Unexpected Windfall And More Increased Spending

March 27, 2014 Public Hearing - 2015 Budget Comments

 I do not support the Town Manager’s budget of $122,837,302 - and I hope the Town Council will not either. 

For those members of the Town Council who last November campaigned on controlling spending. I hope I can count on you to keep your campaign promise. 

The taxpayers need you to control spending because this budget does nothing to control spending. In fact spending is increased by $2,883,344 along with an “unexpected windfall“. 

Every year we have been forced to believe that when revenues decrease, taxes must increase instead of decreasing spending. Given that logic, when revenues increase, as is the case this year then taxes must decrease? Right? 

The question is: why does the Town bureaucracy receive the revenue “windfall” instead of the taxpayers? The taxpayers should receive the revenue “windfall”. 

I encourage the Town Council to make the necessary changes to the 2015 budget to allow for taxes to decrease, as well as make reasonable reductions to the budget. 

It is disappointing that the Town Council did not advise the Board of Education or Town Manager regarding their budget requests before the budget was put together.  I believe that Councilor Cerf, in public, requested to be allowed to advise the Town Manager and Board of Education regarding their budget requests, but was told by the Town Manager to “let him do his job”.  

The result is we have a budget that has increased $2,883,344 and unless the Town Council supports the taxpayers and makes changes, we have another year of increased spending. 

Of course I know that the Town Council cannot specify spending reductions to the BOE budget. However there are areas that should be reduced.  The $400,000 per year IB Program, which will have 13 graduates this school year, according to information provided by the BOE this week should be eliminated. The BOE Central Office Staff non-union raises should be eliminated. As well as the $500 per month car allowance for the superintendent. Is it reasonable that someone making $185,000 per year needs a car allowance?

Based on these items, a $426,000 reduction to the BOE budget would be reasonable. 

In the Town Operations Budget, I suggest you review vacant positions.

That I am aware of, there is a code inspector, an assistant director of public works and an assistant town clerk that all have been vacant for at least several months. Of course there could be more, I hope you will ask the question. 

Is it reasonable to assume that after a position has been vacant for several months, there could be some cost efficiencies implemented? 

Also please review non-union benefits and post employment retirement benefits. Are they reasonable?  If the “Terms and Conditions of Employment for non-union employees” is still in effect, these employees are paying 10% for their health insurance. If this is in fact true, it is long overdue for an increase.

The non-union life insurance benefit is $100,000. Should the taxpayers be supporting $100,000 life insurance policies?  Is that reasonable? 

Retirees between 55 and 65 receive health insurance coverage that is the same as for active Town of Groton employees. Imagine retiring and keeping your health insurance?  And for retirees after 65, the Groton taxpayers pay a percentage of Blue Cross, Blue Shield, Blue Cross Major Medical, Dental riders and prescription drug. Is this reasonable? I don’t thinks so. 

Does anyone believe that the benefits enjoyed by the Town of Groton non-union employees, are at all similar to the coverage that the taxpayers who are paying for it, have? 

Another area for reduction is the 2% salary increase, built into the budget, for all non-union employees. The Town Council should have had input into this amount before the budget was put together. 

As for the Capital Improvement list, please ask yourself as you review the 27 Projects, is the project necessary or is it nice to have? We cannot afford to spend $2,429,000 out the Capital Reserve Fund for unnecessary projects.

Included are some big projects, coming at the voters in a 2015 referendum. Knowing how the Groton voters have been voting in recent referendums, is this reasonable?  

Also included, to my astonishment, is a car wash station that was voted down by the voters of Groton in a 2002 referendum. Again, is this reasonable?

Please DO NOT approve any WPCF projects that increase taxes or User Fees, we cannot afford it.  

There are some frivolous projects included such as the Town Hall Complex $55,000 space analysis. Of 266 Town employees, not one is capable of doing a space analysis?  Also, $25,000 for a barn renovation for storage of light bulbs.  How about the closed schools for storage? Just to list a few.

I do support the boiler units and the Video Monitor Equipment at the Police Station.  

In Groton we need to have the education for our children and the town operations we can afford. This budget as proposed is not affordable or sustainable, and I hope the Town Council will make the necessary changes.