GOP candidates and local officials should unite!

I strongly recommend that everyone actually reads this bulletin.

http://www.masstaxpayers.org/files/State%20fiscal%20crisis%20bulletin%20with%20header.pdf

Republican candidates for Legislature and Governor should wave this bulletin high in the air to show how the Democrats have mishandled the budget for the last few years. They should also be touting the examples of how state spending could be cut to solve this gap.

Many GOP reform recommendations were ignored last year. Bring them back on the campaign trail as a way to close this gap so voters have a choice between reform and revenue.

Local officials need to push reforms at the state level too. If we sit back and let the MTF, Mass. Municipal Association and the Mass. Teachers Association lead the charge, we will be left with more "local option taxes" and calls for higher taxes at the local (via overrides) and state level to save jobs!

The claims of massive job cuts at the local level will be a reality if there is not a push for wage freezes and state spending reform.

The fiscal crisis can't be ignored any longer. This bulletin is a nice outline of the situation. We know there will be plenty of calls for new taxes, but who will be out there offering alternative options to reduce the level of expense growth?

Bring Corporate Sponsors to the local level

I wholeheartedly applaud the Acton-Boxborough school administration for taking the initiative to explore corporate sponsorships for their athletic programs.

Acton-Boxborough may ask businesses to sponsor school teams - - Budget Blues - Boston.com

Posted using ShareThis

I have long thought that this is a missed opportunity for high school programs, as well as potential sponsors. The benefit to schools (and the taxpayers of the community) is pretty obvious. More private money used means less public (TAX) money needed. It would also allow us to take a step towards making a public school education free of "additional fees" that limit our kids ability to explore multiple extracurricular activities.

There are also a benefits to the corporate sponsors. The customer loyalty that will be immediately gained from the community. This loyalty will be based on the goodwill generated by parents and students knowing that a specific business made it possible for them to participate in extracurricular activities. This would especially benefit small "mom and pop" businesses that rely on local customers choosing them over the "big box" stores that are often cheaper.

I would also like to see sponsors receive "charitable contribution" tax credit for money donated to support extracurricular activities. Notice, I didn't say athletic teams. It shouldn't matter whether its the football team or the drama club, each of these programs add to the degree of opportunity our kids have, and each deserve support. A tax credit would not only incentive corporations, but also individuals who would be willing to support their local school.

Some may argue that there would be risks of having corporate sponsors at the high school level. I don't see the risks that exist at the collegiate level because there is no money awarded to schools who win state titles. In fact, when you consider that corporate sponsors have been supporting little league teams for decades, the high school level is the only area where sponsors do not contribute.

Private, charitable contributions are something every school district should be exploring. And incentives for the private sector should be something our state and federal government provide.

Let's put the kids first...and compromise!

In Massachusetts, there are 153 municipalities that will be facing an education funding crisis in FY11 (which begins on July 1, 2010) because the Federal Economic Stimulus plan has not jumped started the economy to replenish the "one-time" influx of cash. Don't get me wrong, its not all the federal government's fault. Officials at both the state and local level have to accept responsibility for using this money to fund on-going operating expenses (mainly to pay for raises to existing staff). And every employee and labor union who refused to engage in a dialogue about wage freezes because this money was available shares in the blame as well.

The willingness at the state and local level to punt the financial issues until next year was a conscious decision by most. It would almost be better if people didn't understand the implications of using this money ($451 million state-wide, according to Stimulus Money For Education Running Out - Team 5 Investigates News Story - WCVB Boston) to fund the contractual raises due to existing staff. The reality, however, is that everyone took the money and agreed to "hope for the best".

Well, the best didn't happen. The federal stimulus money did not generate a large boom to the US economy. The tax increases implemented by the Massachusetts state legislature actually generated LESS revenue. And few towns found (or even tried) a compromise with employees to alter the contractually obligated raises that were negotiated in a better economic climate. So, where does that leave the cities and towns who were relying on the Federal and State governments to be able to replace the stimulus funds with revenue from a revived economy?

Red Mass Group:: Gov. recommends business withold information from Feds

Here is a post that I made at RedMassGroup.com regarding Gov. Patrick's recommendations to integrate immigrants (ILLEGAL ones, too)


Red Mass Group:: Gov. recommends business withold information from Feds

Fund Public Schools first!

