Tag Sale Addicts

This morning's Springfield Republican insert contained an interesting article by Maureen Sullivan about local tag sales. For those of you who do not normally engage in this Friday/ Saturday (and sometimes Sunday) hunt for treasure, you might be surprised at the number of people that do it.

Tag sales are a seasonal event starting in early May when the weather turns warmer and ending in late October when leaf raking and colder weather return.

For the past four years, I have been posting FREE tag sale listings on the LongmeadowBiz website and introduced a feature called Tag Sale Map Locator to make the journey easier. It is a map of Longmeadow with all of the upcoming tag sales marked and day coded (Fri/Sat/Sun).

This Saturday (tomorrow) has an abundance of tag sales (12 different ones) in Longmeadow. Many diehard "tagsalers" create their own map so I usually take some time handing out the free computer generated tag sale maps in an effort to teach these "diehard" addicts. Don't count on me being there to give you one. Take the time now to print your own copy!

Don't forget.... we usually have the most complete list of tag sales.

Check the new listings every week (usually posted by Thursday night) and if you are planning to have your own tag sale, submit your free listing (and save the cost of advertising in The Reminder or Springfield Newspaper!).

What's the best mix for Longmeadow?

In my opinion, our present situation, in which we behave as individualistic citizens within a form of government designed for communal notions of citizenship, is contributing to ugly local politics and public cynicism. If consistency between form and function is too unrealistic, maybe efforts to transform our town's politics from our present inconsistency to another less destructive one would be more realistic.

Maybe we'd be better off with a form of government designed to provide "public services" in an efficient and professional manner that is consistent with our dominant behavioral assumptions (i.e. that taxpayers should get a fair deal), and a renewed townwide commitment to encouraging citizens to see the town as a family and to be active family members who put the interests of the town family on at least the same plane as the interests of their nuclear family.

I think behaving like communitarians (each citizen considers himself a legitimate policy maker whether or not elected to office) in an individualistic system (professionalized municipal government) may be more productive than the reverse, which is our present condition.

One of the reasons my family left Springfield to come to Longmeadow was that the imposition of the Finance Control Board exacerbated and further legitimized an individualistic-consumer mentality among citizens, reducing community membership to a financial arrangement in which residents come and stay because the city provides a "good deal," and reducing political activism to competitive special interest advocacy. The destructive flip side of this approach is that residents, like consumers, have less incentive to maintain civic (read brand) loyalty when times get tough. Rather, the "rational thing to do" is find a better deal elsewhere. Those who stay, on the other hand, are drawn into a political competition for resources, rather than a deliberative democratic debate about the public interest.

The Duquettes came to Longmeadow because of the schools and because of the opportunity to live in, and even help shape, a community held together by a shared identity and spirit. The opportunity remains, but it requires a renewed commitment by our community's leaders to be more fully realized.

Priorities reveal competing notions of citizenship & community

Our dedicated and talented webmaster, Jim Moran, wrote a post in this space prior to our local election in which he argued for a "balanced" approach to leadership and the distribution of town resources, as well as to the consideration of our town's priorities. The argument was reasonable and fair minded, and it also reveals the dominant notion of Democratic citizenship and community in Longmeadow today.

Despite our founding as a classical democratic community where citizen participation in politics was embedded in our community's institutions and culture, we are now a thoroughly liberal individualistic "community" that expects elected officials to govern in the interests of voters. The classical notion of citizen governance alive at Longmeadow's birth lives on in the laments of the few active members of our community, and more importantly, in our form of government - the town meeting. Unfortunately, the present incompatibility between our operational theory of citizenship and our form of government has caused considerable harm our politics. Frustrated by (and unaware of) the conflict between our behavioral and theoretical assumptions about community and citizenship, many townspeople become angry and bitter. The result is more acrimony in our politics and more townspeople opting out of politics to avoid the bickering. This leaves us often with the worst of both worlds; elite participants operating in a system designed for mass participation. One need only look at the Masslive Longmeadow forum to see how this arrangement deranges the perceptions of some residents.

