Some interesting tidbits from last night's Special Town Meeting:
- Nobody, and I do mean nobody, understood how articles 1-3 shifted the money around from the salt shed. Like it or not (and I was fine with it, myself), the proposal was confusing. Do we really understand how the tax levy works vis-a-vis other accounts and 9C cuts? If so, can you explain it to the rest of us?
- There was a lot of practical discussion of the article to change motions to end debate.
- There was an audible grumbling when I rose to ask a very simple question about Highway funding.
- How can anybody think that raising the meals tax that tiny amount is so bad?
- Why is raising taxes called "permanent"? That was just a scare tactic.
- I, for one, don't understand the town's involvement in the Centech proposal. I support the development, but what is the town's legal interest? Don't developers spend their own money to develop their own land?
- Did anybody else realize that the ever-menacing wall clock hadn't been set back to Standard Time?
24 comments:
How can anybody think that raising the meals tax that tiny amount is so bad?
Mark, because Shrewsbury is competing with Northboro and Westboro for commerical development we are giving those towns an advantage. For example, using the RTE 9 and RTE 20 areas. There is a Wendy's and a McDonalds on RTE 9. If Burger King decides to join the fun in that area, the small tax increase, and it is very small, gives Northboro and Westboro an advantage. So those towns may pick up the property tax that a new Burger King would pay. We are trying to bring business to town and this is another weapon we are giving the competition. It's too bad debate was cut off before I could make this point at TM. This would not have changed the vote, it may have made it closer. I do agree with the increase to the hotels.
seriously ??? burger King. If I buy the double whopper, super size fries, and the Big Gulp my bill total at BK in N-boro comes to $7.28 but if its in that ugly town called Shrewsbury which is inflicting another .75% tax then my bill total comes to $7.33. Interesting arguement. Are you going to decide based upon .05? Also, last time I checked the 'menu-boards' at BK, MCD, Wendy's, KFC, etc.. list non tax price. so the .99 Whopper JR in N'Boro is not going to shop up on the board as 1.02 in shrewsbury.
People go to the fast food joint that is nearest to them. While I understand your theory, I don't believe that the many people even give any thought to the extra couple of cents. I doubt the vote last night will have any effect on restaurants coming to town.
Our property tax rate is lower. They'll pick us over W'boro
Mark,
While private developers still spend their own money, Centech has a lot of public money flying around it. The biggest item where public money is spent is on the roadways, such as Centech Blvd. and now Fortune Blvd. There have been lots of public spending cuts, but governments still build roads (until someone from Shrewsbury suggests that we should stop building roads and lower taxes instead).
The message we are trying to send out is that Shrewsbury is business friendly. When competing against Northboro and Westboro, this is another bullet point in their favor. It may be a very small check mark for Northboro/Westboro, but it is a checkmark in the positive column.
and shrewsbury's response for the holiday inn wasn't a business friendly response? ???
I admit that I am wrong. Increasing taxes on a business' customers is business friendly.
Regarding roads and taxes above (Centech etc.)in Shrews. Stop fixing the ones that don't need fixing and start paving dirt roads where people are paying the EXACT same tax as the rest of the world.
How can anybody think that raising the meals tax that tiny amount is so bad?
The tiny amount is not the issue, it is the principle of the thing. A number of our citizens don't feel the correct response to every problem is raising taxes. This town/state takes in a lot of money. It has been pretty consistently stated that the state wastes 41 cents out of every dollar that is collected. While I don't personally believe the figure to be that high, I bet it is quite a large percentage.
Why do we waste so much money? Because we can. Business is responsible to their share holders and their customers. If they run out of money they have to stream line things, or sell more product. If the government runs out of money, they just take more from us. Not voting for this "tiny" increase isn't because people can't afford it, it's that they can't continue to have "tiny" increases over and over again.
Who says the state wastes 41 cents out of every dollar? Is this the SRT version and their fuzzy math? At the last BOS meeting, Mr. Tartaglia was very quick to say no to any consideration of increasing fees, why does he not feel the same about school fees? He thinks there is plenty of money to go around. I would love to see him provide all the services in the manner they are today within the current budget. He comes up with all these ideas, but do any really make sense? I like the fact he brings ideas to the table, but I don't like the fact that he feels it is ok to "tax" - his words - one group in town - school parents - but won't even consider the need to raise fees to what the surrounding communities are doing.
