Despite the lowest levy increase proposed in over a decade of 1.25 percent, the mayor’s opponents are still not satisfied. Despite many expenditures on the horizon, the mayor’s opponents insist we must spend down the free cash. And the mayor’s opponents also appear willing to jeopardize the city’s excellent bond rating and cost the city $135,000 in short-term borrowing costs to make a stand.
Over what? Well, it turns out not much: just a $1.69/month for the average homeowner.
Westfield’s Political Fight Over Spare Change
Under the mayor’s proposed plan, a 1.25 percent increase offset with a 1.66 CIP shift would cost the average home owner $51.75 next year in extra property tax. If the city council got their way, a zero percent increase and kept the CIP shift at 1.63, the average homeowner’s tax bill would go up only slightly less to $31.50. Do the math and the difference between the two comes out to $1.69 per month.
Is $1.69/month going to make a difference in anybody’s life? I don’t think so. Even homeowners on fixed incomes receive cost of living increases and will be able to easily absorb this cost. And the recent drop in gasoline costs will make this trifling increase very easy to swallow for residents. The fact is, the difference between a zero percent tax increase and a 1.25 percent tax increase won’t even be noticed. The $1.69 will, however, result in a few extra hundred thousand dollars that will help they city cover its expenses.
So let’s call this fight for what it is. This fight isn’t about saving homeowners a $1.69/month. This fight is all about politics.
For example, one city councilor has been trying to make the case for years that the city is in dire economic straits and will soon be bankrupt and/or unable to raise taxes in the near future. And yet this same city councilor wants us to believe it’s a good idea to spend down our free cash. And this is the same city councilor who, a few years ago, suggested we have a Proposition 2 1/2 override to raise more revenue for the school budget. How can this be? How can a city councilor who fears the city is on the verge of bankruptcy honestly suggest it’s a great idea to spend down our cash on hand? The councilor makes the incredulous justification that because the free cash money will be used for operating costs, then it’s OK by him to use it for a tax break. That logic simply doesn’t hold water. It would be like a financially strapped family deciding that money in the bank needed for home repairs is better spent on bags of candy.
No, the only way to truly reconcile this city councilor’s contradictory positions is recognizing that they allow him to paint the mayor as fiscally irresponsible while simultaneously bashing him for raising taxes.
Fortunately, I think the majority of Westfield residents see this charade for what it is and are supporting the mayor for taking a more prudent approach to Westfield’s finances. Westfield’s budget is still extremely tight and holding onto the extra money in free cash is a much wiser move. Besides, the money currently in free cash isn’t going to vanish if the city council doesn’t give it away this year. So I suggest we put the city’s financial well-being above the political fight over spare change no one will miss.
Sincerely,
Steve Dondley