Longmeadow's politics has too often been reduced to a competition for scarce resources; a competition that pits different constituencies in town against each other. The most enduring rift seems to be between those for whom our schools are most important, central to our town's character and identity, and those for whom our schools are important, but no more so than other town "services." Our language clearly illustrates both this division and the reigning individualistic assumption that this dispute requires "balance" and a "fair distribution" of resources between "competing priorities/interests." We talk about the "town-side and the schools-side. We seem to agree that notions of our town's priorities should be clearly articulated by leaders and should be funded according to their order of priority. These linguistic themes are treated as common sense and we are thus thoroughly entrenched in a liberal individualist political culture, without any consciousness of how this liberal approach clashes with our participatory governing institutions and communitarian aspirations.

If the people of Longmeadow wish to live in a liberal-individualistic political community that sees politics as a competition for resources between disparate visions of the public interest ("ambition v. ambition") it can and should do so, but it cannot continue to be operationally Madisonian and institutionally and rhetorically Tocquevillian. Either we must change our institutions and expectations to fit our present liberal-individualistic behavior, or we must seek to re-invigorate the more communitarian notions of democratic citizenship and community upon which our town was founded and our form of government was designed.

Should we define the public interest of our town the way every place else seems to in America, as the result of compromise between competing and distinct interests? Or, should we try to re-build the notion of citizenship and community that made Longmeadow distinct from other places; a notion of community in which members equate their self interest with that of the community, much like family members. An effort to revive "self interest rightly understood" would be my personal preference because, among other things, it would help mitigate the disconnect between the standards by which we judge politics in our town and the institutions and procedures through which we conduct it.

Election Day is Tuesday, June 9

This will be a very important town election for Longmeadow.

The voters of Longmeadow will be electing the leadership for the executive branch of our town government. They will be choosing 3 of the 5 members of the Select Board. In addition, there will be the election of a new member of the Longmeadow School Committee.

If you have been reading the "Buzz", you know that the financial crisis that has affected the rest of the world has had a direct impact on Longmeadow. The town's revenue sources have decreased significantly while at the same time the cost of operating our schools and delivering town services have increased. In addition, the town infrastructure including our schools, DPW facility and equipment, water/sewer systems, etc. are in critical need of repair or replacement. There will be important choices to be made and we will be electing three people who will be key players in the decision making.

Below are my choices for election day. You may not agree with some or all of them.... all I ask is for you to be an informed voter and get out to vote next Tuesday, June 9!

Our town needs balanced leadership!

If you haven't been reading the LongmeadowBuzz blog and following the uncertainties of our town finances, please wake up before it is too late!

There are likely to be some significant shortfalls in town revenues for both the current FY2009 and FY2010. With the expiration of teacher and town employee contracts and no provision for "cost of living" adjustments in the FY2010 budget, the town will likely be dipping into the Operational Stabilization Fund or "rainy day" fund to balance the FY2010 budget.

Because of continuing fiscal problems, there will be a continuing need for elimination/ reduction of additional non-essential town-wide services. Longmeadow has done a significant amount of this in the past (curbside leaf collection, reduced curbside trash, increased High School sports user fees, etc.). There have been recent rumors of closing/relocation of the Greenwood Park/Senior Center as one of the next steps to reduce our spending.

In addition, the School Building Committee is moving on a timeline that may be putting a decision to build a new high school (price tag ~ $50-100 million) on the warrant for next year's annual town meeting.

If I had to personally prioritize town services, I would say that schools are very important but certainly don't rank at the top of the list.... I would rank public safety, fire, police, water supply, sewer and storm drainage before schools. Recent maintenance experience and surveys have shown that our town infrastructure and equipment are in desperate need of repair. You as a homeowner only need to experience a sewer backup or storm drain overflow into your basement one time before you put these services at the top of your personal list.

Election day is next Tuesday, June 9 with three of the Select Board seats being contested . There are two different Select Board elections- four candidates are running for two "three year" seats and two candidates are running for the "one year" seat (vacated by Brian Ashe).

Make sure that you vote for three candidates.

There is also a contest for one school committee seat (one year) with two candidates running. Two other incumbent candidates are running unopposed for the two "three year" seats .

