The town needs to cut property tax rates
Implementing the proposed spending budget and property-tax increase would be counter-productive and continue, rather than address, the fiscal problems faced by the town. I am a strong supporter of the public schools, a registered democrat, and a believer in effective government. Unfortunately, sometimes, effectiveness requires doing less than we want in recognition of budgetary, political and economic realities. Now is one of those times.
We need to cut the property tax rate, not increase it. Freezing it at last year’s level would be a reasonable compromise. Any alternative, even an increase at the rate of inflation, will enhance problems in our real-estate market, make it more difficult to attract business investment and enhance prospects for a tax driven political backlash that would lead to far harsher and less well considered cuts - something that has occurred in other states with predicable consequences on public schools.
This means that the budget should not contain any salary increase not mandated by a clear contractual obligation. Exceptions could be made for those town employees that earn the least but it would be immoral, and politically problematic, for senior officials to give themselves, or be given, a pay raise, even one that is equal to or below the rate of inflation. This means reducing some of the well-meaning subsidies to non-government organizations. This means postponing non-urgent paving and construction projects. This means continuing the downward trend in the number of people that work full-time for the town (through attrition, not layoffs). This means increasing fees for certain services used by less than a majority of residents, from golf, to the marina, to the beaches, to the pavilions, to the ball fields, to certain school athletic programs (I would pay more fees in several instances). Each of us must be willing to accept less funding in some areas in order to see it enacted in others.
With regard to the overall Board of Education budget: Despite well-meaning claims, there is no evidence that the levels of spending outside the classroom that Fairfield currently maintains are necessary for quality education. Can it be advantageous to have these positions? Of course. But we do not have this luxury at the present time. Many of the office and supervisory positions in the Fairfield School system’s central office and some in the schools themselves could be adjusted or eliminated so that the individuals can be assigned to existing teaching positions within the schools. We can outsource or combine school related back-office functions. We can utilize more interns and volunteers for particular activities. It may also be time to listen to those in the town who advocate (for economic, moral and potential future legal reasons) for returning to a single town-wide high-school football team.
The town should also seek to combine some town services and purchases with similar services in neighboring towns to achieve economies of scale. However, there is no need to hire consultants to examine in what areas this could be done. Offer University classes, including graduate schools, the opportunity to research this topic as part of their business and public administration curricula.
Property taxes in Fairfield have increased dramatically in the last 15 years, and far,far more than the rate of inflation and far more than in the towns with which Fairfield competes for homebuyers and business investment. If you care about the what the quality of our public schools will be in 5-10 years, this trend must be halted and reversed.
David Downie
http://minutemannewscenter.com/articles/2014/04/04/fairfield/opinion/letters/doc533c33b2ab088924811713.txt
Implementing the proposed spending budget and property-tax increase would be counter-productive and continue, rather than address, the fiscal problems faced by the town. I am a strong supporter of the public schools, a registered democrat, and a believer in effective government. Unfortunately, sometimes, effectiveness requires doing less than we want in recognition of budgetary, political and economic realities. Now is one of those times.
We need to cut the property tax rate, not increase it. Freezing it at last year’s level would be a reasonable compromise. Any alternative, even an increase at the rate of inflation, will enhance problems in our real-estate market, make it more difficult to attract business investment and enhance prospects for a tax driven political backlash that would lead to far harsher and less well considered cuts - something that has occurred in other states with predicable consequences on public schools.
This means that the budget should not contain any salary increase not mandated by a clear contractual obligation. Exceptions could be made for those town employees that earn the least but it would be immoral, and politically problematic, for senior officials to give themselves, or be given, a pay raise, even one that is equal to or below the rate of inflation. This means reducing some of the well-meaning subsidies to non-government organizations. This means postponing non-urgent paving and construction projects. This means continuing the downward trend in the number of people that work full-time for the town (through attrition, not layoffs). This means increasing fees for certain services used by less than a majority of residents, from golf, to the marina, to the beaches, to the pavilions, to the ball fields, to certain school athletic programs (I would pay more fees in several instances). Each of us must be willing to accept less funding in some areas in order to see it enacted in others.
With regard to the overall Board of Education budget: Despite well-meaning claims, there is no evidence that the levels of spending outside the classroom that Fairfield currently maintains are necessary for quality education. Can it be advantageous to have these positions? Of course. But we do not have this luxury at the present time. Many of the office and supervisory positions in the Fairfield School system’s central office and some in the schools themselves could be adjusted or eliminated so that the individuals can be assigned to existing teaching positions within the schools. We can outsource or combine school related back-office functions. We can utilize more interns and volunteers for particular activities. It may also be time to listen to those in the town who advocate (for economic, moral and potential future legal reasons) for returning to a single town-wide high-school football team.
The town should also seek to combine some town services and purchases with similar services in neighboring towns to achieve economies of scale. However, there is no need to hire consultants to examine in what areas this could be done. Offer University classes, including graduate schools, the opportunity to research this topic as part of their business and public administration curricula.
Property taxes in Fairfield have increased dramatically in the last 15 years, and far,far more than the rate of inflation and far more than in the towns with which Fairfield competes for homebuyers and business investment. If you care about the what the quality of our public schools will be in 5-10 years, this trend must be halted and reversed.
David Downie
http://minutemannewscenter.com/articles/2014/04/04/fairfield/opinion/letters/doc533c33b2ab088924811713.txt
