proponents of Proposition
2½, said towns seeking state tax reform are doing themselves a
disservice by depending on overrides.
"It's so much easier to put an override on the ballot and whine about
the fact there's not enough local aid, instead of fighting for reforms
that will in the long run save the money," she said.
The Boston Globe
Sunday, April 1, 2007
50 towns tackle property tax hikes
In the past, efforts to override Proposition 2½ property tax
limits have typically been used to stave off cuts during recessions, or add
police, firefighters and teachers and increase services during more prosperous
times....
‘‘We’re hearing about shortfalls all over the place at the local level,’’ said
John Robertson, deputy legislative director with the Massachusetts Municipal
Association....
‘‘Scores of communities are reaching a point where they simply don’t have the
revenue, no matter how much they squeeze, to support the existing level of
services,’’ said Michael J. Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers
Foundation....
‘‘Even if they had increasing local aid, cities and towns are not going to be
able to support the level of medical benefits,’’ Widmer said. ‘‘That’s going to
be a very jarring transition, but it’s going to have to happen.’’
Barbara Anderson, president of Citizens for Limited Taxation, the
group that led the campaign to adopt Proposition 2½ in 1980, predicts that voter
support for overrides will continue to erode as long as municipal employee
benefits continue to exceed those in the private sector.
‘‘People are starting to connect these tax requests with the general inability
of elected officials to deal with these issues,’’ she said. ‘‘The people they’re
asking for the overrides are the ones themselves trying to afford health
insurance.’’
The Patriot Ledger
Tuesday, April 2, 2007
More towns face grim possibility of tax overrides
This week on Beacon Hill we're all but certain to see an
opportunity to save millions in public dollars sacrificed on the altar of
political timidity.
The issue is healthcare, whose steadily rising costs are straining municipal
budgets throughout the Commonwealth, absorbing much of what new revenue is
available and squeezing out other worthwhile programs....
Over the last six years, the state's healthcare costs increased by 61 percent,
while Boston's grew by 92 percent...
In Lynn, total healthcare costs have gone up by 181 percent since 2000, in a
city that can afford a yearly budget increase of only about 3 percent....
Removing program design from collective bargaining would diminish the power of
the various unions....
Thus at a time when municipal budgets are so strapped that dozens of communities
are asking taxpayers to approve Proposition 2½ overrides, the common-sense
public interest has taken a back seat to union concerns.
All of which raises this question: Has the return of one-party government
spelled the death of any intrepid reform impulse on Beacon Hill?
The Boston Globe
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
An obstacle to easing towns' healthcare costs
By Scot Lehigh
Coming soon to a polling place near you: a crucial decision
on whether or not to raise your own property taxes. Already, six communities
have spoken....
To anti-tax crusader Barbara Anderson, this year's bumper crop of
override votes is a golden opportunity to fix chronic budget problems facing
cities and towns. "This is the year to do something about the terrible unfunded
pension liability, the future unfunded health care costs, serious problems that
we're looking at in the future that no amount of overrides are going to be able
to deal with. They have to face them now."
CBS4 - WBZ-TV
Tuesday, April 2, 2007
Keller At Large
Towns Hold Springtime Vote On Property Taxes
The state's cities and towns are all facing the same problem
-- with, ironically, the same solution. Rising healthcare and pension costs for
municipal employees are the problem...
It is a luxury, a relic of the past, we can no longer afford. Every year
homeowners are paying more and getting less for their property tax dollars.
There is a better way....
The big obstacle to municipal healthcare and pension reform is the public
employee unions. The leader of the pack: the "Just Say No" firefighters' union,
which opposes even the meekest efforts to rein in costs on healthcare and
pensions. "The two biggest benefits to my union are health insurance and
pensions," says Robert McCarthy, president of the 12,000-member Professional
Fire Fighters of Massachusetts. "My job is to protect their benefits."
I like firefighters as much as anyone. But the situation is getting worse, not
better. There is a huge bill coming due for retiree healthcare, which state and
local governments are just starting to face. Boston alone puts the unfunded
obligation for retiree benefits at $5.2 billion. Unless we get a handle on the
costs, next year there will even more override petitions, and the dollars will
be even bigger. Taxpayers can say "no," too.
