At March 21 Longmeadow Select Board meeting, Michael Clark, clerk of the Longmeadow Finance Committee read an official statement during the public comments period regarding support of the formation of a Bonding and Investment Advisory committee. At the end of the written statement, Mr. Clark offered his own "personal" remarks that were different from the official FC vote including a re-thinking and reversal of his original committee vote. It was clear to me and probably to most viewers that these were his personal comments. Below is a short clip (courtesy of LCTV) with Mr. Clark's remarks.
At the Finance Committee public meeting two days later, Peter Greenberg, the FC chair read a strongly worded message that was highly critical of Mr. Clark's personal remarks and threatened that similar future actions by any committee member would result in member expulsion. Because this FC meeting was a public forum on the upcoming FY2012 budget, was being taped for broadcast on LCTV and attended by a large number of town employees and residents, the remarks were not simply a intra-committee discussion. It was a very public reprimand.
Richard Liasse, the appointed FC to SB liaison was present at this March 21 SB meeting. Why wasn't he asked to read the FC statement given that this is his assigned responsibility? Also, it is interesting to note Mr. Liasse's biweekly SB comments as the FC representative usually contain both official and his personal remarks. Below is a video clip (courtesy of LCTV) of Mr. Greenberg's remarks.
As readers of my Buzz posts know, I was highly critical of Mr. Clark's lack of experience when he was running for Select Board last June but I have been impressed with his participation in town government related business over the past 9 months by his membership on the Finance Committee. His recent decision to run for School Committee to gain experience on school related business is also very noteworthy. While I do not agree with many of his publicly expressed views, I do admire his willingness to commit his time and energy to town and now school related business.
What happened at the March 23 Finance Committee meeting was a "cheap shot" aimed at making sure that committee members "toe the line". I'm sure that Mr. Clark is feeling similar to how I felt last year when I was fired as the "town webmaster" for expressing my "personal" opinion about the tactics of the School Building Committee. (N.B. My commentary was here on the Buzz blog and was in no way connected to my responsibilities as town webmaster.) I suspect that Mr. Greenberg is working from the same playbook as our current SB chairman.
We need both public officials and town residents to be able to voice their opinions in public without fear of reprisal of any kind.
Michael Clark deserves an official public apology from Peter Greenberg.
Showing posts with label finance committee. Show all posts
Showing posts with label finance committee. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
The Facts, Ma'am.
In case you were wondering about the flurry of papers that fell out of your Reminder this week, one of them is from the Citizens for a Responsible Government. This organization has been opposed to much progress in the town's history, and I was pleased to see that Mark Barowsky, Chair of the Longmeadow Finance Committee, responded to what he called the "published propoganda" via a note to the School Building Committee (SBC) with many points of clarification and correction. Of course, the SBC knows the truth, so he is preaching to the choir. I post much of his letter here as a way of reaching out to a wider audience of interested readers. All emphasis via bold/italics is mine.
"A flyer inserted in this week's reminder by the CITIZENS FOR A RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT made erroneous statements as to the position and [recommendation] of the Finance Committee presented at the Special Town meeting on May 11th.
"The Finance Committee's recommendation was that the project is 'financially feasible' not 'feasible'"
"The Finance Committee at no time stated that taxes will double by the year 2020 if only this project was approved"
"The Finance Committee's calculation for the rise in taxes through 2020 NEVER included a negotiated contractual escalation of 4.5% for labor costs"
What about those other projects? Like other town buildings? Like the DPW facilities? Or Williams or Glenbrook? Or how about a sky bridge to connect the Community House and Town Hall? Or a monorail, for that matter? ;-)
In all seriousness, lots of things can be considered, but few are within the realm of possibility. What does Mr. Barowsky say about them?
"The Finance Committee has noted that while there have been many studies performed that there has been no prioritization for any of the projects and while there is a recognized need, it has yet been determined if any of these projects need to be on an immediate basis. The Finance Committee has recommended that the boards prioritize and put a plan in place as to which and when each project should be initiated."
