The
KENT TOWN BUDGET— by
Jim Baker
The Kent Town Board is considering a 14% increase in
Town taxes. The public hearings have been hot and, due
to the way the budget is presented, confusing. Recycling,
of course, is not involved. We do not take any money from
the town.
 |
Why the big increase ?
Part of the problem is costs associated with moving
into the new complex. Another part is that for years
the Town has been dipping into funds that had been
reserved for the new municipal complex. Under such
special circumstances one would expect all the town
departments to take a more or less equal cut. We are
concerned that this is not the case. |
The Recreation Department is about to be given a very
substantial increase! One reason for possible confusion
however, is the way the budget is presented. For example:
the adult program includes golf instruction. It is not
clear, from looking at the budget, if tax payer money
is going to pay for an adult to learn to play golf. The
cost of this program is listed but not any possible income
associated with it.. This is true of each of their programs.
Taxpayers have the right to know if they will be asked
to subsidize "adult aerobics".
The Recreation Department also wants to take possession
of the old town hall! In 2001 the Town Board stated, in
a publicity release, that both the old library and old
town hall would be sold as a means of defraying the cost
of the new Town Center. The old town hall has recently
been assessed at $600,000. If we allow the Recreation
Department to take this building the tax payer will be
hit for maintenance, for refurnishing, and for making
the building handicapped accessible. Even the setic disposal
system seems to have its problems. In asking for this
building, the Recreation Department is asking for what
amounts to a blank check.
The Recreation Department was offered an office in the
new town hall. They declined. They will open their office
in the old town hall unless your Town Board reverses itself.
The next Town Board meeting is Monday at the new Town
Hall at 7:30 PM.
AND IN ADDITION
We are attempting to institute one way traffic around
the garbage truck. Where did we get those cute little
signs? They are the signs of politicians turned inside
out.
The posts are up for the fence that will face Route 52.
The next fence will hide us from the new municipal center.
We are also working on our entrance. Eileen Civitello
and David Both are working on a stone fence-gate for our
front entrance. I haven't tried to cash that imposing
check as yet. But we do thank Senator Leibell for the
$10,000. He has told us a number of times that the KRC
is unique. Our volunteers continue to find new items to
recycle.
Have you heard of the Freecycle Network? Jim Baker 225-7901
TOWN
TAXES TO INCREASE— by George
Baum
 |
Surprise!
The Town General and Highway budget for 2005 (nearly
$8,000,000) will require an additional $1,000,000
over the amount raised by taxes in 2004. The increase
in taxes will be about 14% |
The budget is for operating expenses only (the cost of
delivering services) not capital expenses (the cost of
major pieces of equipment and buildings). These expenses
do not include the Sanitation Districts, Park Districts,
Water Districts, and Fire Districts which are funded separately
but included in your individual tax bill.
For several years, the Town has been subsidizing it's
operating budget with money that had been built up in
undesignated reserves in anticipation of building a new
Town Center. Now that the Center has been built, these
reserves are at a minimum and we will have to pay the
full, actual cost of the Town's operating budget (some
$450,000 will still be transferred from the reserves in
2005). hi 2006 no funds will be available for transfer,
so taxes will have to go up again. While the increased
cost per household may be in the range of $100-$200 each
year, this is death by a thousand cuts.
We might ask our Board why the costs are escalating far
higher than the inflation rate. We expect them to question
each department to justify each line item for each department.
If you go to a public hearing, you would be handed a 30
page document filled with numbers and asked for comments.
This is not a process of transparency. We might even expect
the Board to look for ways to reduce expenses by raising
revenues for specialized services, by increasing efficiency,
by sharing of resources between departments and with the
County, with local schools or even by partnering with
local religious institutions. Apparently they are unable,
or unwilling to face difficult decisions and find less
expensive ways to meet the Town's needs.
There is a way out of this. Congress set an example under
pre GW administrations. First they cut every department's
appropriation by the same %. Who doubts that any of our
Town departments could not sustain a 5-10% cut and yet
continue to provide the same services as in the previous
year? The second thing Congress did was to require any
bill that involved new expenditures to either be paid
for by a corresponding cut elsewhere or by defining how
the new expenses would be met.
It's your Town, it's your money, what do you want?
George Baum
November 19, 2004
|
