Great Barrington — As the cost of employing actual human beings and keeping up with infrastructure continues to drive up town and school budgets, officials and townsfolk occasionally erupt in frustration over what and how to shave dollars and still keep things running.
Last week, it was the 7 percent Berkshire Hills Regional District school budget increase that freaked everyone out and led to proposed cuts to people –– or “staff” as they are called –– that were cheered by some, deplored by others.
Now we have the proposed 2017 town budget to add to get our whopping total. The town’s calculations assume last year’s education costs, giving us a net $24.8 million total budget – after all expenses, including education, have been added. Of that total, the town says it needs $11 million to operate, a 1.3 percent increase ($140,000) from last year. Depending on what happens this week with the school budget, to be voted on this Thursday (March 3), the property tax rate could go up from $14.48 per thousand in the proposed town budget to $15.15, a 6 percent hike from the current $14.29.
A look at the pie charts in the budget tell the story. Not surprisingly, the police and fire departments need the most to do what they do. That amount is $2.2 million. Next is public works, and they need $2.1 million. Insurance alone clocks in at $1.8 million.
Then, there is the $5.6 million capital budget to pay for fixing things and buying new stuff. About $2.9 million in grants is applied here, the rest is borrowed. Painting the Bridge Street bridge after the state fixes it will cost about one million bucks if the state doesn’t also pay to paint it. The town also says it needs, for instance, $969,000 for roadwork, some trucks, and a bunch of other things.
Many of the town’s costs can’t be avoided, like fixing the front steps at Town Hall, for instance. There are potholes that will need filling come spring, and we would never deprive the Fire Department of new air packs.
So it is people we try to squeeze. We begin to look at how technology can remove the need for extra people, or how we can use a kind of human that doesn’t require benefits: “contractors,” we call them. But if staffing is already close to the bone, and we’re locked into union agreements, we’re not sure where to bring our machetes down next.
So when Town Manager Jennifer Tabakin suggested at Monday’s (February 29) budget presentation that the town should spend $72,000 on a new human to do a bunch of jobs that a number of people including her are already doing, a few veins bulged.
Selectboard member Dan Bailly
“In 25 years we’ve never had an ‘assistant town manager,’ ” snipped Selectboard member Dan Bailly, “and now you want one.”
Tabakin explained that the position was more of an operations manager, and not an assistant to her. She said the idea was conceptual right now, but the possibly “permanent” position would involve, among other things, consolidating all the grant writing and grant management that is now done by her and two others at town hall, consultants, and in each department. She said the position would likely offset its cost and pull more money into the town, and that it wasn’t meant to be “long term.”
Several people including Bailly pointed out that it was hard to eliminate positions once installed. “Creating a permanent job at this level is a stretch,” said Finance Committee Chair Michael Wise. Bailly suggested possibly increasing consultant hours instead.
“There are a lot of projects that need to move forward,” said Selectboard Chair Sean Stanton. “The bill is a little bit challenging to swallow.”
“I can’t see myself supporting this,” said Finance Committee member Thomas Blauvelt.
Selectboard member Ed Abrahams told Tabakin he wanted to see a more “fleshed out” job description. Tabakin said she would do so and come back to the boards with it.
But the feather ruffling had spread into the audience. Patrick Fennell wanted to know if the town would “use contractor services rather than a human being — or are we putting in human beings at $100,000 per year all the time.”
A grim Selectboard Chair Sean Stanton and Town Manager Jennifer Tabakin
“Benefits are the problem,” said former finance committee chair Sharon Gregory. Since the town had paid down quite a bit of its debt, she said, “I had hoped for savings.”
Ideas for how to not pay humans were abounding, and Michael Wise upped the game. “If the Selectboard were ‘all volunteer,’ it would save the town $80,000 [per year],” he noted.
Stanton gave him a sobering response. “I can’t really afford to be on the board,” he said, noting the $5,000 it costs him per year for mandated health insurance that went up when his wife had a baby last year. “I don’t think this job should come without benefits…it’s also a lot of hours. I would suggest we go in the other direction…though it does seem strange to increase one’s own salary.”
Stanton further said it was important for working people to be on the board, not just retirees, he said with smile and a glance at Wise, who is retired. “I’m not trying to pick on you, Michael.”
Budget meetings will continue next week. For meeting times, go to the town’s website. For budget detail, click here.
The post Let the Great Barrington budget battle begin: Town operating costs up 1.3 percent appeared first on The Berkshire Edge.