To the previous writer: Yes Mr. Tartaglia wants to hold the line on fees and taxes. Thats why the town elected him. Unfortunately he has no control over school fees. The School Committe sets the fees and the Board of Selectmen cannot change them. If school fees are your issue, you should be bashing Mark Murray instead.
Also, if you think the tiny amount raised by increasing town fees will eliminate the school fees, then I would suggest it is you that is using fuzzy math.
Mr. Tartaglia should be commended for having the gumption to take a stand, but when it comes to raising revenue and bringing our fees in line with the surrounding communities, he says he can't support it. Why? He has been very vocal in the past about saying the schools spend too much, etc. Gee - in a community where school spending is in the bottom of the barrel, how can it be they spend too much? It is time our elected officials - BOS - start to take a stand to raise revenue in any area they can. I don't want to pay more in fees, but I don't want to see more cuts to services. I am sick of the SRT crowd talking out of both sides of their mouth. Fees are only bad when it affects them. Fee the parents of school age children to death, but that is OK. Time for some equity.
Shrewsbury IS business-friendly. We have some of the lowest property taxes around. Town Hall, engineering & building permits have been reasonable and the departments are happy to work with developers. Our water, sewer and electric rates have been very competitive for years. So, why do these other communities keep getting more office parks and small businesses? I don't think it's going to be the .75% difference in meals tax that makes anyone pick Westboro or Northboro over Shrewsbury.
The School Committee only charges fees because there is not enough money in their budget to cover the costs of educating our children. They wish they didn't have to charge them, but if they don't MORE teachers and services and support would be lost. Mark Murray and the rest of the committee instituted fees because they had no choice.
The School Committee charges fees because they are punishing voters for not approving an override. Fees make up very little of the overall budget, a little over 1%, but they are crippling to families with children. The School Committee has heard pleas for years and doesn't care.
There are over 700 teachers and staff in the school department. If 10 were laid off, that savings could nearly eliminate fees. 5 would cut the fees in half. Probably most parents would prefer bto go without a few teachers or staff to get reduced fees. But your School Committee will sneer if the idea is even brought up. Afterall, there is barely enough money for the Mandarin Chinese teacher.
To the 4:50pm poster - your comments are comical and rude. Based on your "Mandarin" comment, everyone knows who you are. What is your problem with the School Committee? You chose to ignore the fact that fees were not undertaken lightly and that the SC is not "sneering" at people you talk to them about cutting fees. Do you even watch the meetings? You and your crowd stand on your soap box and say "cut, cut, cut" when it comes to the schools. This shows you haven't paid attention to the cuts in programs and budget over the past years. You are the same group who get all upset when there is a mention of fees or cutting on the municipal side. You call everything a "tax." No, it is paying your fair share. Stop posting your ridiculous lies on this blog. You know that fees are the first thing the SC would love to see go away, but they care about program and want to be sure all students get the courses they need. Your ignorance shows everytime you speak out against Mandarin as a language in the schools. You obviously take no time to see where we are going as a country and you don't have any clue about what a global education entails. I feel really sorry for you. Why don't you do something productive with your time?
When times were good the school com at contract time never considered what would happen when the tide turned. Between the step and the cost of living raises, salaries went up where 5 - 8 percent a year. That cannot be sustained.
To the 10:11am post - the same goes for fire and police. Why do you only blame teachers? Your view is slanted and gives an inaccurate picture of what has gone on in this town. You obviously have an ax to grind about teachers and schools. Gee, I guess you were never a kid!
What is your position on the lucrative contracts the fire and police unions have worked out with Dan over the past few years? Do you think they were too rich, as you imply about the teacher's contract?
To the 11:48 poster.
I looked at the biggest group. Yes, the police and fire depts contacts were also not sustainable during bad times. The quinn bill must go. Some detail work needs to go to flaggers, but first we neeed a law that tops out flagger pay at $18 - $20 so we have real savings.
