A braver man than I

Don't 

try
this
at 
home. 

1938-2007

Budget Workshop 11/26

I attended the November 26 Selectmen’s budget workshop. There were about 15 other citizens who also attended. This workshop was not televised and citizens were not allowed to ask questions or make comments. There were materials available to all who attended so they had the same packet of information as the Selectmen. This information is also available on the web .

The format is that Dan Morgado, Town Manager, walks the boards through early numbers and his thoughts related to the budget. He also provides a cover letter, supportive and interesting material, and provides a set of written questions for the board to think about.

On page 4 of Mr. Morgado’s cover letter he wrote, “We have maintained high levels of service among the various municipal departments by working harder and smarter, and with the exception of the police (+14) and fire (+4) departments, the overall municipal department employee count is below where we were in Fiscal Year 1998.”

Why does Mr. Morgado exclude the police and fire personnel increases when discussing the municipal head counts?

He then goes on to write further about the municipal departments, “We have also made great use of the many excellent contractors in out sourcing work whenever possible.”

On this same page Mr. Morgado writes, “Unfortunately, during this period the Town’s overall head count continued to grow primarily to meet school enrollment and programmatic demands. Just recently for instance, the School Department moved four part time positions to full time to service programmatic needs at Parker Road.” He then goes on to warn of the costs associated with hiring people.

How many people has the school department hired since FY 1998 that are not related to teaching children?

Does the school have the option of outsourcing the teaching of our children?

The operation and the management of municipal departments are very different from the operation and management of schools. I think this type of comparison is misleading at best.

Mr. Morgado also provided that the population has increased by 31% between the year 1990 and 2000. This population increase is applauded by the town manager with one hand for the new growth addition to the tax levy, but he uses the other hand to shake a finger at the school about the costs associated with educating the by-product of the new growth.

Properly educating the children of Shrewsbury is a must, please Mr. Morgado do not further set the stage to make it a war between our municipal departments and school department.

Robbing Peter to Pay Paul

Republican State Representatives, such as Karyn Polito and Paul Frost of Millbury, have filed a bill to return the $450 million from the state lottery to towns and cities. Shrewsbury would be eligible for a one time windfall of $1.5 million and Millbury $1 million. The revenue earned from Mass. Lottery is supposed to be sent back to the cities and towns, however from 2004 through 2006 the aid was capped to allow the commonwealth to use it.

Sounds good doesn’t it? But is it really?

• Lottery sales are down and are projected to be down again this year, totaling over $240 million. That means the usual lottery amount that towns and cities receive will be on the low side again.
• Not only that the nationally scrutinized Massachusetts mandatory health insurance program is exceeding expectations and could have a $147 million shortage. “And LESLIE KIRWAN, secretary for administration and finance, says the Commonwealth faces a budget deficit of at least $1.3 billion next year.”
  

Should we leave that money for the state to fill in its gaps? Things look pretty bleak here in Shrewsbury, but look even worse at the state level. I don’t think we can expect too much help from the State any time soon. Come to think of it, Karyn you go girl, grab that money and run because we will not be seeing that kind of money in a long time!

I've been promoted!

Last week's Shrewsbury Record called me "Citizens for a Better Shrewsbury (CBS) Chairman." Just for The Record, I'm not the chairman. I haven't even been to a meeting in months because of scheduling conflicts.

Not that I'm disclaiming Citizens for a Better Shrewsbury — they're a hard working bunch of residents of all ages, politics, and opinions who are trying to help our town.

Who is the Chairman? I'm not sure. Maybe the CBS'ers in commentville will let us know.

Disabilities commission told to walk it off

To the editor:-

Below is a letter that was sent from Dorbert Thomas, President of the Shewsbury Historical Society to Mr. Keith Willette from the Shrewsbury Commission on Disabilities. Their response to not promote equal access for persons with mobility impairments at the School House is displorable, discriminatory, and unconsciousable. A friend of mine who is a scooter user and a good friend of one of the commission's members wants to visit the school house to learn about its historical significance in the old days. Unfortunately, she can't visit this site due to short-sightness and blatant prejudice. Please voice your concerns to the Historical Society to promote equal access for all. Massachusetts state law does not exempt historical buildings from not being accessible. Perhaps, it would be better to have events and speaking engagements outside of the schoolhouse. Though the school house is only open two hours a year, it is not equally accesible for persons with mobility impairments. Does Shrewsbury want to be known as a town that promotes segregation and not integration for all its residents?