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
25 towns, 25 plans
By Steve Bailey
I hope to persuade the reader to support both an
override and a more challenging curriculum for North Andover schools,
and to describe how the two actions are implicitly connected....
"Teachers in the class" are as essential to an excellent education as
"boots on the ground" are to a strong military. Of all the taxes we pay,
those that go to "teachers in the class" serve our communities' future
the best....
As taxpayers and voters, we are responsible for the quality and breadth
of public services through the decisions we make as community members.
Our obligation as a wealthy community, with a median household income
that is $20,000 more than the state average, is to provide fiscal
leadership and direction....
Remember these words by Derek Bok, Harvard's past president: "If you
think education is expensive, try ignorance."
The Eagle-Tribune
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Override allows town to meet educational obligation
By John D. Lennhoff, proponent
Overrides don't solve problems, they only perpetuate fiscal
mismanagement....
This year we are looking at a $3.5 million override article on our Town Meeting
warrant, with $3 million of that going to the schools. Not surprisingly, the
enthusiasm for this override seems to come from the school community. But why
this year?
The answer is simple. Two years ago, the School Committee signed a contract with
the teachers' union calling for an unsustainable 6 percent annual increase in
labor costs -- including salaries, step increases and benefits....
Assume for a minute that the proposed $3.5 million override passes. Does anyone
really believe this will solve the school's fiscal problems? All it would do is
allow more money to be negotiated away in the next contract by our elected
officials, with zero improvement in school programs or educational outcomes.
The Eagle-Tribune
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Override won't solve town's problems
By Ted Tripp, opponent
Chip Ford's CLT Commentary
At long last, the real problem with persistent
municipal shortfalls is finally being recognized. It's not that
citizens aren't being taxed enough -- that myth has been dispelled
through attrition. There aren't many left who still subscribe to
that facile bromide.
As we've recognized for so many years, it's not a
revenue problem, it's a spending problem -- and More Is Never Enough
(MINE), it never will be.
As we warned years ago, the elephant in the living
room that nobody will acknowledge until it goes on a rampage is
overly-generous public employee union contracts. That elephant has
begun to bellow and stomp, it's getting difficult to keep ignoring it.
More and more by the day are coming to recognize the threat it poses and
is about to unleash. Everything in its way will be crushed if it
isn't somehow restrained.
In the CLT Update of Apr. 24, 2005 ("The
secret ticking time bomb: 'public service' pensions, health insurance
giveaways"), two years ago I wrote in my commentary:
As if the impending crash of Social Security and
Medicare isn't overwhelming enough for taxpayers, now comes news of
perhaps an even bigger threat to our financial survival -- and
especially that of younger workers and taxpayers and those not yet
born. The "public service" gravy train is soon to utterly bury us,
especially the younger generations coming up who'll have to pay the
staggering bill for government first and foremost taking care of
itself as usual.
It's getting late if taxpayers are to fend off the
raging rogue elephant, but better late than never -- before it gets its
full head of steam. The time has arrived to get out the prods
while we still have a chance to survive and turn it away from the
village.
As Barbara said, "It's so much easier to put an
override on the ballot and whine about the fact there's not enough local
aid, instead of fighting for reforms that will in the long run save the
money ... This is the year to do something about the terrible unfunded
pension liability, the future unfunded health care costs, serious
problems that we're looking at in the future that no amount of overrides
are going to be able to deal with. They have to face them now."
If not now, when? How many more overrides can
beleaguered taxpayers sustain before being trampled underfoot?
 |
|
Chip Ford |
The Boston Globe
Sunday, April 1, 2007
50 towns tackle property tax hikes
Walpole says no; Scituate vote is split
By John C. Drake
With little relief anticipated from Beacon Hill, 50 Massachusetts towns
are considering property tax hikes to close budget holes brought on by
increased health insurance premiums, special education costs, government
salaries, and other local expenses.
Voters this month will be asked to approve property tax hikes ranging
from $750,000 in Dartmouth to pay an injured officer's medical bills to
$5.2 million in Saugus to save the library, 18 teachers, and four police
officers from the budget ax.