"Unless the statement was made behind closed doors, the comment that 'several of the Finance Committee members repeatedly insisted that property owners could always choose not to pay the taxes' was never made in our meetings. Such an aberration can only be deemed a deception."
"This Citizens for a Responsible Government seem to use such information as a drunken man uses lamp posts - for support rather than for illumination."
I don't know about that, but I do know that the focus on any town vote should be based on the facts, on the legitimate merits of a case. The facts of the LHS are clear--clearly disturbing. The need for action has been established. The proposed plan meets those needs and addresses the concerns about maintenance and cost effectiveness. The proposal we will vote on JUNE 8th at the Community House from 8am to 8pm is a financially feasible proposal. The whole town will benefit if the vote is a gracious YES, thank you.
Rebecca M. Townsend
for more information, see Lancer Pride
This just in from Peter Greenberg, also a member of the Finance Committee:
As a member of the Finance Committee, whose responsibility it is to conduct long range fiscal planning, we have reviewed a number of 10 year scenarios. When you scenario plan, you assume both good and bad. That leads to “what ifs”, uncertainty and outright guesses. I admit that I don’t have the powers to foresee the next 10 years and these days, it’s hard to predict what may happen 6 months from now. But what I can tell you today, at this moment, is that our Town has very little long term debt and can afford the LHS project before you, our residents on June 8.
I don’t have to remind you that our town’s financial Achilles heel is that our tax base is limited by its residential nature and the restrictions of Proposition 2 1/2. There simply is very little extra revenue to fund these major capitol projects while trying to maintain the level of day to day services that we now enjoy. We have to find, and if deemed proper, embrace any opportunity that allows us to one by one, rebuild our worn out infrastructure.
One of these opportunities is upon us. For nearly thirteen years, we have been trying to get to this point today, where a viable option finally exists to fix our High School. Over the last 22 months, the Longmeadow School Building Committee (SBC) of which I am also a member, has worked to position our project within the guidelines of the MSBA, knowing full well that we had one shot to take advantage of the current reimbursement program. The alternative: Lose the approved 34 million dollar grant and literally start over competing with 100’s of other school districts already vying for the same dollars. Again, looking at this moment in time, losing that money would be in my opinion, financially irresponsible.
Thousands of hours have gone into the design of the high school submitted to and approved by the MSBA for funding. It keeps us competitive with other bedroom communities in providing a high school facility that can legitimately reach a 50-year life cycle. It will allow our teachers today and tomorrow to fully take advantage of 21st century learning initiatives and it provides key academic and community spaces that our current footprint under any renovation plan would be difficult to match.
Surrounding communities have recently supported investing in new high school projects while facing similar economic constraints as Longmeadow. I hope that as a community, we seek to understand every dimension of this decision, encompassing both current residents and future generations. Though it is difficult to separate today’s seemingly uphill battle from the hope and promise of a better tomorrow, I believe the residents of Longmeadow will ultimately make the right decision.
In the 50’s my grandparents made that decision by voting for the construction of our current high school facility. I honor their memory and their foresight to keep excellence in the delivery of Longmeadow’s public education, by suggesting that we do the right thing for our children and grandchildren, and vote yes for this project.
Thank you.
Peter Greenberg
"A flyer inserted in this week's reminder by the CITIZENS FOR A RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT made erroneous statements as to the position and [recommendation] of the Finance Committee presented at the Special Town meeting on May 11th.
"The Finance Committee's recommendation was that the project is 'financially feasible' not 'feasible'"
"The Finance Committee at no time stated that taxes will double by the year 2020 if only this project was approved"
"The Finance Committee's calculation for the rise in taxes through 2020 NEVER included a negotiated contractual escalation of 4.5% for labor costs"
What about those other projects? Like other town buildings? Like the DPW facilities? Or Williams or Glenbrook? Or how about a sky bridge to connect the Community House and Town Hall? Or a monorail, for that matter? ;-)
In all seriousness, lots of things can be considered, but few are within the realm of possibility. What does Mr. Barowsky say about them?