Robbin Miller
Advocate
Shrewsbury

Dear Mr. Willette,
The Shrewsbury Historical Society has no plans to address accessibility to the District #5 Schoolhouse. This is an historical building and any changes will destroy the historical value of the property.

The schoolhouse is open to the public for two hours, once a year, during the Spirit of Shrewsbury Festival. It is not now, nor will it be in the future, used as a school trip.

Sincerely,
Dorbert Thomas
President
Shrewsbury Historical Society

Show Down at the Okay Corral

Local business man, Mark Ragsdale is denied his right to bear arms by Shrewsbury Police Chief Hester. Does Chief Hester think he is the Sheriff of Kia City and Mark Ragsdale the Bad Guy, Ragin’ Ragsdale? Without his guns what can the poor man do but sue?

I mean come on anyone could shoot an officer a few feet from you in the dark. So what if Ragin’ Ragsdale had a few drinks. So what if Ragin Ragsdale is legally blind at night, and has someone drive him around during the day? So what if Ragin’ Ragsdale has mood swings, has severe diabetes and needs to watch his diet and probably restrict his alcohol intake? So what if he carries at gun at his side on the show room floor, heck, it probably boosts sales! When Mr. Ragsdale says to a customer,” this is our best deal take it or leave it”, would you leave it?

Does all this mean he should not have a license to own a gun or guns since he is a collector? Frankly, if you wear a cowboy hat you just have to carry a gun to complete your ensemble. Come on, ask any 6 year old boy, cowboy hat, gun, bandanna, and horse, ahhh....life is good. It’s not like he is a gang member. Heck, he must pay a lot of money to the town of Shrewsbury in taxes, he is a business owner, and owns a big house. Treat the man with a little respect.

How can the Sheriff treat Ragin’ Ragsdale like he is a danger to his community, just because he shot an officer, at close range, while intoxicated, has mood swings and is losing his eyesight. Poor Ragin’Ragsdale has enough problems, let him have his toys. Just imagine the look in the kiddie’s eyes on Halloween night when the trick or treaters ring his doorbell and he answers the door wearing his western gear, with guns blazing. Brings tears to your eyes, or maybe I should say fears to your life.

Thank you Chief Hester for sticking to your guns by not letting Mr. Ragsdale have his guns. Hopefully the civil lawsuit will not waste too much of the taxpayers money, but if it does it is worth every penny.

Buy my vote!

Here's some Thanksgiving reading for you.

A recent article asks a provocative question: Is it Smarter to Sell Your Vote or to Cast it? Considering low voter turnout in Shrewsbury, this is an interesting read — check it out.

"Trash tax" not needed?

To provide new revenues to offset projected increases in the cost of trash disposal, the town's administration has considered requiring residents to buy special trash bags -- a proposal that's been deemed a "trash tax" by some. But now a "trash tax" may not be necessary.

The town will soon sign a new 20-year contract both for trash disposal and for the operation of the town's landfill.* The cost of disposing of the town's trash had been projected to rise from $433,028 in fiscal year 2007 to $828,376 in the current fiscal year, when the cost per ton of trash burned, rises under the new contract. However, the increase in trash disposal costs will be lower than projected due both to the new contract's charges for burning the trash (which were lower than expected), and to slower growth in the amount of trash to be disposed of. Consequently, the cost of trash disposal in this fiscal year is now estimated at $785,668 -- an increase of $352,640 above last fiscal year's costs.

Meanwhile, it was announced at the November 5th Selectmen's meeting that revenues from the town's landfill are expected to double soon under the new contract: from roughly $600,000/year now to $1.2 million/year. The increase is due both to the increase in the fee that the town charges companies to use the landfill and to the broader range of waste that will be accepted at the landfill.

The increased landfill revenues (about $600,000) should more than pay for the town's increased trash disposal costs (about $350,000). So, the financial argument for a "trash tax" has been considerably weakened as a result of the administration's adroit negotiation of the new contract.


* "New trash pact ups tipping fees: Revenues from use of dump expected to rise too" by Elaine Thompson, Worcester Telegram & Gazette, 13 November 2007, pages B1, 2. (See: http://www.telegram.com/article/20071113/NEWS/711130582 .)