The state's Proposition 2½ law, passed in 1980, limits annual increases
in a community's tax levy to 2.5 percent, requiring voter approval for
property tax increases above that level. Across the state, the limit
puts into focus two deeply contradictory themes: the steadily increasing
demands of local governments to pay for services, and the weariness of
property owners fed up with their taxes, which averaged $4,007 for a
single-family home in the current fiscal year.
Last year, voters rejected 59 of 89 override proposals, marking the
lowest approval rate statewide since 1999. The average override attempt
was about $630,000 last year.
This year, the average request is $1.9 million among the 25 towns that
have scheduled votes; a similar number of towns are considering votes
but have not formally decided.
The average request does not include overrides used to pay off debt,
formally called debt exclusions, which are as high as $20 million.
The property tax override requests follow what many local officials say
were disappointing local aid figures in Governor Deval Patrick's
proposed budget for the coming fiscal year, which starts July 1. With a
long legislative debate over the state budget still unresolved, local
officials say they can't wait on promises of property tax help from
Beacon Hill.
"We're hopeful, but we need to take care of things ourselves," said
Charles Clark , chairman of the Rockport Board of Selectmen. A Town
Meeting vote is set there for April 7, followed by a townwide election
May 8, on a proposed $782,000 override. "The state has promised a lot in
the past and hasn't quite delivered. Cities and towns can't be held
hostage to that. They have to get their own houses in order as best they
can."
The override measures are dividing communities and often pit town
departments against one another because some of the ballot questions
allow voters to pick specific increases for areas such as schools or
public works. A dozen or so community blogs and e-mail discussion lists
have sprouted up, and advocates both for and against tax hikes have held
protests and rallies on town commons and on Beacon Hill. "I have kids in
the system, but I need to make sure I can pay for the roof over their
heads and keep them fed," said one anonymous Walpole poster on a message
board at walpolenews.com, in response to pleas that voters say "yes" to
the $3.9 million override that was on the ballot yesterday.
Another poster suggested that an opponent of the override "won't be
happy until all 3,800 of our school children are all huddled together in
one unheated, unlit auditorium learning from 20-year-old textbooks
supervised by one teacher who reports to one administrator."
Late last night, Walpole town officials said that voters had rejected a
proposed $3.9 million override, primarily to fund school costs.
"Proposition 2½ is failing us," Joseph Denneen, chairman of the Walpole
Board of Selectmen, had said earlier in the day. "The increase that is
allowed by Proposition 2½ does not even cover the increases in medical
insurance premiums for our employees. So right away, before you're even
talking about funding a contract or giving someone a raise or buying a
new pickup truck, you're in the hole."
In Scituate, voters approved two of the five override questions on their
ballots and defeated another two. The results of the fifth question, to
raise $3.5 million for a fire station -- were too close to call last
night.
Also yesterday, residents in Harvard agreed to place two override
questions on this Tuesday's ballot.
In Saugus, the $5.2 million override proposal on the April 24 ballot is
likely to be the state's largest ballot measure this year. Peter A.
Rossetti Jr., chairman of the Saugus selectmen, said unexpected
increases in healthcare costs are the primary reason.
"We had some unusual situations where a number of employees had claims
that far exceeded what had been budgeted," he said. "That dried up
available funds and put us into a deficit situation."
In addition to state aid drying up, there are other local pressures
adding to the strain communities are facing.
"Communities are telling us the slowdown in the housing economy is
having an effect on local revenues," said John Robertson , deputy
legislative director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association. In
addition to stagnating property tax values, the slowdown means less
revenue from building permits.
Some towns are returning to voters this spring despite recent override
rejections. In Lexington, where officials are pondering an override as
high as $4 million this spring, voters rejected a pair of overrides for
schools totalling $3.2 million last year.
Randolph voters haven't passed an override in 25 years, and they saw no
need to end the trend this year. They rejected a $4.1 million tax
increase last week. Dartmouth, where officials say they need a $750,000
tax increase to pay for an injured officer's medical bills, is returning
to voters after they rejected an identical request last year.