Just when you think a group can't surprise you any more, you wake up one Monday morning to read that they've done it again!

Who am I talking about? The obvious guess would be one (or both) of my daughters. But that's not who I'm referring to now. No, my girls usually give me nice surprises. Just yesterday my 5 year old (Riley) colored a beautiful picture and stayed in the lines.

This new surprise comes from the liberal wing of the MA state legislature (I know, they make up more than a "wing"). They have decided that now is the time to reconsider providing subsidies to ILLEGAL immigrants for college tuition. They want to extend in-state tuition rates to ILLEGAL immigrants. No, I do not support giving driver's licences, tuition rates, or healthcare plans to ILLEGAL immigrants. However, there is another reason why discussing this idea makes no sense to me.

We are in the middle of a financial crisis. A financial crisis that has both the state and local governments making cuts to education, human services, and public safety. Is it really a good idea to be examining a new program that will cost the state money?

The state budget for the current fiscal year used over $1 BILLION dollars from Federal Stimulus money and "Rainy Day" funds in order to cover the existing expense level. This was in addition to raising the sales tax by 25% (5% to 6.25%). Yet, the increased sales tax has actually generated less funds than anticipated...causing more mid-year cuts!

The largest question facing the state budget is "How are the Federal Stimulus and Rainy day funds going to be replaced?" These funds were used to pay for on-going operating expenses at the local level. The federal stimulus funds were specifically directed to schools as a way to make up for the fact that revenues did not exist to cover the state's portion of required education funding. In turn, these funds were used to save teaching jobs by paying the required contractual increases.

If a new source of funds is not found, municipalities across Massachussetts will be forced to ask residents for large property tax increases or face massive cuts to education, public safety, and human services.

Does the legislature really think that its more important to spend money they don't have on a new program? Is providing ILLEGAL immigrants tuition more important than funding our public schools, public safety, and human services?

This lack of rationale should not be rewarded by re-election in Nov 2010.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33950859/ns/us_news-education/page/2/

Good news travels slow

Its the everyday efforts and good deeds that don't make the news reports or papers. In the last 12 hours I've heard about two communities that have given their time and money to help further the educational opportunities of their kids.

I came home yesterday to see a note in my daughter's kindergarten folder. It was a short newsletter sent out by the Home & School Association (H&SA). The H&SA is a private non-profit group that raises money to supplement the budget of the elementary school in Millis, MA. The newletter gave information about future events and meetings, but it also reported how successful the fall fundraising drive was. Over $10,000 profit was made in the annual holiday gift sale project. This is $10,000 of private money donated to public education in a small (8,000 residents) middle class town.

The second example was found this morning when I noticed a facebook post from my friend Eric Dahlberg in Chelmsford, MA. It was the link to an article about an "adult spelling bee" that was hosted by the Chelmsford Educational Fund. Same type of organization and the HS&A, just different name. While the article didn't tell how much was raised, it was just another example of how, when given the chance, people will help.

I know this is not completely unique. Many (if not all) school communities have some version of a Parent/Teacher Association (PTA). In fact, I can remember doing fundraising for my elementary school in Troy, NY...so that is not new either.

It would just be nice to see more reports about the willingess of people to spend their own money to help our kids get a better education. Too often we just see articles about people who oppose tax increases that will "benefit schools". Funny thing is, most of the time they are talking about the same exact people!

When Government cries wolf...

It has become a common belief that government at all levels is filled with patronage and wasteful spending. I can tell you that is not universally true. It is probably the least true at the local level.

However, in Massachussetts, the local level is the only one that voters can actually have a direct input. Many communities have either a representative or open town meeting form of government. This allows residents to vote on nearly every decision (especially fiscal decisions) made for their town. While this is the most democratic format for decisions to be made at the local level, it is also the one place that voters can take out thier anger at the waste and patronage they see in the news.

Massachusetts also has a law called Proposition 2 1/2. This law requires that no city/town property tax revenue can be increased by an aggregate value of 2 1/2% in any given year without a ballot question being approved at the voting booth. In theory, this is a great law. It requires local governments to contain expense growth within 2 1/2% or justify a higher amount to the voters (referred to as an "override vote").