Sewer fees up 70% in 2010

The town, state, and federal governments will soon conclude a 20-year agreement on the operation of the Westborough sewage treatment plant. The agreement will raise residents' sewer fees about 70% starting in 2010, and those fees will remain high for 20 years.

Much of the revenue from the higher fees will fund a $19.5 million upgrade of the treatment plant. Specifically, a new phosphorus-removal system will reduce the amount of phosphorus discharged from the plant into the Assabet River. Presently each day the plant discharges about 28 pounds of phosphorus dissolved in 4.4 million gallons of treated water; by 2010, that will drop to about 4 pounds in 4.65 million gallons. The state and federal governments want less phosphorus in the Assabet River because phosphorus fertilizes algae growth in the river during late summer.

The state encouraged the town to build the treatment plant, and the state approved the location, design, and operation of the plant. The state also specified the standards that the treated water must meet before it can be discharged into the Assabet. But when the state decided that the plant was polluting the Assabet, Shrewsbury -- not the state -- had to pay to correct the problem. Tens of millions of dollars that could have been spent on Shrewsbury's schools, police, and other departments will instead be spent to clean a river that doesn't even flow through Shrewsbury.

A state law regarding unfunded mandates requires the state to pay costs that its laws and regulations impose on towns. But a state court case -- the so-called "Norfolk decision"^* -- allows the state to wriggle out of its obligations: the legal argument is that if the state doesn't require something (and the state didn't require Shrewsbury to build the Westborough treatment plant), then the state doesn't have to pay for any improvements that it mandates -- largely undermining the prohibition against unfunded mandates. (Massachusetts justice: in a case against the state, a state court finds for the state. You can't fight city hall, at least not in Boston.)

And the state may impose still more costs: Phosphorus has settled into the bed of the Assabet, so to eliminate this second source of phosphorus, the state may require the river bed to be dredged at a cost of millions more.

Reference:
^*Town of Norfolk v. Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, 407 Mass. 233 (1990). See:
    (i) http://www.library.unt.edu/gpo/acir/Reports/information/M-173.pdf , page 40.
    (ii) http://www.mass.gov/sao/faq.htm , scroll 2/3 down the page.

Education Then and Now ...

I attended a one room school house. One teacher taught all subjects to all the children in grades 1 - 8.

Our bathroom was an outhouse and the wood stove kept us warm in the winter. It was my job to bring the wood in and keep the fire burning.

By jiggles, we learned a lot more then kids do today! I had an 89 average; the top in my class.

It was at this point that my eyes would glaze over and I would just chock it up to one more story where dad walked to school bare foot and up hill both ways! Now I wished I had listen more attentively to some of his stories.

I'm sure you all have similar generational "glitches" in your own lives, I share this one with you to underscore how much public education and the world has evolved since my father was attending school in Northern Vermont in 1923.

The world today requires a broader education - technology, the global economy, the environment - these were not even considerations in 1923. Today our children need to learn to think critically, work in teams, communicate well, and to learn about the world so that the Untied States can continue to succeed in this new world.

Today a community is legally required to meet and to pay for the education of segments of students that were not even identified in 1923. If the community cannot meet the needs of some of the student segments within their public schools then they legally must use tax dollars to pay tuition, and in some cases, the transportation costs to schools that can meet those needs.

The diagram provided has attempted to identify the majority of student segments that public schools must accommodate today. In addition, the diagram shows where tax dollars leave the public school system in Shrewsbury to support the educational and transportation needs of students who cannot be accommodated by the Shrewsbury Public School System.

Vocational education, not an option in the school systems of 1923, is now a top-notch option for students who choose to train for a vocation instead of the attend the public high school. Shrewsbury is obligated to pay tuition for students who attend vocational schools.

Fair and Appropriate Education laws ensure that the needs of special education students are met by the public school system. If the school system cannot meet the needs of a special education student then the school system must pay tuition and transportation expenses to out of district schools for these students.

Public school systems must pay tuition for students who decide to attend a school choice school or a charter school.

Public school systems must provide transportation for students who attend a private school within Shrewsbury.

I know a lot of people are surprised when they learn that the public school system is legally required to pay tuition for so many students to attend schools outside of the community's own public schools. But these are the facts and they do bare some thought.