Fear of a political backlash led Natick officials to hold off on placing
a $2.1 million override before voters this year. Officials will draw
from reserve funds and put off capital projects to balance the budget,
but the delay just means an even larger override measure likely will
have to go before voters for the 2009 budget year, town officials said.
Voters in nearby Newton approved plans for a new high school this year,
but its mayor is vowing to avoid a property tax override.
Some communities, swamped by new spending demands, are trying new
tactics to make them more appealing to voters.
For example, in 2005, Arlington's override proposal included a larger
fiscal plan that included a vow to control spending and a promise to not
place another override on the ballot for five years. The effort passed.
This year, Amherst is making its $2.5 million override proposal part of
a three-year financial plan, and officials in Shrewsbury, which is
seeking a $5 million tax hike, also have vowed not to ask voters again
for three years if the measure passes.
"You're going to see communities start to package these things, to make
a commitment to voters that this isn't all about an override," Robertson
said. "It's about constraining spending."
Other towns are hedging their bets, placing a "menu" of override
proposals on the ballot, allowing voters to agree to pay higher taxes to
fund school salaries but not, for example, additional police officers,
rather than lumping all the town's needs into a single up-or-down vote.
Kingston officials have placed five questions on the April 28 ballot
this month, splitting up elementary schools, the high school, police,
public works, and general government expenses. The requests total $1.6
million.
During last year's campaign for governor, Patrick promised some relief
from property taxes and help to cities and towns to raise more money in
other ways.
As governor, he has proposed allowing communities to assess a $1 or $2
tax on meals and hotels; eliminating the exemption on property taxes
enjoyed by telecommunications companies for their poles and wires on
city streets; opening up the state Group Insurance Commission to local
government employees; and changing the way pensions funds are invested
and administered. For taxpayers, Patrick wants to expand a property tax
credit for low-income seniors to include homeowners of any age.
Patrick has proposed a $312 million local aid increase, about 5 percent
over this fiscal year.
"We've increased local aid, but not to the amount we would have liked,"
said Lieutenant Governor Timothy P. Murray . "We are working on a series
of short-term efforts to get more money to the cities and towns."
Looking at the tax increase requests across the state, Michael Widmer of
the Massachusetts Taxpayers Association said communities have little
reason to expect a windfall in state revenue. "There is very little
chance of any significant property tax relief in the near term," he
said.
Some local officials say Patrick's measures would be helpful but the
problems are more fundamental. They cite the Chapter 70 education
funding formula, which they say does not send enough school money to
towns and cities, and the sharp limitations imposed by Proposition 2½
itself.
Robertson said that major changes in how local government is funded are
needed to stave off the steady flow of tax hike requests. "Cities and
towns do need something to make themselves more self-reliant and give
them some tools to help themselves."
Barbara Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited
Taxation and one of the state's leading proponents of Proposition
2½, said towns seeking state tax reform are doing themselves a
disservice by depending on overrides.
"It's so much easier to put an override on the ballot and whine about
the fact there's not enough local aid, instead of fighting for reforms
that will in the long run save the money," she said.
Christine McConville of the Globe staff contributed to this report.
The Patriot Ledger
Tuesday, April 2, 2007
More towns face grim possibility of tax overrides
By Rick Collins
Rockland officials say they need $675,000 in additional taxes to run the
town next year and $300,000 more to fix the library roof.
Kingston is seeking $1.6 million to prevent cuts in the schools, police
and fire departments and other services.
Tax increases are being proposed in Marshfield, East Bridgewater and
Middleboro and considered in Braintree and Sharon.
And while Scituate voters this weekend approved $3.5 million in tax
increases, including $2.9 million for the schools, they shot down
funding for a new fire station and senior center.
Across Massachusetts, about 50 communities -- one in seven -- have
proposed tax hikes to deal with budget woes to pay for basic services.
In the past, efforts to override Proposition 2½ property tax limits have
typically been used to stave off cuts during recessions, or add police,
firefighters and teachers and increase services during more prosperous
times.
But the circumstances have changed. Even though the national and state
economies are growing, many communities say their fiscal picture is
bleak.