Our state government doesn't have that restriction. In fact, just last August the sales tax was increased from 5% to 6.25% without a ballot question. The sales tax was also expanded to cover items that had previously been excluded...no ballot question there either. No, the Governor and Democratic majority in the legislature told us that they had turned every stone and pinched every penny...there was no reform left to do. There was no choice but to raise taxes.

And now, we see just another example of a rock they missed.

One of the secondary consequences of news reports of wasteful governement is that people tend to dismiss any request for increased funds out of hand. This immediate dismissal is felt most at the local level when instances arise that do require an override question to be placed on the ballot. Its unfortunate because many of the people who always vote "no" on overrides are the same people who, like I, favor smaller/local governement over bigger government.

I would much rather pay more taxes to town hall knowing I can influence how its spent instead of sending more money to the state and federal government so they can create 35 departments that serve the same function. Funny how the Senate President is just realizing that...

Senate president: Consolidate economic agencies to save money

Another pay cut for municipal workers...

Once again, the people who provide the most basic services in our communities are going to be forced to take a pay cut. No, they're salary isn't being cut. Instead, they are going to have a deductible added to their Health Insurance Plan. If not a deductible, than a higher premium to be deducted from their paycheck. These are the options being discussed by the GIC (Group Insurance Commission) to compensate for being $50 million short based upon the actual claims processed this year.

Sharing the costs of increased premiums or adding a deductible to the employee's portion of the costs is not out of the norm for most companies these days. In fact, my own company entertained that idea just two weeks ago as we discussed plan changes for next year. The problem I have with this proposal is that it is going to be effective in February...mid-year!

One option that is being discussed by the GIC is to add a $750 deductible for single members, and $2,250 for family plans. Given the timing, it could basically eliminate municipal employees coverage for the second half of the fiscal year.

How could this happen? The GIC increased premiums by 3% for the current fiscal year...only 3%!!! While everyone enjoyed the good news (myself included), it appears that more questions should have been asked about the low increase. Or, did the state assume more communities would choose to enter the GIC plan...thus underestimating the premium revenue that would be generated. Wouldn't be the first bad estimate by those on Beacon Hill this year (see tax revenue).

Either way, once again it is the municipalities that will absorb the burden of bad estimates and planning by those on Beacon Hill.

Too little, too soon

Last night I was joined by two other members of the Millis Finance Committee in voting against raising the meals tax charged by town businesses from 6.25% to 7.0%. Our opinion was a majority 3-2.

In addition to my general concern about further burdening residents and businesses, and the competitive advantage I feel exists for towns that do not increase this tax. I made two other arguments:

My primary contention is that the amount that is to be generated for this year will not be sufficient (Too Little) to avoid having to utilize town reserve funds when local-aid is cut in the next few week. Based on the current level of reserve funds the town has put aside, the money generated by this tax increase for the current will not make a difference in the Town's ability to save a job.

I also believe that any tax increase should be considered as part of a comprehensive plan to address the impending shortfall in the Town's budget due to decreases in state-aid. Unfortunently, Millis is projected to start the FY11 budget process with a $1 million deficit. This deficit is due to the amount of federal stimulus money (and other one-time funds) that were used to balance the current budget. The federal stimulus money was required to be spent on education to save jobs. Only problem is that the state doesn't have enough funds to replace this money for next year. Without a comprehensive plan (Too Soon) we run the risk of having to ask residents for multiple tax increases, knowing the first request isn't enough.

Ultimately, town residents will decide whether they are willing to increases their taxes when Town Meeting is held on November 2, 2009. I hope they agree that its "Too little, too Soon".

Collaboration should be a first choice

Millis-Hopedale football teamwork working out well - Milford, MA - The Milford Daily News

Posted using ShareThis

Due to a number of people putting the needs and desires of high school kids above all else, two communities can take pride in one high school football team.

Millis HS could not field a team...
Hopedale didn't have a program...

Some school administrators would have given up and both schools would have lost. Instead, a relationship has been established. There were no terrotorial or financial hurdles deemed to large, and no beaurocratic red tape delayed the process.

This is how communities should be utilizing each other...especially when it comes to educating our kids. In order for it to work, though, we need adminstrators and policy makers exploring all options and putting the kids first!

State will pass most of the buck to Cities/Towns

State budget gap could grow from bad to worse - Milford, MA - The Milford Daily News

Posted using ShareThis

The more open about it they are the more of a guarantee it is...