A number of the Shrewsbury teachers hired for school year 2007 - 2008 were to support special education. This is a good investment because it is a fact that it cost the town less to provide special education in the district. At the recent 3-board meeting School Committee members brought up the point that we are seeing an increase in special education children and that the needs are greater. As a town we should consider if it would be cost effective to invest in our schools so that we can meet the needs of these student in district.

The number of students choosing to attend charter schools is steadily increasing. After the first year that a student is in a charter school the public school system must pay the full share of the student's tuition. In 2006 the total cost for charter school tuition was $424,421 and Shrewsbury's out-of-pocket share was $230,649. From discussions with others it appears that charter schools are being selected by students and their family because they believe that they will receive a more challenging education. The students who are selecting the charter schools, again from conversations only, mainly appear to be the average and advance students.

As a town we should look at programs that we are offering our average and advance learners and make sure that we are providing an education that is challenging every student to improve and learn more. Currently a student who scores proficient or advanced on the MCAS both receive a CPI of 100%. Therefore, under the MCAS measurement there is no incentive for the schools to move proficient students to advance, or to further challenge our advance students. MCAS focus on moving all students up to proficient.

What we all need to understand is that the financial incentive to make sure that we are challenging our average and advance students is real. The real cost to Shrewsbury is increasing every year. Shrewsbury needs to bolster these programs and they need to communicate that to the public. The answer is not pushing back on charter schools the answer is making sure that we are challenging all of students to maximize their own educational potential. It will cost us less in the long-run to invest in our town's public schools.

My father was incorrect to judged my educational experience and requirements against his educational experience. We will also be incorrect, and poorer, if we judge today's Shrewsbury educational experience and requirements against those of our own.

A Stooge and a Smart Dame go on a date

About a month ago, Moe DePalo and Moira Miller had a date with MassDevelopment, then Karyn Polito showed up and elbowed her way into the front of the photo, and a few others showed up in case Moira got bored with Moe’s dim comments and head slapping. Spurious George didn’t know much about MassDevelopment, I thought they had something to do with Fort Devens, or maybe it was one of those power drinks to help weight lifters bulk up.

According to their website, they basically reinvented Fort Devens, the former military base which is now a planned community with 4,400 acres with a golf course and of course the big fish Bristol-Myers. If they can work magic on a former old military installation, maybe they could wiggle their wand at the Allen Property or CenTech or maybe install that toll bridge over Quinsig, like I suggested.

MassDevelopment has been around for over 6 years, isn’t it funny that Moira Miller gets elected and NOW the Selectman and Karyn Polito have discovered MassDevelopment? Is the budget so tight we can’t even afford to buy the Selectman a subscription to the Boston Globe so they know what is going on in other parts of the state? It seems from looking at the MassDevelopment website every town in the state has used their services, Shrewsbury must be in deep doo-doo if we are finally looking to them for guidance.

Trash Issues, Trash Options

I was one of many speakers at a public forum last week about Trash. Many ideas were discussed, all of which bear repeating here.

Issues:

• Health - This is a health issue. Sanitation is at risk without well-maintained trash collection.
• Recycling - Everybody at the meeting agreed that recycling is good and needs to increase.
• Override - Some people (not me) suggested that this is a way around the tax levy limit, and therefore it ought to be put to a referendum.
• Finances - Is Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) necessary? The latest figures show that the new contract numbers aren't going to be as bad as predicted. (Can anyone out there in commentville tell us the new numbers?)

Options:

• One free bag - Allows for smaller homes to still have free collection. However, doesn't reduce trash as much. And why should we favor a home with one resident over a family of six?
• One free bin - Easier to monitor and doesn't require purchasing anything. Otherwise, same pros & cons as free bag.
• Clear bag - Haulers can reject bags containing recyclables.
• Richer homes – Won't be deterred by paying for bags.
• Apartments & Commercial buildings - They already pay for trash, so PAYT would help them because it would bring the rest of the Town down to parity.

Town Meeting Members should be involved in budget

To the editor:-

(The following letter was sent to Town Meeting Members today)

I am a Town Meeting Member from Precinct 8 and I served on Shrewsbury’s Finance Committee from August 2006 until June 2007.

I am trying to get more Town Meeting Members interested in the town’s FY09 budget process as it gets underway. I am concerned that Shrewsbury is entering the fifth year of a structural deficit with no relief in sight. Now is the time for all of us, as elected representatives from our precincts, to get informed and involved.