‘‘We’re hearing about shortfalls all over the place at the local
level,’’ said John Robertson, deputy legislative director with the
Massachusetts Municipal Association.
However, with average tax bills in some communities increasing more than
40 percent since 2000, taxpayers have resisted the additional spending
requests.
Over the last five months, tax hikes have been rejected in Canton,
Rockland and Randolph. Abington approved $3 million for a senior center
and new windows at the early childhood center, and Halifax approved
$800,000 to cap the town landfill.
Canton Selectman Avril Elkort said overrides are often just short-term
solutions that fail to solve underlying financial problem.
‘‘What we’re doing is adding money to (the problem) and just keeping it
going for a few more years,’’ she said. ‘‘We have to stop and look
overall if this is all we can afford as a town.’’
Local officials and government observers across the political spectrum
agree that many communities have reached a crossroads.
Lean increases in state aid, empty rainy-day accounts and continuing
double-digit increases in personnel costs mean many communities can no
longer afford to provide services at current levels.
‘‘Scores of communities are reaching a point where they simply don’t
have the revenue, no matter how much they squeeze, to support the
existing level of services,’’ said Michael J. Widmer, president of the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.
Many predict communities will continue to experience money problems
unless they make drastic cuts in payrolls, benefits and services, or
they hike taxes.
The issue, some say, is not just the number of town employees -- most
communities have fewer now than they did before 2004 -- but rather
employee benefits such as pensions, guaranteed pay hikes and relatively
low-cost health care.
Health care costs for municipalities increase an average of about 10
percent annually and consume larger amounts of a community’s budget.
‘‘Even if they had increasing local aid, cities and towns are not going
to be able to support the level of medical benefits,’’ Widmer said.
‘‘That’s going to be a very jarring transition, but it’s going to have
to happen.’’
Barbara Anderson, president of Citizens for Limited Taxation,
the group that led the campaign to adopt Proposition 2½ in 1980,
predicts that voter support for overrides will continue to erode as long
as municipal employee benefits continue to exceed those in the private
sector.
‘‘People are starting to connect these tax requests with the general
inability of elected officials to deal with these issues,’’ she said.
‘‘The people they’re asking for the overrides are the ones themselves
trying to afford health insurance.’’
The Boston Globe
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
An obstacle to easing towns' healthcare costs
By Scot Lehigh
This week on Beacon Hill we're all but certain to see an opportunity to
save millions in public dollars sacrificed on the altar of political
timidity.
The issue is healthcare, whose steadily rising costs are straining
municipal budgets throughout the Commonwealth, absorbing much of what
new revenue is available and squeezing out other worthwhile programs.
This is a problem with a recognized remedy: Have cities and towns join
the Group Insurance Commission, the state agency that buys health
insurance for state workers, as soon as the GIC can conveniently take
them.
Run by Dolores Mitchell, a tough, smart veteran of the first Dukakis
administration, the commission long ago proved its mettle.
The GIC's buying power and health-plan design have helped restrain the
large increases other health plans have experienced, while providing
state workers with quality coverage.
Over the last six years, the state's healthcare costs increased by 61
percent, while Boston's grew by 92 percent, according to Sam Tyler,
president of the Boston Municipal Research Bureau. Had Boston's increase
tracked the state's, the city would have saved a total of $38 million in
that period. Or, for this fiscal year alone, $6 million.
"Given the current law enforcement needs, Boston could have used that
savings to hire 85 new police officers," Tyler notes.
In Lynn, total healthcare costs have gone up by 181 percent since 2000,
in a city that can afford a yearly budget increase of only about 3
percent. If Lynn could join the commission, "we could save $1.5 million
in health insurance next year," says Mayor Chip Clancy.
Health plans offered by the commission are both cheaper and better than
what his city can offer, Clancy says.
He should know: Because his wife is a state employee, the Clancy family
gets its health coverage through the state.
But there's an impediment to enacting a reform Clancy calls a
"no-brainer": the public-employee unions. Even if the GIC took over,
localities and their unions would still negotiate the employer/employee
split on healthcare premiums.