There are a number of other uncontested elections. Here is a link to a complete election ballot.

The next 3-5 years are critical for Longmeadow if we are going to preserve the quality of life that many of us have come to expect. The Select Board race will elect 3 of 5 members- each of whom will play an important role in shaping our town's future. When deciding how to vote, please consider the team makeup of the SelectBoard. It appears obvious that there are polarizing elements in our town that would place schools above all else. We should elect candidates that will bring balance between schools and town services into planning for the future.

If you are going to be out of town and not able to vote on Election Day, pick up an absentee ballot at Town Hall. The deadline for filing absentee ballots is June 8 at 12 noon at the Town Clerk's office in Town Hall. For additional information about absentee ballots, please visit the Town Clerk's Voter Info webpage.

Make sure you get out to vote on election day- June 9.... As we have seen in recent close elections, your vote does count.

Congratulations

to Dan Bausch- one of Longmeadow.org's Around Our Town local photographers. One of his photos was selected for the Cries & Whispers column in today's Republican newspaper.

Dan has been taking photos of local events and happenings and sharing them online since last December.... When you have some time, check out the rest of his photos at Around Our Town on Longmeadow.org..... perhaps you will be in one of them.

In addition to Dan, there have been a couple of other town residents sharing their photos as well. If you have some photos of local interest and are interested in sharing them, simply send them to webmaster@longmeadow.org

Looking for a Choice at Town Meeting?

Longmeadow News- May 14, 2009
[click image to read entire article]

In the May 14, 2009 issue of the Longmeadow News, Mr. Alex Grant wrote in an opinion piece that the voters of Longmeadow were “missing … a choice” in the budget. Mr. Grant wrote that Longmeadow residents “have little choice but to approve the budget presented to them.”

Although Mr. Grant’s observation is correct that the town residents were given but one budget option to either approve or disapprove, I submit that the floor of the town meeting is not the place to write a $52 million budget. What is missing from Mr. Grant’s essay is the fact that the School Committee, the Select Board, and the Finance Committee jointly developed the proposed budget over a period of nearly six months – during which time there were numerous opportunities for public input. By the time of the Town Meeting, residents should expect the budget to be finalized and presented for approval by the residents of the town.

The complexity of the budget, and the requirement that it be balanced, is such that its development by 11,000 town voters, or even 150 town meeting attendees is not practical. The budget is appropriately, in my opinion, prepared by the three committees that are charged with representing the town residents. The members of these committees take into account the needs of the town as well as input from residents. They assure that legal constraints (mandated programs) are financed, and that other statutory requirements are met (such as having a balance between income and expenses).

Once the proposed budget is developed and finalized, what the Town Meeting should do is provide a forum for:

• Those developing the budget to explain what they did and how they made the choices that were made. Options that were considered and rejected could be presented, but a review of six months of budget development would are not needed. Nothing would be served by rehashing at the town meeting each controversy or compromise that took place during the preparation of the budget. The Town Manager’s presentation met these objectives.
  
• Individuals to ask questions regarding the budget process, the bases for decisions that were made, and the budget recommendations.
  
• Individuals and groups with alternate positions on budget items (income or expenditures) to communicate their position and seek support from the town voters acting as the legislative branch of our government. Alternative proposals for additional spending should include either equivalent spending reductions in other line items or a source of income to support the added line expense.

Even with the prior development of the budget, residents still have the option of rejecting the budget on the floor of the town meeting – although I would submit that such action should be accompanied by a clear directive of how the proposed budget should be revised.

Mr. Grant acknowledged that the operating budget presented at this year’s Town Meeting “looked like a reasonable product of tough times and hard choice”. However, I could not disagree more strongly to his other comment that “the 150 residents who attended should be under no illusion that they wielded any significant power at that meeting.” Those 150 people did far more than pass a budget that that had been written, debated, and rewritten over a period of six months; they acted on 33 other articles on the Warrant, several of which had not been subject to that same level of public review over the prior several months. It is most interesting to note, that indeed, many of the articles and motions that failed to gain residents’ support at the town meeting were those that had not been broadly considered prior to the meeting.