"The Finance Committee has noted that while there have been many studies performed that there has been no prioritization for any of the projects and while there is a recognized need, it has yet been determined if any of these projects need to be on an immediate basis. The Finance Committee has recommended that the boards prioritize and put a plan in place as to which and when each project should be initiated."
"Unless the statement was made behind closed doors, the comment that 'several of the Finance Committee members repeatedly insisted that property owners could always choose not to pay the taxes' was never made in our meetings. Such an aberration can only be deemed a deception."
"This Citizens for a Responsible Government seem to use such information as a drunken man uses lamp posts - for support rather than for illumination."
I don't know about that, but I do know that the focus on any town vote should be based on the facts, on the legitimate merits of a case. The facts of the LHS are clear--clearly disturbing. The need for action has been established. The proposed plan meets those needs and addresses the concerns about maintenance and cost effectiveness. The proposal we will vote on JUNE 8th at the Community House from 8am to 8pm is a financially feasible proposal. The whole town will benefit if the vote is a gracious YES, thank you.
Rebecca M. Townsend
for more information, see Lancer Pride
This just in from Peter Greenberg, also a member of the Finance Committee:
As a member of the Finance Committee, whose responsibility it is to conduct long range fiscal planning, we have reviewed a number of 10 year scenarios. When you scenario plan, you assume both good and bad. That leads to “what ifs”, uncertainty and outright guesses. I admit that I don’t have the powers to foresee the next 10 years and these days, it’s hard to predict what may happen 6 months from now. But what I can tell you today, at this moment, is that our Town has very little long term debt and can afford the LHS project before you, our residents on June 8.
I don’t have to remind you that our town’s financial Achilles heel is that our tax base is limited by its residential nature and the restrictions of Proposition 2 1/2. There simply is very little extra revenue to fund these major capitol projects while trying to maintain the level of day to day services that we now enjoy. We have to find, and if deemed proper, embrace any opportunity that allows us to one by one, rebuild our worn out infrastructure.
One of these opportunities is upon us. For nearly thirteen years, we have been trying to get to this point today, where a viable option finally exists to fix our High School. Over the last 22 months, the Longmeadow School Building Committee (SBC) of which I am also a member, has worked to position our project within the guidelines of the MSBA, knowing full well that we had one shot to take advantage of the current reimbursement program. The alternative: Lose the approved 34 million dollar grant and literally start over competing with 100’s of other school districts already vying for the same dollars. Again, looking at this moment in time, losing that money would be in my opinion, financially irresponsible.
Thousands of hours have gone into the design of the high school submitted to and approved by the MSBA for funding. It keeps us competitive with other bedroom communities in providing a high school facility that can legitimately reach a 50-year life cycle. It will allow our teachers today and tomorrow to fully take advantage of 21st century learning initiatives and it provides key academic and community spaces that our current footprint under any renovation plan would be difficult to match.
Surrounding communities have recently supported investing in new high school projects while facing similar economic constraints as Longmeadow. I hope that as a community, we seek to understand every dimension of this decision, encompassing both current residents and future generations. Though it is difficult to separate today’s seemingly uphill battle from the hope and promise of a better tomorrow, I believe the residents of Longmeadow will ultimately make the right decision.
In the 50’s my grandparents made that decision by voting for the construction of our current high school facility. I honor their memory and their foresight to keep excellence in the delivery of Longmeadow’s public education, by suggesting that we do the right thing for our children and grandchildren, and vote yes for this project.
Thank you.
Peter Greenberg
Monday, May 24, 2010
The Issue
What is before Longmeadow voters?
We have 1 issue to decide tomorrow night: whether to accept Commonwealth money earmarked for Longmeadow's High School, or to reject that offer.
Yes or no.
If we vote no, there is not another plan waiting in the wings. We would need to start from square one, and the money the Commonwealth held for us will go back into their general pool for building projects. The LHS would not get repaired; nothing constructive would happen as a result of a no vote.