The rest of the health plan design, however, would be left to the
commission.
Therein lies the rub: Removing program design from collective bargaining
would diminish the power of the various unions. And so the cautious
measure a legislative committee will probably endorse this week will
require a 70 percent vote from a local union committee before a
municipality could join the GIC.
That language puts the unions in the driver's seat, letting them either
veto a locality's attempt to join or exact other concessions as the
price of their okay. Thus the so-called "coalition bargaining" proviso
takes a smart idea and severely waters it down.
"The optional approach is better than nothing, but it takes the steam
out of a broader reform that would have a much more significant impact,"
says Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers
Foundation.
So why do legislators favor that approach?
Well, explains Democratic Representative Rachel Kaprielian of Watertown,
House sponsor of the legislation, if the Legislature let municipalities
join the GIC without union approval, "I think you would see a lot more
consternation."
Consternation? Yikes! Certainly it's worth millions in municipal dollars
to avoid that.
Representative Jay Kaufman, House chairman of the Public Service
Committee, sounds almost rueful about the tepid measure his panel is set
to approve.
"The legislative process is imperfect," he says. "I am constantly
balancing taking large steps that are ultimately good steps but have so
much push-back that they become almost meaningless gestures as opposed
to trying to advance the ball down field, even if not as much as I'd
like," he says.
But surely a governor committed to relieving the financial squeeze on
cities and towns would push hard for a stronger measure? Alas, when the
AFL-CIO queried the candidates on its questionnaire last year, Deval
Patrick made it clear he wouldn't buck organized labor on the matter.
Administration spokesman Joe Landolfi argues that the coalition
bargaining approach, which Patrick supports, "is a very real first
step," but concedes "we weren't prepared to force this" to get something
better.
Thus at a time when municipal budgets are so strapped that dozens of
communities are asking taxpayers to approve Proposition 2½ overrides,
the common-sense public interest has taken a back seat to union
concerns.
All of which raises this question: Has the return of one-party
government spelled the death of any intrepid reform impulse on Beacon
Hill?
CBS4 - WBZ-TV
Tuesday, April 2, 2007
Keller At Large
Jon Keller Reporting
Towns Hold Springtime Vote On Property Taxes
For many cities and towns in Massachusetts, springtime means gearing up
for controversial votes on raising local property taxes, and this year
is shaping up to be one of the busiest season for those so-called
override votes in years.
So why is the pressure for property tax-hikes so intense this year?
The sluggish economy and the soaring cost of public employee benefits
are just two of the many reasons why your city or town may soon be
holding a vote to override the property tax cap if they haven't already.
And both sides of the tax hike debate agree this year's crop of
overrides are pivotal to your community's financial future.
Coming soon to a polling place near you: a crucial decision on whether
or not to raise your own property taxes. Already, six communities have
spoken.
In Sudbury, Winchester and Lincoln, voters passed more than $4 million
worth of overrides. But in Canton, Randolph and Walpole, overrides were
rejected despite warnings of severe service cutbacks. In Scituate,
voters backed one override for schools and public safety, but nixed
funding for a senior center and fire station.
"You can't just keep raising your neighbor's property taxes."
To anti-tax crusader Barbara Anderson, this year's bumper crop of
override votes is a golden opportunity to fix chronic budget problems
facing cities and towns. "This is the year to do something about the
terrible unfunded pension liability, the future unfunded health care
costs, serious problems that we're looking at in the future that no
amount of overrides are going to be able to deal with. They have to face
them now."
Anderson welcomes proposals by Gov. Deval Patrick to address those
problems. And that puts her in an unusual alliance with this longtime
lobbyist for more local government revenues.
"We agree 100 percent that if we don't address this problem now, then
Massachusetts will find itself in a very bad place in one or two years,
and the taxpayers will find themselves in bad places," said Geoff
Beckwith of the Mass. Municipal Association.
Anderson and Beckwith represent two conflicting views of proposition
two-and-a-half. She says it's the only thing keeping government from a
full-scale raid on your wallet. He says it's a barrier to sound
management practice. But they share one prediction: the status quo is
steering local government and the taxpayers toward the edge of a cliff.
