Last month I asked several questions that I wanted answers to from the candidates in this year's town elections. Since I'm planning to vote based on people's positions on the important issues facing the town, I'm pleased that two candidates (Matt Massengill and Andy Churchill) chose to respond in letters to the Bulletin, but as of my deadline in early March, I'm still waiting to learn what other people, particularly the incumbents, think. I am somewhat surprised that the Awad - Hubley - Weiss group hasn't revealed their platform.
In the meantime, the Select Board voted top put two override questions on the ballot for the election taking place on March 30th. So I'm back, still with more questions than answers.
As I understand it, the budgets that have been proposed so far would spend slightly over $16.4 million on municipal services, $1.3 for the libraries, $17.6 million on the elementary schools, and almost $10.2 on our share of the Middle and High Schools. (In the operating budgets, we spend more than $3 for schools for every $2 on libraries and town services.) Including over $3 million for various things we don't have much control over, including debt and our assessment for the Pioneer Valley Transit Authority's busses (which we seem to want more of, not less), the budgets add up to about $4 million more than the budget we are currently operating under.
We are hoping that our "income" will be about $27.2 million in property taxes, $12.4 million in aid from the state to Amherst (almost half specifically for elementary schools), and $10.4 million from the state to the Regional Schools. The state numbers are always unreliable at this time of year: neither house of the legislature has voted yet on the Governor's budget, and despite improvements in taxes coming into the state over last year, there is still a projected state deficit of over $1 billion for the next fiscal year, and a lot of other good causes on which state dollars can be spent. Most of us support most of those causes, too, so we're hardly in a position to argue that the state should cut everything else in order to increase "local aid." The Finance Committee recommends that we not use up very much of our $6.1 million in various "reserve" accounts. I agree with them: fiscal year 2005 will not be the last difficult year in which we need to use our savings, and we should keep some money for genuine emergencies. If we follow their advice, we have to find $4 million in some combination of cuts and overrides. The override proposals that will be on the ballot are for $2.5 or $2 million; that leaves cuts of at least $1.5 or $ 2 million even if one of the overrides passes.
At this point, I can't picture either override passing. So far, no one has made an argument to us, the tax-paying public, documenting the specific needs. That comment is not made in the conviction that no one can make such an argument, but rather in frustration at both the lack of information and the paucity of political discussion about it, at least as reflected in the news media. For example, I understand that many people have strong opinions about "The Vagina Monologues" and their suitability for high school-age people; but surely more of us will be directly affected both by local tax increases and by service cuts. A $4 million budget reduction would be truly horrible, I'm sure; no doubt many would find a $2 million or $1.5 million cut also unthinkable. But a $2 million tax increase is also horrible for a lot of people probably different people. I join those who are concerned about such increases and the promise of more in the next few years as state aid most likely continues to fail to keep up with growing expenses.
While I am not likely to be forced out of my home in the near future, I dread the future. I am perfectly serious that I need to know that tax increases are truly necessary. In the winter of 2002, my real estate taxes went up 9% and my condo fees went up 6.25% over the previous year's. This winter, my condo fees rose by 8% (despite an attempt by many owners to keep the increases to no more than 5%) and local taxes rose by almost 12.5%. During that time the University, my employer, was not paying the raises agreed to in our union contract. Although the University is now paying those raises, that does no good for me and my fellow retirees.
How are we going to have this community-wide discussion in just a few weeks? If we don't have that discussion, on what basis will the Boards, Committees, and Town Meeting make decisions? And if, as I expect, there has to be another try for an override after Town Meeting, will we be any better informed then? I sincerely hope so.