DAVID FLAHERTY
The calendar says spring is here. For the City Council, that means it’s getting closer to budget time. As you know, I think we still have major budget problems like many other cities and towns across the country. We have massive snowballing obligations related to retiree pensions and benefits. Many taxpayers feel we are overtaxing them and that they are not getting their money’s worth (sadly, the budget forecasts show that we need to tax to the maximum amount allowed by Prop 2 ½ and that we’d still be short almost $20 million per year). A huge percentage of our budget depends on state aid. Recently, Beacon Hill legislators have proposed some increases in unrestricted local aid. This sounds good until you read the details and understand how they plan on paying for it, and that future streams are not guaranteed (which creates problems when you depend on state aid to pay for employees and benefits).
In order to balance this year’s city budget, we had to withdraw about $1.2 million from our savings account – and that was just to balance the budget as proposed in June which intentionally didn’t include sufficient funding for several line items or projects. Since June, the city has used additional free cash and stabilization draws to fund these unbudgeted items and projects.
We need to change this budget process and stop the snowballing. We need to find ways to become more efficient in realistic measurable ways. We need to find new sources of revenue without adding undue burdens on the taxpayers.
This year we have some new councilors on the council, and I’m happy to say that several were quite disappointed in the process last year, and have expressed desires to not repeat the same mistakes. We need a complete, accurate, and realistic budget this year – no extra items on a paper napkin, and no wishful-thinking numbers. We need to bump up the priority for road maintenance and repairs.
We need your help at budget time in May and June. Reductions in growth rates, and adjustments to long-term benefits are a critical part of the solutions. Yet, any time we propose those types of solutions, employee groups and their friends come out of the woodwork to decry the “cuts” and manipulate public sentiment by threatening to cut necessary services, talking about threats to public safety, and talking about “cuts” that will devastate very popular school and athletic programs. Last year we tried to reduce the proposed budget by about 1.25 percent, yet you would have thought we were cutting it by 50 percent based on the rhetoric. Please, please stay informed and come to some of the meetings to express your opinions about how the city spends your tax money.
This year, I’m the Chairman of the Zoning, Planning, and Development (ZPD) Committee. ZPD meets once a month to take care of anything related to zoning ordinance, zoning changes, special permits, and general planning and development items. We met Wednesday evening and the topic was the marijuana facilities and ordinances. Frankly, this is a mess. The state is making laws and forcing us to make laws without thinking about all of the consequences. We did our best to define the zoning in ways that meet the requirements of the state, while restricting the locations of the potential facilities in ways that protect our citizens and values. After examining detailed maps, we decided to recommend that the buffer area around schools and youth services facilities be increased to 1,000 feet. This is consistent with the Drug Free School Zone buffers, and still gives the marijuana retailers and farmers plenty of places to operate in town if they are granted a Special Permit by the Planning Board.
On the “to be answered” list are questions such as: does a hardship permit allow homegrown marijuana anywhere? Does the act of smoking marijuana follow the same rules as smoking cigarettes and cigars? If marijuana is an allowed drug treatment, can you smoke it in non-smoking facilities such as private and public apartments? Will the state eventually allow recreational use of marijuana? How much of a burden will be placed on the city? Will the $15,000 annual fee be sufficient? How do police enforce laws that have so many unanswered questions?
In April, ZPD will be discussing issues related to the expansion of the former Balise Property near Walmart (Extra Innings, and future home to several other businesses), car and RV lots on the North Side, and changing the zoning laws to allow for plastic manufacturing in Industrial Zones in Westfield. The meeting with be Wednesday April 30 at 6:30 p.m.
On Tuesday, April 1, we are having a special election to fill Don Humason’s vacant State Representative seat. Whoever wins this election will only serve for a few months before having to run again for the full-term in the fall. Dan Allie and John Velis are the candidates. Many of you have met them or have received phone calls or mailings from their campaigns and supporters. I’ve met both candidates. I respect both of them, and I respect many of the people who are working on their behalf. I’ve followed the news about their candidacy, have read their websites and Facebook pages, and have read about a dozen letters and postcards from the campaigns. Both have served this country. Both have volunteered in ways that serve the citizens of Westfield. Both are gentlemen who care a lot about Westfield. Both aspire to serve the best interests of Westfield in the Massachusetts legislature.
I’ve decided to support Dan Allie primarily because I know where he stands on issues that I think are important. Frankly, I don’t agree with him on everything – maybe only 80 percent. However, that 80 percent relates to critical conservative financial issues, lower burdens on taxpayers and businesses, and the desire to address necessary government reforms.
I don’t know where John stands on many issues because he hasn’t clearly expressed his positions. He seems like a good guy, I like him personally, and based on what I think I know about him, maybe we agree on 50 percent or more. I’m guessing that that 50 percent would relate mostly to social issues and service to others. I do believe he would do his best to serve the citizens of Westfield. However, without knowing more specifics, I’ve got to support Dan. Because I haven’t heard directly from John, I’m looking at who supports him and what their issues and positions are. I do know that many of his supporters and campaign donors are further left of me on the liberal scale, and many have ties to government labor unions. One issue of concern was John’s answer to a question about minimum wage at Thursday’s debate. His answer led me to believe that he would support increased compensation and benefits for employees (as desired by many labor organizations) without being as concerned about how citizens, companies, or governmental bodies, would be effected, or how they would pay for the increased costs. I certainly understand the desire for people to earn a decent wage, but before voting on something like this, I think we need to look at the details and consequences. Will companies hire fewer people? Will young people miss out on their first work experiences? Will companies raise their prices to cover the costs of increased wages and taxes? Will this spiral upwards because everyone else now needs more money to pay for the same things? In a spiral, wouldn’t everyone’s position stay relative, and essentially the higher earnings from the increased minimum wage would be gobbled up by higher costs of products and services? Could this contribute to deflation? How many other pay rates are indexed off minimum wage? How much will it cost taxpayers in the way of special discounts and credits associated with government programs that use multiples of the minimum wage as qualifiers? This is a big problem for me. These questions and answers are important. As mentioned at the beginning of this article, I think we need to find ways to control the growth rates in government spending. We need representatives who are willing to say “show me the money” before agreeing to laws, regulations, labor contracts, tax or fee increases, etc…
We cannot keep taxing, borrowing, spending, and snowballing obligations forever. We need fiscally conservative representatives in Boston and in Westfield.
Please make every effort to vote on Tuesday.
Thank you,
Dave Flaherty Westfield At-large City Councilor
PS. Congratulations to Nick Albano, of St. Mary’s Boy Scout Troop 109 who will receive his Eagle Scout rank at next weekend’s Eagle Court of Honor!
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this column are those of the author and not the staff, editor, or publisher of this publication.