On October 25, the Board of Selectmen hosted the Finance Committee and School Committee for a “three-board” meeting. You may still be able to catch a rebroadcast on Shrewsbury cable or through Video on Demand. It was enlightening to watch the discussion between these three groups who are charged with setting priorities and developing the budget for approval at Annual Town Meeting. The three boards are seeking feedback from Shrewsbury citizens about what they value and where the town should expend its limited discretionary resources.

Here is a copy of a letter I sent to Town Hall last week to encourage the Board of Selectmen to develop some early projections about what FY09 might look like. I also asked them to identify potential areas of cutbacks if revenues are lower than expected. Finally, I asked that they seek other sources of revenue for the town to help close the gap.

In the next few weeks, there are two good opportunities for you to learn more and provide input at this early stage of the budget process:

November 26, 7 PM — Conference Room A, Town Hall – the BOS Financial Workshop with Town Manager Dan Morgado. I was the only member of the Finance Committee to attend this meeting last year and I found it to be extremely valuable in terms of laying out the foundation and trends for development of the annual budget.

December 11, 7 PM — Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Town Hall – the BOS will hold a public hearing to hear from Shrewsbury residents about what they value and what the town’s spending priorities should be.

Please read the attached information and forward your own thoughts to the Board of Selectmen. I hope to see you at the upcoming meetings.

Sincerely,

Johanna B. Musselman

Tax-Exempt Property

The Worcester Business Journal just published its 2007 Fact Book, with vital statistics for Central Massachusetts. It is full of data about more than 80 communities in our region.

A chart on page 7 illustrates the Central MA Towns with the most tax-exempt property.

Are you surprised that Shrewsbury is number 5 on this list?

The top five are:
Worcester $ 2.8 billion in tax-exempt property
Framingham $ 1.2 billion
Fitchburg $ 662 million
Natick $ 506 million
Shrewsbury $ 479 million

Some of the other 4 communities have colleges and private schools which would be exempt from property tax.

Does anyone know which properties in Shrewsbury are tax exempt? This tax-exempt category represents 9.3% of Shrewsbury's total assessed property of $5.2 billion.

Compare this to Franklin, a town with a similar total assessed property ($4.9 billion) -- their tax-exempt property is only 6.2% of the total.

If any of Shrewsbury's tax-exempt property could be returned to the tax rolls, the value would become a component of "new growth" in property tax. At Shrewsbury's current tax rate of $8.66 per $1000 in assessed value, think of the possibilities!

More Fees

Dear Selectman,

After watching your tri-board meeting on October 25, I do not want any services or departments cut from the upcoming budget. My Core Values are: I WANT IT ALL! Instead I would like to suggest the following fees to help increase revenue:

1. A parking fee for parking in the all municipal and school owned lots, including library
2. An open bid per neighborhood to turn on the street lights or if you want it dark, you could outbid your neighbors who want them turned on at night
3. Anyone who runs for public office and displays yard signs should pay a fee per sign
4. Pay toilets in all municipal bathrooms and schools (children eligible for reduced school lunches would be exempt)
5. Turn Quinsig Bridge into a toll bridge
6. The short staffed municipal departments who are bombarded with requests for information will charge a fee to those individuals or groups who contact them and expect a response
7. Solicitation fee for all school children, and scout troops selling door to door
8. A luxury car fee, Humvees, an even larger fee
9. Coin operated playgrounds
10. Residents or businesses within 100ft of clogged road drains will pay fee; Sidewalks not shoveled within 8 hours of snow storm will be fined
11. At the Lawn and Leaf Drop Off at the Highway Dept, the burly guys in professional looking pick up trucks with an 18 foot mountain of freshly mowed grass pay professional or out of town fee
12. Custom Snow Plowing Program: Silver will be plowed within 8 hours Gold will be plowed within 4 hours and Platinum will get immediate service and drivers will take extra care not to plow your freshly cleaned driveway entrance.
13. Put out to bid the names of all municipal buildings
14. Out Source to India or China: everyone of non supervisory level at the Carney Municipal Building
15. Rent out the new fire truck to carnivals and fairs, all those gizmos sound like fun
16. Turn down heating thermostats to 68 in all public buildings; complainers will be fined
17. Fees placed on all knitting and quilting at the Senior Center that is later sold at a profit

1000 Words

Another
good
reason
to
enjoy
gis.shrewsbury-ma.gov.