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
25 towns, 25 plans
By Steve Bailey
If God helps those who help themselves, why should taxpayers be expected
to do more?
On Sunday, John C. Drake's enterprising lead story in the Globe reported
that 50 communities are considering property tax hikes to close growing
local budget gaps. Of 25 towns that have scheduled Proposition 2½
overrides this year, the average request for new tax money is $1.9
million -- about triple the average request of a year ago.
The state's cities and towns are all facing the same problem -- with,
ironically, the same solution. Rising healthcare and pension costs for
municipal employees are the problem; consolidation should be part of the
solution. The 25 communities seeking tax hikes are like the worst
dysfunctional days of the Red Sox, when the team was defined by 25 guys
and 25 cabs. In this case, it is a matter of each community clinging to
its underperforming local pension fund and its expensive local health
insurance plan.
It is a luxury, a relic of the past, we can no longer afford. Every year
homeowners are paying more and getting less for their property tax
dollars. There is a better way.
Start with healthcare. With annual double-digit premium increases,
healthcare is the budget buster that can't be ignored. Sam Tyler,
president of the Boston Municipal Research Bureau, estimates that half
the city's new revenue next year will go to pay the rising cost of
healthcare alone. There is an alternative: Boston, like the 25
communities seeking tax hikes, could join the state's excellent employee
health insurance plan. Over the past six years, Boston's healthcare
costs went up 92 percent; the state's costs rose 61 percent. The key
difference: In the state system, health insurance is largely taken off
the negotiating table.
Only Springfield, under the state's financial oversight, is now part of
the state's group insurance plan. Legislation being considered on Beacon
Hill would allow communities to join the state plan on a voluntary
basis. The approach is too tepid, giving employee unions too much
leverage to dictate the terms. The same is true for the state's approach
on pension reform.
Governor Deval Patrick has proposed forcing underperforming local
pension funds into the state's top-performing pension fund. Of the 25
communities seeking tax hikes, 18 are in local pension funds that would
be folded into the state fund under Patrick's plan. The Worcester
Regional system, which invests for towns like Harvard and Northborough,
returned just 3.15 percent annually over the last five years; Hampshire
County, which invests for Amherst, returned just 3.89 percent. The state
system, by contrast, returned 7.04 percent a year. We're leaving
millions on the table.
No one is even talking about doing anything about consolidating the
wasteful benefits side. They should be. Why should each town be mailing
retirement checks? It would also be far harder to qualify for a
disability pension with a bad charley horse if your pals weren't sitting
on the local board.
The big obstacle to municipal healthcare and pension reform is the
public employee unions. The leader of the pack: the "Just Say No"
firefighters' union, which opposes even the meekest efforts to rein in
costs on healthcare and pensions. "The two biggest benefits to my union
are health insurance and pensions," says Robert McCarthy, president of
the 12,000-member Professional Fire Fighters of Massachusetts. "My job
is to protect their benefits."
I like firefighters as much as anyone. But the situation is getting
worse, not better. There is a huge bill coming due for retiree
healthcare, which state and local governments are just starting to face.
Boston alone puts the unfunded obligation for retiree benefits at $5.2
billion. Unless we get a handle on the costs, next year there will even
more override petitions, and the dollars will be even bigger. Taxpayers
can say "no," too.
The Eagle-Tribune
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Point: Override allows town to meet educational obligation
By John D. Lennhoff, proponent
"How did we get to where we are, and where should we go?" was the
headline on the political advertisement I recently received in the mail
concerning the budgetary, accreditation, and public confidence crises in
the North Andover schools. The document described why mandating high
standards alone would solve the current public school troubles and avoid
the imposition of an override. I hope to persuade the reader to support
both an override and a more challenging curriculum for North Andover
schools, and to describe how the two actions are implicitly connected.
"Teachers in the class" are as essential to an excellent education as
"boots on the ground" are to a strong military. Of all the taxes we pay,
those that go to "teachers in the class" serve our communities' future
the best. Teachers challenge students best when they provide an
exceptional curriculum in a small classroom environment.