The issue that appeared to be of greatest interest to Mr. Grant (and perhaps to those who were in attendance) was the issue of postponing the vote on the budget. Although the tri-committees (School, Select Board, Finance) had met the evening before the town meeting to discuss this issue, the short notice prior to that meeting and technical difficulties at LCTV (which prevented it from being televised) essentially made this a “new” issue to most of the electorate when it was proposed on the floor of the meeting. As a new issue, the debate was lively and polarized. I would guess that opinions were voiced at the Town Meeting that had not been heard the evening before. With the State Aid budget still not in place two weeks after the town meeting, it appears that the decision reached by the town’s electorate prevented an unnecessary delay in the approval of the budget that was developed over months of effort.

Other articles that seemed perfunctory when posted (such as articles 13 for remote reading water meters, articles 16 and 18 on parking and snow removal and article 32 on outdoor water use) also failed when questions arose on the floor of the town meeting that might have been addressed or at least anticipated had these items been given the same opportunity for prior public review.

Contrast these articles that did not pass with the passage of articles that included the approval of large expenditures. No, Mr. Grant, the passage of these articles was not a “foregone conclusion”, but their passage was rather an indication that the appropriate amount of planning and review had been completed prior to the evening of the meeting. In addition to the budget, the capital expenditures and the Community Preservation expenditures had been the subject of multiple publically held committee hearings over many months. Input from individuals and groups potentially affected by these warrant articles had been considered prior to the votes at the town meeting

Yes, Mr. Grant, only 150 people participated in this year’s town meeting, but whether in the vote on postponement of the budget or any of the 34 scheduled Warrant Articles, these people had significant power – and hopefully next year will see ten times as many voters at the Longmeadow Town Meeting to show the power of the people.

Mark P. Gold

Mark Gold is the chairman of the Capital Planning Committee and is a candidate for the one year seat on the Select Board. See his website at GoldforSelectBoard.com for additional information.

It’s all about the money!

The following are excerpts from an April 30 Longmeadow School Committee PR.

“The Longmeadow School Committee and the Longmeadow Teachers Union have been engaged in “Interest Based Bargaining” since January. As of April 29, a settlement had not been reached and both negotiating teams have agreed to jointly file for mediation with the Division of Labor Relations for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The School Committee is hopeful that with the assistance of a state mediator, the parties will reach resolution on a successor agreement before the August 31 expiration of the current agreement.”

“The School Committee recognizes that the current financial climate makes collective bargaining extremely difficult for both management and the union. The School Department budget, recently approved at Town Meeting, included more than $200,000 in step increases imbedded in the current collective bargaining agreement for the teachers, but did not include additional funds for a cost of living adjustment (COLA). The Committee recognizes that there is a potential $600,000 deficit for the FY2010 budget and that such a deficit will place an even greater strain on the District’s limited resources. In the next two weeks, the School Committee will be taking the difficult action of reducing its workforce for the 2009/2010 school year.”

In the May 14 issue of the Springfield Republican, there was an article about the upcoming SC/ teacher’s union mediation process. Marcia Haar, president of the Longmeadow Education Association, was quoted “These difficult economic times require a level of creativity in negotiations that a mediator should be able to facilitate.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For anyone who has been reading my posts on LongmeadowBuzz, you will know that I believe we as a town need to be realistic as to what we can afford whether it comes to teacher (and other town employee) salaries, building a new high school or repairing our decaying town infrastructure (water/ sewer lines, DPW facility, etc.).

Longmeadow is certainly not isolated from the difficult economic times that the world is now experiencing. The town is receiving significantly less state aid than in previous years and our other revenue sources (auto excise taxes, interest on town deposits, etc.) are down sharply. At the same time some of our expenses, particularly those related to Special Education are escalating at a fast pace.

In the world around us, we are seeing skyrocketing unemployment/ job losses, business bankruptcies, crashing stock markets and collapse of some of our best know financial institutions. For even the most savvy people, financial survival is becoming more and more difficult with every passing day. No one knows for sure when this crisis will be over.

Now back to the subject at hand….Looking from the outside it would appear that one of the key obstacles in these SC/teacher union negotiations is likely related to cost of living adjustments (COLA) and other salary/ benefit considerations that need be factored into the new three year teachers contract.

