Why delay the override question?

There seems to be widespread agreement that the only way for Andover to continue to afford the servcies that it provides today is to approve an override of Proposition 2 1/2, to allow more propoerty tax revenue to be collected. The three boards (Selectmen, School Committee, and Finance Committee) submitted an override question into the warrant for the upcoming Town Meeting, and the Selectmen recently approved it's insertion into the final warrant.
Then this week, still facing a large budget deficit, the School Committee decided to recommend that voters at Town Meeting vote against the override. In a similar vein, Bill Pennington has indicated that he will request voters approve withdrawl of his private warrant article requesting an override, and in a recent letter Pennington claims that an override "... is not a viable option this year".
So if an override is really needed, then why isn't this year the right year for voters to address the issue?
Another letter in last week's Townsman states:

"How can the citizens make an intelligent decision on a tax override that is
thrown out to them 30 days prior to the Town Meeting — or is it just a political
tactic? It has been obvious for a long time that Andover needs to increase its
revenue base."

It seems to me that this statement is self-contradictory. If indeed it has been so obvious for so long, then why can't Andover voters make an intelligent decision about an override this year?
I actually believe that the Andover voters are quite competent at making decisions on complex issues that affect their town and their lives. At Town Meeting on April 30, they will be asked to vote on the specific budget amounts for each department, as well as an extensive array of financial and legal articles. In contrast, a Proposition 2 1/2 override question seems really quite simple, and well within the ability of voters to descern their best interests.
It appears to me that those who think an override shouldn't be addressed this year are concerned because they have not seen sufficient buy-in across the town to insure that the override would be passed. This is an understandable concern from that perspective, but one that flies in the face of an open decision-making process.
Several proponents of increased spending on operating budgets have agrued that the Town should use 'reserves' to meet the shortfall in this year's operating budget, and "try again" to get adequate support for an override next year. This approach seems disrespectful of the votes that might be cast on the override question this year, as if to suggest that people voting against an override are simply "not yet prepared" to make such a decision, and need more time to be convinced. Perhaps if an override concern were a sudden recent issue, then this position might be defensible. Since in fact the issue has been a topic of broad town discussion for several years, this argument sounds to me more like a short-sighted tactic to mollify the conscience of people who want more money to spend this year, but realize deep inside that the town can't afford it with passing the override.

The Phillps money - what to do with it?

When Bill Pennington met with the Board of Selectmen and Finance Committee on Wednesday, he said that he intended to withdraw his private article for a Proposition 2 1/2 override at Town Meeting, but that the article regarding a transfer of the Phillips Academy contribution fund to operating budgets might still be an option for the voters to consider. Vikki Gallagher expressed a similar sentiment in her letter to the Townsman yesterday.
It's easy to understand why some might look at the roughly $1M in this fund and consider it a 'quick fix' to some of our budget deficit problems for FY09. In reality, using that money to fund operations budgets really would be a quick "fix", helping get the town more addicted to a drug that we seem to like the taste of. Each year in recent history we have taken money from our "reserves" - money that has no recurring source of renewal, similar to our personal savings account (or credit card), and spend it on stuff we gotta have. The more fixes we take of this drug, the more we get hooked, and the more we focus on how to get our next fix, without taking responsibility for how we're going to cope financially with our nasty habit.
Andover's financial problem isn't really the $2M+ dollar gap between recommend department budgets and the available revenue that we face this year. The problem is that we have, for several years, chosen at Town Meeting to authorize more expenditures than we can truly afford. The gap last year was several hundred thousand dollars, and we collectively gasped as we said "okay, just one last time." Now the gap is a couple million, and the best estimate we can make today indicates that the gap will be over FOUR MILLION dollars next year.
Each time we take reserves to fund our operational budget, it increases the gap between "level services" and "available revenues" the following year. If the residents of the town vote to sustain the growth of the operational budget, they should take the responsible path and approve a Proposition 2 1/2 override. Eroding our dwindling reserves will only sustain our habit for very short time, and then we'll face a staggering deficit with nothing to fall back on.
The Board of Selectmen and Finance Committee both passed motions Wednesday to recommend that Town Meeting approve the transfer of the Phillips Academy fund into the Stabilization Fund. It's the sensible choice.

Slushy cash?

