***Continuing: Flags & Signs**Semi-Annual Tribute to Our Fallen Troops***
**TODAY Thu: Decoration of Veterans Graves**Meet at VFW**5pm**All Welcome**
***TODAY Thu: Relay for Life Fundraiser**Bertucci's**4-9pm**Coupon in article**
***Sat: Holliston Cash Mob**Begin at Pejamajo's**10:45am***
***Coming Mon 5/27: Memorial Day Parade**Ceremony on Town Hall Steps***
***Coming Tue 5/28: Adam Green with new "Holliston" episodes**HHS Aud**7-10pm***
***Coming 5/30: Moving Wall**Medway VFW**Opens 6pm***
Search the Site
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Selectmen Announce Lower than Maximum Tax Rate
by William Dowd 12/11/12
Then, we could all give them the credit they are trying so hard to ...
Selectmen Announce Lower than Maximum Tax Rate
At the Board of Selectmen meeting on December 10, 2012, the Board concluded its tax rate classification hearing for FY13. During the discussion, the Board made it very clear that based on the updated valuations of property and the approved FY13 budget, Holliston would be spending almost $240,000 LESS than the maximum permitted under Prop 2 ½. This works out to a tax rate 12 cents lower than it could be.
I believe this was highlighted to demonstrate the very fine financial management that is being provided to Holliston’s taxpayers. To listen to the Board, you’d almost think this was some intentional outcome from a dedicated effort to hold the line on spending. However, from all of my work looking into the Town’s budget and extremely high costs of the health insurance benefits being provided to employees and retirees, I am convinced that this outcome is completely accidental.
All of the Town’s appropriation votes at Town Meeting were predicated on projected valuations and estimated tax rates. It would be imprudent to push revenue estimates up just to make room for more spending. It’s much harder to come back and cut budgets than it is to set budgets below maximum expected revenue and run with a small margin.
For me, the lower than maximum rate means about $43 this year. Don’t get me wrong – I’m grateful. I just don’t think it’s right to put it out there as some accomplishment of rigorous cost control by the Board of Selectmen when it really isn’t. If the Selectmen were really interested in cost control, they would:
a.) insist on rapid recovery of the overcharges the Town has incurred for health insurance,
b.) make a real effort to reform the state law on retiree health insurance eligibility,
c.) correct the mistake it has been making for over ten years in paying more for post-age 65 health insurance than was authorized by Town Meeting,
d.) insist on true cost of service rates for our ambulance service,
e.) rescue the late, incomplete, inaccurate and apparently doomed $30,000 employee compensation and benefit study, and
f.) put forth a well thought out, complete and detailed proposal for a Department of Public Works including costs/savings and benefits to the Town.
a.) insist on rapid recovery of the overcharges the Town has incurred for health insurance,
b.) make a real effort to reform the state law on retiree health insurance eligibility,
c.) correct the mistake it has been making for over ten years in paying more for post-age 65 health insurance than was authorized by Town Meeting,
d.) insist on true cost of service rates for our ambulance service,
e.) rescue the late, incomplete, inaccurate and apparently doomed $30,000 employee compensation and benefit study, and
f.) put forth a well thought out, complete and detailed proposal for a Department of Public Works including costs/savings and benefits to the Town.
Then, we could all give them the credit they are trying so hard to wrestle from the very small amount of money that is both typical of prior years, and derived completely from a mathematical calculation.
Posted in Comments.
.jpg)
.jpg)
Comments (3)