As taxpayers and voters, we are responsible for the quality and breadth
of public services through the decisions we make as community members.
Our obligation as a wealthy community, with a median household income
that is $20,000 more than the state average, is to provide fiscal
leadership and direction.
The Massachusetts Departments of Education and Revenue Web sites are
excellent sources of information. The DoE cites that North Andover
budgets $1,300 less of their FY06 education budget per student on
"in-class teachers" than Andover, and $1,000 less than the state
average. Fewer dollars spent on teacher salaries results in bigger class
sizes and overworked teachers. Andover, North Reading, and Westford all
planned about 40-42 percent of their FY06 education dollars for
teachers, while North Andover allocated 34 percent. The administration
costs per student in these towns are all comparable; in fact the fixed
costs such as maintenance, insurance, guidance and testing, pupil
services, and instructional materials are all at about the same cost per
student. The discrepancy in spending per student between North Andover
and many other comparable towns comes out of the number of "in-class
teachers."
Andover and North Andover property taxes are comparable for FY06 at
$11.40 and $11.14 per $1,000 assessed, respectively. However, Andover
receives $678 in commercial and industrial taxes per person, while North
Andover receives only $214 per resident. A few other tax details add up
to the difference in funding per resident or student between the two
towns. While the commercial and industrial tax base in North Andover is
growing, it is unlikely to impact the town budget in time to avert a
worsening financial crisis. An increase in property taxes via an
override will return our student-teacher ratio to one that provides our
children with an excellent education in an accredited school. A more
challenging curriculum will be enabled through more "in-class teachers"
and not higher goals alone.
Remember these words by Derek Bok, Harvard's past president: "If you
think education is expensive, try ignorance."
John D. Lennhoff has been a North Andover resident for 16 years. His
children attend the Sargent School.
The Eagle-Tribune
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Counterpoint: Override won't solve town's problems
By Ted Tripp, opponent
Overrides don't solve problems, they only perpetuate fiscal
mismanagement.
In 1997, North Andover passed a $1.3 million override with $426,000 of
that going to the schools. We were told at the time that this money
would solve the school's funding problems. Yet, three years later in
2000 we were asked for another override, this time for $2 million with
$860,000 going to the schools. It also passed. What happened to all that
money given to the schools and municipal side just three years earlier?
Apparently, the 1997 override didn't solve any problems.
In 2002, the Town Manager's Financial Task Force recommended a $10
million override just to cover desired spending increases. But that
would be good only until 2006 when another massive override would be
needed. The selectmen blinked at the high figure and reduced it to $4
million. This time, however, the voters smartened up and defeated the
override by a margin of 2 to 1. They told the town to live within its
means under the constraints of Proposition 2½.
This year we are looking at a $3.5 million override article on our Town
Meeting warrant, with $3 million of that going to the schools. Not
surprisingly, the enthusiasm for this override seems to come from the
school community. But why this year?
The answer is simple. Two years ago, the School Committee signed a
contract with the teachers' union calling for an unsustainable 6 percent
annual increase in labor costs -- including salaries, step increases and
benefits. Just before signing it, the committee was specifically told
that funding would not be available and that dozens of teachers would
have to be terminated in the years ahead. They signed it anyway. What
were they thinking?
The predicted cutbacks have now taken place, causing major problems with
class sizes, lack of music and art, and the closing of school libraries.
All of which could have been prevented had the committee agreed to a
contract that was both affordable and in the best interests of our
children.
Shamelessly, the majority of the current School Committee just approved
a school budget for next year that is millions more than the town can
afford. Until our May Town Meeting, we won't know if the strategy is to
push for the multimillion-dollar override article or to decimate the
police and fire departments.
Assume for a minute that the proposed $3.5 million override passes. Does
anyone really believe this will solve the school's fiscal problems? All
it would do is allow more money to be negotiated away in the next
contract by our elected officials, with zero improvement in school
programs or educational outcomes.
The voters should just say "NO" to any tax increase and send a message
to those in office that voters are fed up with unaffordable contract.
Ted Tripp is a resident of North Andover and president of the North
Andover Taxpayers Association.
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
|