John Zipeto's letter to the Townsman claims that the Free Cash account is really a town "slush fund". He exposes the fact that "It has been financed annually by a systematic over-budgeting of certain town departments. It has been going on for years."
Wow. This finally explains why 'certain' town departments are just rolling in cash each year...
John is quite correct that the town tries to budget conservatively for projected expenses. After all, if a department claims that it costs "X" to get a job done, then runs out of money before they've accomplished the task, then the voters would be justifiably disappointed. At the end of the year, if the department finished the year without expending the money that was budgeted, the excess is "returned" to the Free Cash account.
Note that Town departments cannot move money around between accounts at will, so if a sum is budgetted for, say Printing expenses, and they find a more economical way to get the material published than planned, the excess money cannot be shifted to some other use, such as staff salaries or new computers. The excess money gets returned to Free Cash at the end of the year.
John is correct that there is a secret plot within town management to squirrel money away into Free Cash. It says so in the Town Manager's budget document, on page 192 (great place for secrets - who would look there?!). Why would the town management ever do such a thing? It's a conspiracy with financial rating services like Moody's, who tempt towns into such devious practices by offering them higher bond ratings when they do so.
John is also quite correct when he says that the proceeds of this heinous process would go along way towards eliminating the funding gap in FY09. In fact, the Town Manager's budget recommends using $1,680,000 of this slush fund to do just that in FY09. In fact, the town has been using Free Cash to support the operating budget for years, which is one reason that the account is critically low today, and probably heading lower next year.
The tricky part about this slush fund, though, is the fact that Town Meeting actually has to vote on every appropriation of funds out of that account. It's really a crazy idea for a pot of money that's supposed to be hush-hush. That's why every year the Finance Committee publishes a lengthy description of the Free Cash acount in the core section of the budget article material (page 27 last year), describing the purpose, history, significance and a detailed accouting of balances and appropriations from Free Cash over the prior 10 years.
And I agree again with John that the Finance Committee and Board of Selectmen should (continue) to express shock and dismay over the abuse of Free Cash by the systematic over-spending on operating budgets that cannot be paid for with available revenues.

Kudos to engaged residents

This year I have been very gratified to see so many residents going to the effort of attending the public budget review meetings for Andover. I'm sure that there are more who watch from home, but it's certainly a clear expression of interest and engagement for someone to come down to Town Hall and sit around for several hours, a couple times a week.

It's probably reckless for me to start naming people who I've noticed attending frequently, because I'm bound to offend someone by not including them. Apologies in advance.

Mary Carbone, of course, has a very long history of active attendence at town meetings. I was concerned last Fall because I hadn't seen her for a while, but fortunately she has more recently resumed her regular attendence and participation.

Over the past two years, I doubt that any 'unofficial' resident has attended more Selectmen or Finance Committee meetings than Tom Deso. In addition to the time he spends serving on other volunteer committees, Tom shows up to most board meetings as regularly as any of the board members, and has become the voice of reason that these boards frequently turn to for input. At the Joint Meeting of the Selectmen and Finance Committee last night, Tom made a simple and clear observation that swiftly concluded a 20 minute rambling discussion about tax foreclosure property sales, that could well have consumed the Board for another hour had Tom not spoken up. He is a valued contributor to the leadership of the town.

I have been particularly pleased to see John Pasquale attending the recent CIP and budget article review meetings. John has been an outspoken advocate of reason at Town Meeting for several years, and has particpated in several Selectmen meetings in the past. His engagement with the review of capital projects and warrant articles this year has been constructive and welcome. It would be great if more residents could ask their questions and make their concerns known during the review period leading up to Town Meeting, so that they could have more input to the recommendations that are put forward at the Meeting, and better informed when the time comes to vote. John sets a fine example in this regard.

Of course, the candidates for Selectmen and School Committee positions have been fairly regular in attending the budget review meetings for the past few months. They have my respect for being interested enough in the operation of the town to put themselves into the election process, and to be willing to make the commitment of time and energy that their potential roles will demand.

There are plenty of other people who have shown up to enough meetings in recent memory that I should give them mention as well. John Zipeto, Diane Costagliola, Peggy Kruse, and Bill Pennington come to mind, just to name a few more. For any other residents who feel interested and engaged in the process of making Andover 'work' - thanks!

