July 20, 2017 — Belmont Citizen-Herald
It’s worth saying out loud already. Even though Belmont has been frugal with its spending in recent years, Town Meeting was told this May that “projected deficits for [Fiscal Year 2020] and beyond suggest that. . .increased revenue (such as in the form of a future override and/or reduced expenditures) may. . .be required in the coming years.”
This message was brought by a group called the Warrant Committee. The Warrant Committee is charged with being TM’s advisor on financial matters. The Committee authors a report to TM each year on Belmont’s proposed budget for the coming year and beyond. While not easy reading, the report is worth paying attention to.
Belmont has used the increased revenue from its 2015 operating override wisely, this year’s report said. When voters approved the 2015 override, TM created what was called the “General Stabilization Fund.” The GSF was intended to serve as a “savings account” to hold the override revenue until needed. The override revenue was expected to help the town balance its budget for three years (2015, 2016, 2017).
In fact, according to the Warrant Committee, Belmont will not need to draw money from this “savings account” in 2018. As a result, the Warrant Committee said, “we should be in a position to use a portion of [the GSF] to balance the budget in [Fiscal Year 2019].” It is at that point, however, that the arithmetic catches up with Belmont and the savings account will run dry. The arithmetic is easy to understand. While expenditures in this year’s budget will increase by 3.5%, revenues simply don’t increase that fast. Accordingly, while Belmont can draw down its savings account for several years, eventually those savings will run out.
This year’s budget does what most Belmont residents really want done. According to the Warrant Committee, “the recommended budget maintains roughly level town services, avoids major cuts in the School programs and addresses higher enrollments, and provides for capital investments (roads, sidewalks, equipment).” The Warrant Committee reported unequivocally that “Belmont’s schools are efficiently run with excellent results.” The Committee noted that “there has been increasing attention to the state of our roads and sidewalks and the 2015 override devoted more resources in this critical area.”
Schools. Roads. Level services. Good job, right?
So, given that good news, why talk about 2020 today? The time comes closer, you see, when Belmont will need to seek another override approval from the voters. When that time arrives, statements will be made about the dire consequences of not approving the override, as well as about the “millions of dollars of waste” that could be removed from the budget (if only we “really tried”). Letters will be written. E-mails sent. As we know all too well, however, in an election campaign, it is often difficult to separate truth from spin. Competing claims are often intended not to educate, but rather simply to harden the pre-existing opinions of people who already firmly believe one way or the other.
Knowing what we know today about when the arithmetic tells us our savings will run dry, therefore, one process that would be beneficial, whether through the Warrant Committee or someone else, is for a series of public forums to be held over the next two years to allow the public to express their opinions about what specific services are essential to preserve from cuts and, conversely, where specific budget cuts would be proposed by those who believe waste exists.
Engaging in that public conversation outside the context of a campaign, by beginning it before an override is proposed, and hosting it by town officials, would be helpful to all concerned.