I went to every town council meeting for about a year back in 2008 (or thereabouts), and I don’t recall another period during which there was reliably something controversial every week for this long. Tonight it’s discussion of exceeding the tax levy cap.
The council has been going through various zoning, appointment, and other issues, but exceeding the cap is coming up soon. Former Budget Committee Chairman Chris Cotta is in attendance, though he hasn’t been, lately (that I’ve noticed). School Committee Member Carol Herrmann is also making a rare appearance, sitting next to Deb Pallasch.
That must be the “raise our taxes” group. Of course, TCC is well represented, as well. At least there’s some counterpoint, these days.
7:46 p.m.
Town Administrator Jim Goncalo noted that the town appears likely to get half of its expected motor vehicle tax reimbursement from the state.
And now they’re to the tax cap discussion. Council Member Louise Durfee explained that the vote is to send a “letter of inquiry” to see how much the town could go over the tax if it needs to.
Member Jay Lambert states that he doesn’t think the town needs to go over the cap. “The recommendation of the Budget Committee is now under the tax.” A recommendation from Mr. Goncalo would exceed the cap. Lambert thinks that the General Assembly’s recent budgetary statements will bring Goncalo’s budget under the cap, as well.
Lambert: “I really believe that, if we get into this issue, we’re going to have a number of different problems.” He points out that the form to exceed the cap puts the burden on the town to state how much it will exceed the cap by; there’s no request for information. He’s pointing out that the numbers that the town would fill in “would have to be zero,” given the budgets on the table.
“The proposed budget comes from the Budget Committee, not the town administrator” by the town charter.
7:52 p.m.
“If we use the town administrator’s numbers… how can we then justify ignoring the school committee recommendation?”
7:55 p.m.
Lambert also pointed out that the state’s form letter that goes out in response to requests to exceed the levy cap notes that both a 4/5 vote of the “governing body” and a majority of the financial town meeting are required.
7:57 p.m.
Durfee’s response was, first, to laugh. “First of all, the docket is closed. Secondly, I don’t think anybody sitting here can say that we are going to get the monies from the cars.” She’s “been advised” that we won’t see one dime “as a reimbursement.” By whom?
7:58 p.m.
Durfee claims that Peter Schafer (state official up in Providence) told Jim Goncalo, at some point in the past, that the town should seek a “what are we eligible for” information. Curious how her arguments seem always to stem from undocumented conversations and PowerPoint presentations.
8:02 p.m.
Lambert: “As you point out, we can go to Providence after the financial town meeting.”
Durfee: Cited FTM Moderator Mike Smith’s published statements that he doesn’t intend to allow people to exceed the cap. My information is that he’s changed his tune. Lambert believes that the FTM will approve what it wants to approve.
8:05 p.m.
Lambert doesn’t believe the General Assembly will have the courage to cut car tax reimbursements to zero next year.
Council President Don Bollin is repeating his anecdote about a judge who forced the town to fund its budget in some way other than taxes based on an FTM vote.
8:10 p.m.
Bollin and Durfee clearly want to get permission to exceed the cap without officially seeking to exceed the cap (because that would bring in the sticky fact that the town’s current proposed budget is actually under the cap.
Council Member Hannibal Costa made the point that taxpayers don’t want a tax increase, so it’s a minor consideration to get more information.
8:13 p.m.
Member Cecil Leonard is stating that the council “cast the die” when it approved Goncalo’s budget, which is higher than the Budget Committee budget. So, he’s saying that the council has already proposed to break the cap. What purpose the Budget Committee serves seems to me to be the next question.
8:15 p.m.
Costa moved to proceed with the letter. Council Member Ed Roderick wants to send the inquiry. He thinks “the numbers that we’re dealing with” are the Town Council’s recommended budget, above the Budget Committee, and the School Committee’s budget, above the Budget Committee. Again: what’s the role of the Budget Committee?
Budget Committee Chairman Jeff Caron is now speaking.
8:19 p.m.
Caron: “Because there’s no ‘probable cause’” to proceed the cap; therefore, there could be a charter violation, because the Budget Committee budget is the official budget. He’s also noting that Bollin promised that the administrator, Caron, and the treasurer would meet for a determination of what and whether the town would request, need, and so forth.
8:21 p.m.
Costa asked what would happen if the FTM exceeds the cap. Caron hopes that the moderator will rule it out of order. Costa phrases it as denying the FTM the right to exceed the cap. Caron phrases it as complying with the law.
8:22 p.m.
Former Budget Committee Chairman Chris Cotta is characterizing the Town Council’s move as a request for information.
Costa moved the question. Caron hopped up before a second to repeat that his meeting has not occurred. Bollin responded by parsing words about whether they’re seeking information or getting permission.
Durfee stated that such a meeting would be a waste of time. But it’s a matter of process. The fact that the process’s results might not be to Durfee’s liking. Experience suggests that Ms. Durfee and friends don’t like process that results in something against their preference.
8:29 p.m.
School Committee Vice Chair Sally Black. She’s saying the school department does have a surpluse because of pensions, and the committee moved that forward to next year’s budget. What about the “restricted” stimulus money?
8:31 p.m.
Bollin is saying that he’s “disappointed” that the meeting between the administrator, treasurer, and Budget Committee chairman didn’t happen… but we’re where we are.
Lambert is stating that the council has to develop some processes so people understand what’s going on. He’s never heard of these “advisory opinions” and “letters of inquiry.”
Durfee’s responding, again, that they’re seeking a “number of eligibility.” Unless that number is utterly useless, it seems to me that there’s no difference whatsoever between seeking a waiver and asking what waiver is available. The vote to request that information was five to two, with Roderick and Lambert voting against.
Make note: This was fundamentally a request for a waiver, and the vote did not pass by the 4/5 required to exceed the cap.
Loading ...
[...] some reason, after the Monday Town Council meeting at which the majority voted to eschew expectations that the town treasurer and the chairman of the [...]
First, thanks for posting and keeping up with the goings on — hard to make it to all of these in person.
In response to: “Make note: This was fundamentally a request for a waiver, and the vote did not pass by the 4/5 required to exceed the cap.” It’s my understanding that the 4/5 majority is required to actually request that the town exceed the levy cap. It sounds to me like the council is just looking to have all of the information available to them prior to the FTM, so they can make an informed decision on the budget. A letter of inquiry can under no circumstances be considered a request to raise the cap — it is simply a request for information. I believe several of the council members tried to communicate this, but Mr. Caron only seems to hear what Mr. Caron wants to hear. I’d sure like us to go into the FTM fully informed.