If we choose YES, however, we benefit in many ways. One way is through the favorable economic climate for such large scale projects. Our interest rate would be at an historic low, and construction bids would likely come in lower than at another time. Evidence from other districts bears this out. Another way is that the timeframe for building would be expedited. Two years--two years without kids in trailers.
The Finance Committee's opinions on this project matter to some degree, since they are the long range planning financial group for Town Meeting. As of this writing, they have not presented Longmeadow with a long range plan, however. Any informal discussion that they may have had regarding other projects is uninformed by a variety of factors: What is the cost for each item? Will we receive grants or other aid from the state or federal government for such projects? There are too many unknowns for the FC to make any valid claim about the future. It is a shame that our FC would waste time discussing that which they have no control over.
Aristotle even classifies deliberation as that which includes practical matters within people’s power (In The Rhetoric, 1359a); there are too many unknowns for them to deliberate about such possible future items. They are inconsequential to the issue before us.
We know the consequences of inaction-voting no. We know the benefits of acting positively with a YES vote. Those concerns, plus our values and interests, are legitimate to consider. I hope Town Meeting decides to keep its eyes on the prize.
Rebecca M. Townsend
We have 1 issue to decide tomorrow night: whether to accept Commonwealth money earmarked for Longmeadow's High School, or to reject that offer.
Yes or no.
If we vote no, there is not another plan waiting in the wings. We would need to start from square one, and the money the Commonwealth held for us will go back into their general pool for building projects. The LHS would not get repaired; nothing constructive would happen as a result of a no vote.
If we choose YES, however, we benefit in many ways. One way is through the favorable economic climate for such large scale projects. Our interest rate would be at an historic low, and construction bids would likely come in lower than at another time. Evidence from other districts bears this out. Another way is that the timeframe for building would be expedited. Two years--two years without kids in trailers.
The Finance Committee's opinions on this project matter to some degree, since they are the long range planning financial group for Town Meeting. As of this writing, they have not presented Longmeadow with a long range plan, however. Any informal discussion that they may have had regarding other projects is uninformed by a variety of factors: What is the cost for each item? Will we receive grants or other aid from the state or federal government for such projects? There are too many unknowns for the FC to make any valid claim about the future. It is a shame that our FC would waste time discussing that which they have no control over.
Aristotle even classifies deliberation as that which includes practical matters within people’s power (In The Rhetoric, 1359a); there are too many unknowns for them to deliberate about such possible future items. They are inconsequential to the issue before us.
We know the consequences of inaction-voting no. We know the benefits of acting positively with a YES vote. Those concerns, plus our values and interests, are legitimate to consider. I hope Town Meeting decides to keep its eyes on the prize.
Rebecca M. Townsend
Sunday, May 23, 2010
10 Year Property Tax Projections
Below is Article #1 for the Special Town Meeting warrant that will be discussed and voted on Tuesday, May 25 at Longmeadow HS. The Longmeadow Finance Committee (LFC) will provide a recommendation to the Town Meeting floor regarding the impact of the pending High School Building project on future property taxes.
ARTICLE 1
To see if the Town will vote to appropriate, borrow or transfer from available funds, a sum of money to be expended under the direction of the School Building Committee for Longmeadow High School, located at 95 Grassy Gutter Road, between Bliss Road and Williams Street in Longmeadow, Massachusetts, which school facility shall have an anticipated useful life as an educational facility for the instruction of school children of at least 50 years, and for which the Town may be eligible for a school construction grant from the Massachusetts School Building Authority (“MSBA”). The MSBA’s grant program is a non-entitlement, discretionary program based on need, as determined by the MSBA, and any project costs the Town incurs in excess of any grant approved by and received from the MSBA shall be the sole responsibility of the Town. Any grant that the Town of Longmeadow may receive from the MSBA for the Project shall not exceed the lesser of (1) fifty one point eight four percent (51.84%) of eligible, approved project costs, as determined by the MSBA, or (2) the total maximum grant amount determined by the MSBA.