If we try to take an unemotional look at where budget cuts have impacted our community, we see that we are all paying for trash removal. That is a fee, but it is the only fee that we ALL pay.
As a parent, I now pay fees for my children to play sports, participate in activities after school, to ride the bus, AND to play in youth sports outside of school (a new Parks & Rec fee for all youth sports organizations using town fields). All I want for my children is a well rounded and happy childhood -- the same anyone wants. I grew up in a town that was willing to spread the burden of the cost of all municipal expenses -- including the schools, they are a part of the municipality -- among all taxpayers. Why should Shrewsbury be different? Why should we think our neighbors should pay for things that are a part of a community, but we should except just because we don't like or don't currently use a service?
I almost fell out my seat hearing a certain outspoken Town Meeting Member's argument against raising the meals tax as, "This might have to be paid by Shrewsbury residents." Who the heck uses municipal services of all kinds? WE do. We all do. And we ALL should pay for it.
Enough with the "us" vs. "them" crap that is standing in the way of this town moving foward!
To the 8:45 AM poster - The best you can do is get emotional and call names? I will provide a civil reply and if you wish to comment, please be equally civil.
Let's talk facts. Most everyone feels the school fees are too high. This has been told to the School Committee over and over again. They can easily lower the fees, but must make up that revenue by reducing cost. The bulk of the school budget is wages, so that is the place to look. The reduction of a handful of staff (out of over 700) can nearly eliminate the fees. Why not do that? Better yet, let's poll the parents and ask them if they'd support that idea. We all know what the answer would be. The School Committee also knows what the answer would be, yet they choose to ignore it. Instead, they 'motivate' the parents saying the fees can ONLY be reduced with an override. This is not right. I call it sneering, but you can call it what you want.
About Mandarin Chinese classes- It was introduced into the schools because a large school donation came with strings attached- that Mandarin Chinese must be taught. It is not a mainstream school language and is clearly in the nice-to-have category. Meanwhile, at public meetings about the budget several months ago, many kids came forward begging that shop class should not be cut. The School Committee chose to save Mandarin Chinese and cut shop class. I do not agree with that decision. I know those kids don't either.
As for education from a national perspective- the average cost for educating Massachusetts students is 6th highest in the country. Why is our state so high? Perhaps we pay too much to our teaching staff. Perhaps we don't handle special education properly. Shrewsbury students are getting a good education based on their impressive MCAS results. But in fairness to taxpayers and parents, we ought to find more cost efficient ways of educating and we ought to reduce or eliminate school fees.
If Shrewsbury's spending on schools (including all of the municipal components) is in the very bottom of all MA districts, why should we be spending less? Cuts have been made in program for many years and further cuts to core classroom teachers have been mitigated by the unpleasant fees.
Our teachers have not asked for "the moon" and have been very reasonable partners during recent years' negotiations, with an eye to preserving jobs.
Compared to other districts in MA we spend less per pupil on administration, on core teachers, on materials & textbooks, and less on insurance & benefits.
Further cutting is not the answer since we are already well below what the state says we SHOULD be spending on our schools. In fact, in 2 of the past 3 years, Shrewsbury has been penalized, with a reduction on our allocation of State (Ch . 70) aid. No, we as a town should stand up and pay
more in taxes to support our local schools with local funds. We've become overly reliant on state aid.
To the 8:06 poster.
The previous poster staed the MA has the 6th highest cost per student. Mentioning that Shrewsbury is below state average does not answer that question. What are other states doing? Why is it more expensive here? Our population is not spread out like Utah and New Mexico, etc, so transportation is not the problem. Is it because our elected state officals bow down to the public unions?
We are a state that has been losing population while the populations of other states grow.
Post a Comment
Anonymous comments are allowed, but the publisher retains the right to screen them first.
Comments posted from a registered account are preferred but not required. Registration is free. Accounts are easy to set up and easy to use. Please help ShrewsBuried by participating in this new policy. Any comments, complaints, or compliments should be directed to Publisher@ShrewsBuried.com.
Register for a free commenting account here.