Elected officials always down-play bad news.

• If they say "its not an option right now"...that means its possible.
• If they say "its possible"...its probable.
• If they say "its likely"...its definite!

State Rep. John Fernandes, D-Milford, said current-year budget cuts are inevitable, and warns communities to take care on discretionary spending.

"Local officials need to be cautious in budgeting, and how they handle their financing, because there is so little funding," said Fernandes.

State officials are admitting there is no more rainy day funs or federal stimulus money. They are saying that local aid cuts are likely, so they're definite. Oh, the state says they'll make cuts too.

I'm sure it will be the same across the board, non-targeted, degree of cuts that will only ensure higher inefficiencies (see RMV wait times). What needs to be done are specific reductions that improve the efficiency in state government. There also needs to be a review of the purpose and necessity for all state agencies. Those that are no longer needed or are unsuccessful should be eliminated.

We don't need all state employees to share equally, we need the state beuracracy to be steam-lined.

Until this happens, local governments should not be left holding the bag.

Municipalities will have to make tough choices

Scaling The Hill: September Revenues in Free-Fall

It appears the state of Massachusetts is once again in the early stages of a budget crisis. And the cities and towns of the Commonwealth will be left holding the bag.

A year ago at this time, tax revenues (it was capital gains taxes last year) were missing estimates and the politicians on Beacon Hill began searching for any extra money.

Well, they found some. Most of it came from our newly elected President, and the rest came from rainy day funds that were not going to be replaced. That was last year...

Here we are, a quarter of the way through FY10, and revenues are missing expectations again. This year its the JUST INCREASED sales tax that is falling short. Ok, so let's just go back to the well...only problem is that the wells are dry! The "rainy day" funds were virtually depleted in order to balance the current budget and there doesn't appear to be another "Stimulus Package" coming from Governor Patrick's good pal in D.C.

What does this mean? If the sales tax increase isn't generating the necessary funds for THIS YEAR, how is it also going to make up for the Stimulus Funds AND Rainy Day funds that will need to be covered in FY11.

Answer: Tax increases or Shifting the burden to cities and towns

Given that we are in an election year, I would expect it to be the latter of the two. Meaning, the state will shift an even larger portion of the expense burden to the 351 municipal governments in Massachussetts. The burden will be shifted most obviously through cuts to local aid. However, it will also be shifted through state-mandated increases to certain categories of expenses.

Given the current revenue trends at the state level, I believe that all mandated expense formulas (such as the "foundation level" for education) should be reduced to the FY09 levels. This will ensure that the state can maintain its proportional obligation to cities and towns. Until the state can keep up with its responsibility to the municipalities, there should be no expense increases mandated from Beacon Hill.

In lieu of this adjustment to mandated expense levels, municipalities will be forced to either cut positions beyond safe levels. That is unless, residents vote to increase their property taxes in excess of the Prop 2 1/2 limit (yes...OVERRIDES!).

Local schools districts should be left alone

This article inadvertantly speaks to one of the major issues in the Massachusetts education system. Local officials (and residents) have seen their ability to make decisions decrease. The state government should not be mandating how a school should be run. That is the responsibility of the local elected officials and the residents of the community who elect them.

The other major hurdle that forces our local officials into "no-win" situations is the influence of the Massachussets Teachers Association (MTA) on the collective bargaining process. Any school committee member will tell you that it is not the local union representatives that are driving the process, it is the MTA. The involvement of the MTA in the negotiation process of all teacher contracts amounts to a monopoly.

A template contract is used that ensures virtually the same high percentage (6-7% annual) increases for teachers in every district. While the pieces (cost of living, step, lane, longevity) may vary, the aggregate amounts don't vary by much. This forces all school committees to comply, regardless of the economic sustainability, in fear of being uncompetitive to their neighboring districts.

This also takes the decision out of the local teachers' hands. It is the teachers "on the ground" that best understand the realities in a community. It is their co-workers that face being put out of work, and it is their workload that is to be altered. Why are they not the ones with primary influence at the negotiating table?

30 failing schools may face takeover - The Boston Globe

Posted using ShareThis

Why?

I have decided to create this blog to capture the thoughts I have regarding current issues facing our local communities.