In order to better understand the impact of the new high school project on property taxes I attended the LFC meeting on May 18 during which the LFC recommendation was discussed. (Interestingly enough, I was the only town resident other than members of the LFC in attendance at this meeting.)
The LFC reviewed a forecast prepared by Paul Pasterczyk, Longmeadow Finance Director showing the impact of the High School Building Project on Longmeadow property taxes for the next ten years (--> 2020). As part of this analysis, the impact of a series of 3- $1 million overrides (pretty conservative at an average of $3ooK/year) + construction of a new $9 million DPW facility in 2017 (much lower capital investment than the $150 million estimate for water/sewer and major building projects provided by the A Better Longmeadow/ Vote NO group) were included.
Three scenarios as described below were discussed:
Scenario #1
High School Project not approved + $1 million operational overrides in FY2012, FY2015 and FY2018.
Scenario #2
High School Project approved + $1 million operational overrides in FY2012, FY2015 and FY2018.
Scenario #3
High School Project approved + $1 million operational overrides in FY2012, FY2015 and FY2018 + construction of $9 million DPW facility in 2017.
Below are the results….
ARTICLE 1
To see if the Town will vote to appropriate, borrow or transfer from available funds, a sum of money to be expended under the direction of the School Building Committee for Longmeadow High School, located at 95 Grassy Gutter Road, between Bliss Road and Williams Street in Longmeadow, Massachusetts, which school facility shall have an anticipated useful life as an educational facility for the instruction of school children of at least 50 years, and for which the Town may be eligible for a school construction grant from the Massachusetts School Building Authority (“MSBA”). The MSBA’s grant program is a non-entitlement, discretionary program based on need, as determined by the MSBA, and any project costs the Town incurs in excess of any grant approved by and received from the MSBA shall be the sole responsibility of the Town. Any grant that the Town of Longmeadow may receive from the MSBA for the Project shall not exceed the lesser of (1) fifty one point eight four percent (51.84%) of eligible, approved project costs, as determined by the MSBA, or (2) the total maximum grant amount determined by the MSBA.
In order to better understand the impact of the new high school project on property taxes I attended the LFC meeting on May 18 during which the LFC recommendation was discussed. (Interestingly enough, I was the only town resident other than members of the LFC in attendance at this meeting.)
The LFC reviewed a forecast prepared by Paul Pasterczyk, Longmeadow Finance Director showing the impact of the High School Building Project on Longmeadow property taxes for the next ten years (--> 2020). As part of this analysis, the impact of a series of 3- $1 million overrides (pretty conservative at an average of $3ooK/year) + construction of a new $9 million DPW facility in 2017 (much lower capital investment than the $150 million estimate for water/sewer and major building projects provided by the A Better Longmeadow/ Vote NO group) were included.
Three scenarios as described below were discussed:
Scenario #1
High School Project not approved + $1 million operational overrides in FY2012, FY2015 and FY2018.
Scenario #2
High School Project approved + $1 million operational overrides in FY2012, FY2015 and FY2018.
Scenario #3
High School Project approved + $1 million operational overrides in FY2012, FY2015 and FY2018 + construction of $9 million DPW facility in 2017.
Below are the results….
[click to enlarge chart]
One more case: do nothing.... a 2.5% annual increase (compounded) for 10 years results in a 28% increase in property taxes.
I was surprised by the relatively small difference in financial results for the three different 10 year projections. However, the analysis did show an increase in property taxes ranging from 39 - 48% for the average homeowner over the next ten years.
Obviously, there are many additional factors (state aid, health care costs, employee salaries, etc.) that could affect future property taxes, operational overrides and reductions in town services. This latest analysis is relatively conservative with only one additional $9 million capital project and 3- $1 million operational overrides over 10 years.
This type of financial analysis can be extremely useful in making long term financial decisions. I hope that the LFC continues to probe our financial future… it would be a welcome change from the year to year planning that Longmeadow always seems to be using.