In other words…. “it’s all about the money!”

From what I understand about the Longmeadow teacher’s contract there are at least three components that make up total teacher compensation. These components include step increases, education credit raises and a COLA.

According to my source the step salary schedule for the current contract ending August 31 provides for an average of ~2.8% for every year up to 15th year.

[It is interesting to note in the SC press release that $200,000 for step increases has been “allocated” in the FY2010 budget. However, at the April 27 Select Board meeting the Finance Committee chairman stated that the current teachers’ contract has ~ $350,000 for step increases. Does that mean that the FY2010 school dept budget as approved at Town Meeting does not include the full allocation of salary step increases and is $150,000 short? How about the allocation of funds for education credit raises in FY2010?]

The current contract provides for teacher advancement of their Masters Degree and education credit raises of ~ 1.5 - 2.7% for every 15 credit hours achieved. Obviously, this salary increase is not achieved every year.

For teachers who have been in the system longer than 15 years and who are approaching retirement there are longevity pay increments during the last three years of employment. The current increment is a $3000 increase for each of the last three years.

In today’s uncertain times, a “no cut” employment contract would appear to be a great job benefit. According to the current contract, notice of termination must be given to a teacher before June 15 otherwise employment is guaranteed until the end of the following school year. There are not many people employed in business today that have such an employment contract. Usually, it is 2 weeks notice or less.

Town Meeting passed the FY2010 budget without provisions for teacher or police/fire COLAs. Each 1% COLA that is agreed to will cost the town ~$300,000/year. Now that the teachers union and SC have initiated mediation, the police and fire unions will likely await the outcome and not be inclined to settle for anything less than what the teachers receive.

It is interesting to note that April Consumer Price Index (CPI) data reported today showed prices were unchanged from March and 0.7% lower than one year ago- the largest 12 month drop since 1955. If this is the case, why is there a need for a “cost of living adjustment”?

As reported at Town Meeting, the town has $2.1 million in its Operational Stabilization Fund (aka “rainy day” fund) which will likely be used to meet any contract financial obligations and to balance the FY2010 budget. Let’s be careful that we do not use all of this money too quickly or else we may find that it is still raining for the next two years or more and we have no easy remedy.

Let me repeat what I said three weeks ago in previous Buzz posting…

"I am hoping that the teachers and town employee unions will agree to a 0% COLA for at least one year. We need all of our town employees and teachers to help maintain the quality of life and education in our town. We also need to recognize the difficult financial circumstances that lie ahead and plan accordingly."

Preliminary Election Results

Preliminary Election – Official Figures from Town Clerk

Total Votes Cast – 2524
First Place – Santaniello 521 = 20.6% B,C,D = finished first
Second Place – Aseltine 490 = 19.4% A,E = finished first
Third Place – Tie – Grady – Johansen 359 = 14.2% each
Fourth Place – Stolar 284 = 11.3%
Fifth Place – Marchese 215 = 8.5%

Blanks/Write ins = 296 = 11.7%
Total voters – 1262 (11,932 eligible) 10.58% per cent turnout

Johansen – 2nd in A, 3rd in B, 5th in C, 5th in D, 3rd in E.
Grady – 4th in A, 4th in B, 3rd in C, 3rd in D, 3rd in E

Collected by John J. Fitzgerald

It’s not getting any brighter….

A frontpage article in today’s (5/06/09) Republican newspaper (read the full story) paints a still gloomier picture of the state’s financial condition which could have a very large impact on Longmeadow’s FY09 and FY10 budgets.

Here are some quotes from the article….
- “Senators will be building their fiscal 2010 budget on an estimate that the state will collect $18.1 billion in revenues, nearly $1.5 billion less than the number used by the state House of Representatives.”

- “Senators may cut state aid to cities and towns more than the House.”

In an online Boston Globe article yesterday, it was reported that April state revenues were $456 million below expectations and the deficit for the remaining 3 months in FY2009 are now expected to drop $963 million below expections.