The problem with hard decisions

The problem with hard decisions is... well, they're hard.
It's easy to say that elected officials and professional staff administrators should buck up and make the hard decisions that town needs made, and I would certainly agree that these folks have a responsibility to work diligently on resolving the tough budget issues that the town faces today.
But I would also remind residents of Andover that we have the priviledge of an Open Town Meeting government, and that the residents bear a significant responsibility as the legislative body of the town. Leaders indeed need to lead, but voters ultimately make the tough decisions about whether or not the leaders are headed in the direction the town is willing to follow.
To some people, it seems that there are "common sense" solutions to the budget problems that the town faces, and that "town priorities" can be a guidepost for resolving these choices. If only it could be so easy.
Andover is a town of many people, with diverse backgrounds, ages, financial circumstances, and ultimately, priorities. To speak of "town priorities" is to beg the question - what really are the priorities of the town? Each department of the town government has a mission statement and associated goals. The school department has a well-articulated 'vision' published in the budget document, and the Vision 21 study several years ago attempted to craft a town-wide statement of shared values and priorities. In addition, each elected official may have their individual priorities, or those they feel are important to some particular constituency.
I believe that there is much to be gained by having our town leaders spend much more time (outside of budget season) meeting together to deliberate these various 'visions', and to attempt to forge a common strategy for pursuit of an integrated view of where the town is trying to be in the future, from both a services and a financial standpoint.
Common sense doesn't always solve our problems either... When faced with state and federal unfunded mandates that place crushing financial burdens on the town, with essential expenses such as health care rising 10-15% per year, with a strongly unionized labor force, and with budget authority split between multiple elected bodies, the management of the town must often face choices between alternatives that make limited sense to many observers.
While Andover's leaders face some difficult negotiations and choices this year, the voters also hold responsibility for decisions that may have significant and long-lasting impact on the town. Those who criticize their elected leaders for failing to make the necessary decisions should give some though to their own accountability for these decisions, and certainly should reflect on whether they, or someone else they know, might be capable of providing effective guidance through these tradeoffs. If so, then they have ample opportunity to contribute - immediately - to helping resolve those dilemas [Several residents decided to attend this morning's financial planning meeting, and were openly welcomed to literally 'sit at the table' and participate with the subcommittees as peers], and should be encouraged to run for office.

Morning thunder

The shouting began early on Thursday morning, before I was even half way through my Venti Vanilla (non-fat) Latte. The 7:30 am meeting of the three Long Range Financial Planning subcommittees was certainly energetic, with some frank discussion about the concerns regarding the structure of override proposals and the challenges in reaching multi-board agreement on how to move forward.
The discussion was sucessful at getting a lot of concerns and emotions aired, but the only issue resolved was the agenda for the next subcommittees meeting on Wednesday, 20 Feb at 5:30 pm. The group is attempting to get the analyst from Moody's to call in to the meeting, to give their advice on how to avoid any further slip in the town's bond rating. The group will also review the latest data on revenue and expense forecasts for FY09, and will likely discuss more concrete concepts for how to structure the override and associated contingent appropriations.
The issue here is to decide on (1) the dollar amount for the override question, (2) how & when the override revenues would be used if approved, and (3) whether to adjust the current allocation of 'available' (non override) revenues to reduce the impact on some departments in the event the override is not approved.
When the Town and School budgets were presented to the three boards on 4 Feb, members from each of the boards suggested that we need to consider some changes to the overall budget allocations, to avoid the severe impacts to the school education and athletics programs that have been identified. The Andover High School has a fantastic athletic program, and I doubt anyone in Andover would be content to let the program be eliminated. Several town-side departments have also identified significant strain and shortfalls required to fit within the available revenue budgets. I am particularly concerned with the budget impacts within the Police and Fire-Rescue departments, which have been operating on minimally-staffed shifts and have insuffucient expense budgets to properly maintain basic protective equipment for the employees. Override or not, these are areas I believe we need to be concerned about.

Budget sparring

Staff writer Brian Messenger is punching below the belt.
His front-page article in today's Andover Townsman (click here) paints a picture of our Town Manager as the budget-slashing Grinch in this year's budget process, but it's just not so.
At a Tri-Board meeting on 3 Dec 07, the Board of Selectmen, School Committe, and Finance Committee jointly developed and approved a plan for the budget formation process, including very specific guidance on how the available revenue was to be partioned across Town and School Departments. While the budget document is titled as the "Town Manager's Recommended Budget", the top-line allocation to each department was in fact directed by the Tri-Board policy.
The Manager and his Department Heads developed town-side budgets in compliance with the Tri-Board policy (based on available revenues), and was required by statute to call it his "recommended" budget. The School Department 'preliminary' budget was released on 18 January, and includes no acknowledgement of the Tri-Board policy and budget allocation, and indeeds exceeds the targeted budget by roughly $2.9 Million. With great reluctance, the School Department did present on Monday the impacts of complying with the budget allocations defined at the 3 Dec Tri-Board meeting.
The sparring over the allocation of available FY09 revenue dollars may just be starting, but School Committee member Tony James seems to have taken the gloves off already. After listening to the Town and School presentations, Mr. James summarized by claiming that the impact of the recommend allocation on Town Departments was "nothing", but that there was a "hugely significant and detrimental impact" on the School Department. (I'll comment more on that topic another day...)
The Town and School department budgets are being reviewed in detail over the coming weeks; schedules can be found (here) and (here). The three financial planning sub-committee will meet next on 14 Feb (7:30 am), where the topic of town/school allocation will mostly likely be a central topic.