Budget Review

(intended budget hearing remarks prefaced by previous post)

I’d like to begin by drawing attention to an article in today’s newspaper. “There Will Be Pain.” That’s a quote from Mayor Bloomberg, roundly regarded as a pretty sharp budgetary navigator. His proposed budget spares no one and no thing and will surely be very unpopular with those affected. But his approach serves as a blueprint for us in some respects.

The very first question when considering the budget should be: what is absolutely essential? In my mind, that usually suggests police, fire, and paramedic services – basically, safety-related services. Much of the anticipated increases are in fact, locked in contractually anyway if I understand correctly what I’ve been told and most people, I think, are rightly reluctant to cut in those areas.

The second question becomes: can we cut other departments? Without even looking, my initial gut reaction is to cut every single item by a straight, equally applied percentage. Equal pain, if you will. Some view that as simplistic but I’d love to hear the argument for why it can’t be done. There’s always a lot of talk about “fairness” – so where is the fairness to the taxpayer that routinely is asked to pay more for less?

That’s right, MORE for LESS. We keep hearing that old, worn-out cliché, DO more WITH less, but in actuality we always PAY more and then GET less. Every level of government is too big and too expensive and if the example can’t be set from the top level down than we should seriously consider setting it from the bottom level up – starting with our own Town government.

The harsh reality, if anyone has the guts, is to start doing without. Layoffs are ugly but it’s going on across America and I’d like to know why our own Town government should somehow be exempt? Start with my suggested across-the-board % cut and perhaps you retain jobs if that is an objective, but in my opinion it should be more about priorities at this juncture.

Looking for specific cuts? Start with the easy stuff. Freeze salaries for town employees rather than doling out raises, even if they seem inconsequential. I’m personally irked by the apparent end-around on the previously considered councilmember raise by including what you’re calling a stipend instead. I don’t recall voting for a Deputy Supervisor position and any additional duties it involves should be considered a privilege. My mindset on this is a reflection of my belief in being citizen legislators and certainly not a reflection of any perceived shortcoming on Mr. Signore’s abilities.

We should also be cutting back on things like office supplies by eliminating any unnecessary mailings or interoffice correspondence or the like. From what I recall, virtually every department has a projected increase on that line. We paid a lot for state-of-the-art telephone systems and other technology and we ought to be squeezing every penny out of our technology by thinking of creative alternatives to achieve results. I realize in the scheme of things, these items are small potatoes but they start to add up when viewed cumulatively and more importantly, cutting them reinforces and cultivates a culture and atmosphere of ACTUALLY doing more with less.

One budget area that concerns me is the legal and attorney lines. Why are the budgeted amounts increasing on the scale they are? In fact, the department request was even larger. What gives? I remember arguments that having a contracted legal team would be cheaper for us than having our own Town Attorney, especially since most of the pending tax litigation seems to have been resolved. Similarly, what about considering a Town Engineer to replace what appears to be a significant burgeoning of contracted engineering expenses?

We’ve spent inordinate amounts of money on a plethora of studies…many for worthwhile endeavors…but it’s been money ill-spent probably because many of these capital-intensive, infrastructure projects have not come to fruition and will likely have to be delayed even further because of the economic backdrop. The data collected may not be valid later on. I’m not suggesting that we suspend all these projects but realistically, we both know priorities and timetables will not be friendly to our objectives. We should be giving serious consideration to changing our engineering approach.

Another line that jumps out at me is the Economic Development Specialist for $11,875.00. What the heck is that for? It seems redundant to me. We already have an IDA, involvement with Metroplex, an Economic Development Chairperson in the form of Mr. Mertz, and of course, each of you, who I thought were elected in part to foster that sort of activity. It sounds like an unnecessary liaison type of position that we could do without.

There has been an indicated desire to tap the surplus to mitigate the tax increase. I’m not necessarily against that notion but I caution strongly that doing so is merely a recipe for putting off until tomorrow that which should be done today. The Town collectively does that trick well. No increase now, followed by a big increase down the road does no one any good. It’s time to start the bloodletting by cutting EVERYTHING that can be cut. If it’s not contractual, then it should be on the table – period.

My comments are not meant to imply you’re doing a horrible job or are insensitive to the budget reality. But it’s way past time to take the burden off the taxpayer. The taxpayer needs real, lasting relief, not some politically expedient quick fix. With declining revenue streams, it’s time to get the machete out and start hacking.

A tax increase is not acceptable to me…and it shouldn’t be to you either. We need to make deeper cuts and we need all of you to muster the resolve to do so.