According to Michael Widmer, president of the Mass Taxpayers Foundation, the state may need to use up to $800 million from state’s rainy day fund to balance the the current FY2009 budget leaving only $500 million for FY2010.

Last week’s Town Meeting decision to vote on the FY2010 budget even though accurate numbers on state aid for Longmeadow were not available may not have been the right choice. At Town Meeting it was thought that because of revenue shortfalls, our FY2010 revenue would be $600,000 (or more) short of the FY2010 budget spending levels.

Because it looked like FY2010 state aid was going to be reduced further and create an even larger deficit the Longmeadow School Committee recommended that we “adjourn” the vote on the FY2010 budget until the Town Meeting was reconvened on June 2 so that additional state aid information could be assessed and the FY2010 budget adjusted if necessary.

Christine Swanson, Chairperson explained the logic of June 2 date selection as follows:

• If the Town Meeting voted and approved the budget on April 28, the Longmeadow School Department would have only two weeks (--> May 12) to issue potential “layoff notices” to teachers.
• June 2 was before the Annual Town Elections (June 9) so that the current town leaders (Select Board and School Committee) would be the making the needed budget corrections. In addition, there would be sufficient time before June 15- the latest date for teacher layoff notifications.

While SelectBoard chairman Paul Santaniello was in favor of adjournment of the budget vote, the Select Board was split (Santaniello/Barkett --> favored postponing vote, Grady/Scibelli --> against postponing vote) so the Select Board did not have a recommendation for the Town Meeting to consider.

Select Person Kathy Grady as well as a number of Town Meeting members felt that it was unlikely that even on June 2 there would not be much additional information on state aid and because we have $2 million in the Operational Stabilization Fund (aka “rainy day” fund) that we could use it if necessary to fund any town revenue shortfalls.

The Finance Committee also supported the recommendation by the School Committee for adjournment on the budget vote. Chairman Mark Barowsky also emphasized that the town should not be so quick to count on the Operation Stabilization Fund because it was his opinion at that time that the state’s financial condition and funding for FY2009 and FY2010 was going to continue to worsen.

I have been writing about this impending financial crisis since early January (see 1/16/09 post- A Financial Tsunami is Heading Toward Us! and things have only gotten much worse since then.
At that time I asked “What are town leaders (Select Board/ Town Manager + School Committee) doing right now to prepare for the tsunami wave that has already been formed in Boston and is heading west towards us?

Comment: It would appear that we have experienced additional financial “aftershocks” in Boston and a financial tsunami is still heading our way!

Despite the uptick since March in the stock market and calmer financial markets, it is likely that unemployment will continue to increase (a lagging indicator of the economy) and state + local revenues will continue to erode for some time- probably well into 2010. It seems to me that prudent fiscal policy for Longmeadow would be to use the Operational Stabilization Fund only as a last resort. If FY2010 appears to be a difficult year, FY2011 may be even worse and it would be prudent to have some remaining financial resources to soften any hardship.

A couple of additional issues….

1. There are no cost of living adjustments (school or town employees) included with the FY2010 budget that was voted at last week’s Annual Town Meeting. With both town employee and school department teachers contracts expiring in June and August, there is a potential increase in overall costs of $300,000 with every % increase in COLA.

2. Based upon what I heard at the town meeting, it would appear that next Tuesday, May 12 (also the Select Board preliminary run-off election) is the last day for the School Department to issue layoffs notices. If there are none issued, there can be no teacher layoffs in FY2010.

A couple of questions for our town leaders….

1. When will the collective bargaining agreements with the teachers union as well as the fire and police unions be signed? Will they include any cost of living adjustments?

2. Given all of the FY2010 budget uncertainties, will there be any teacher layoff notices issued before the May 12 deadline?

3. How do you plan to balance the FY09 and FY10 budgets? Are we going to simply use the “rainy day” fund and not worry at this time about future financial revenue shortfalls?

Tonight is the Select Board forum at Glenbrook Middle School (7 PM) in which eight candidates currently running for Select Board will be participating- three of which will be elected and be deeply involved with our FY2009 and FY2010 budget problems.

Take the time to attend the meeting, ask a question or simply watch the broadcast on LCTV. See the event notice for additional information on this important forum.