Based upon what I heard at Tuesday’s meeting, the LFC will “recommend” that approval of the new high school project is “feasible”. They will likely share some of the 10 year property tax projections that I have included with this posting.
We need to do something with Longmeadow High School…. The key question is how much can we afford!
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Tough Times Ahead for Longmeadow- Part II
Monday, November 30 is the next Longmeadow Tri-Board (Select Board, School Committee and Finance Committee) meeting during which serious dialog about the FY11 budget process will begin. Select Board chair Bobby Barkett stated at a recent SB meeting that this next Tri-Board meeting was likely to be “very contentious” because of the difficult financial issues facing the town and the likely need to make significant cuts in both town and school services in order to balance the FY11 budget. The difficulties in setting priorities for cutting town and school services presents some major challenges for our elected leaders.In my previous post summarizing the Tri-Board’s first meeting on October 19, I highlighted some of the major financial issues facing the town of Longmeadow including the following….
- There are continuing significant reductions in state aid for the current FY10.
- The Longmeadow Teachers, Firefighters, Police and other town employee unions have not as yet settled contract negotiations for FY10 and beyond. Each 1% annual increase in COLA would be an additional $300,000 in annual budget costs. The current FY10 budget does not include any COLA provisions.
- Longmeadow faces a projected $2.1 million budget deficit in FY11 without consideration of the financial impact of current union contract negotiations.
As labor contract negotiations continue without agreement, significant budget uncertainties are created which makes the upcoming budget process even that much more difficult. Let me explain further….
- Assume that both unions agree to a 1% COLA adjustment for the current year and for each of the next two years.
- This COLA would add an additional $900,000 in additional operational costs to the FY10 (+$300,000) and FY11 (+$600,000) budgets.
- The total budget deficit (FY10 [adjusted] + FY11) that must be dealt with by the Tri-Board would balloon to $3,000,000.
Recent efforts led by Town Manager Robin Crosbie and Select Board member Mark Gold to identify new revenue sources ($>10K) which might help balance the FY11 and beyond budgets have not been highly successful and do not seem likely to significantly improve the FY11 revenue situation.
To make the financial crisis facing the Town even more difficult.... it is likely that taxpayers will be asked to vote at the Annual Town Meeting next April (and Town Elections in June) in favor of a Proposition 2½ “debt exclusion” override to fund the new High School project. The Massachusetts School Building Authority has recently approved Longmeadow’s new High School project –estimated at ~ $80+ million- and allowed it to move forward to the Schematic Design phase. It has been estimated by the Longmeadow School Building Committee that approval and passage of this project by town voters will add ~ $1 to the current mil rate which translates to ~ $300/year for a house assessed at $300,000 (~6% increase in annual taxes).
The Town can certainly decide to allocate a portion of the monies in the OSF to help balance the upcoming FY11 budget but not without other implications. If the Town uses a significant portion of the OSF to avoid major services reductions for the upcoming FY11, then there could be a large impact on our bond rating (lower rating --> increased interest costs) when we go forward with the new high school project unless the Town shows how it plans to meet growing budget shortfall in future years (FY2012 --> FY2015).
If one looks at Longmeadow’s annual budget for both school and town related services, you will see that the major component is employee salaries. Any significant reduction in budget spending via reduced town/ school services means employee layoffs. A previous post on LongmeadowBuzz blog asked teachers and other unions to consider a 0% COLA for FY10 as a good faith effort to help avoid/ minimize town employee layoffs.
I would not like to see headlines in the local newspapers….
followed by:
Given today’s financial reality for many town residents, it will be difficult for Longmeadow voters pass two large Proposition 2½ overrides come next spring. The last successful override in the Fall 2007 passed by only a small majority (6 votes with a 41% voter turnout). We need a new high school but we also need to maintain the quality of life and town related services that make Longmeadow a great place to live.
Let’s hope that both our town leaders can successfully navigate these turbulent financial waters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)