I will be submitting the FY2008 budget to the City Council on Monday. Tuesday!This will be an exceedingly difficult budget, with Methuen facing the same fiscal pressures as most other cities and towns in Massachusetts. I will post the entire budget here, as well as talking about the larger issues facing cities and towns throughout the Commonwealth. ( Do you have an opinion on Governor Patrick’s Municipal Patnership Act)?
-
Recently Written
- The Lessons of Munich
- A Look at “Stuck” by Yoni Appelbaum
- Town of Seabrook 2024 Water Sewer Financial Reports
- A Look at Apple in China by Patrick McGee
- A Look at Presidential Command by Peter Rodman
- Seabrook Announces Tax Agreement With NextEra
- Seabrook Memorial Day 2025
- Tony Blair On Leadership
- A Look at “Why Nothing Works” by Marc Dunkelman
- A Look at “Abundance” by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson
Archive
Categories
- Appeasement
- Books
- Brexit
- Capital Improvement Plan
- Casino Gaming
- Education
- Education Reform
- Electoral Map
- Fifth Congressional
- Greece
- Health Care Reform
- History
- International
- Ireland
- Manzi in the Morning
- Media
- Merrimack Valley Politics
- Methuen
- Methuen City Council
- Methuen Mayor's Race
- Munich Conference
- Municipal Finance
- Music
- National News
- NextEra
- Resiliency
- Seabrook
- Song of the Week
- Sports
- State News
- Surveys
- Technology Beat
- Transportation Finance
- U.S. Senate Race
- Uncategorized
- WCAP Podcast
Bill Manzi.com 
Looking forward to seeing your proposed budget. I think people in our community would like to know why it takes 6/7 people to run your office. DiZoglio ran a organized house with much less.
LikeLike
In fact my office runs with a Chief of Staff, Administrative Assistant, and an Administrative Aide to the Mayor, which is three people, not six or seven. The staff duties were different, but I believe Mayor DiZoglio had three as well. And yes he did run a tight ship.
Bill Manzi
LikeLike
In response to the article in the Tribune June 11th about the major budget shortfalls for all departments I have 2 points-
1) with all the new monies coming in on the tax rolls that is from this sprawl that started with Mayor Pollard where are all the funds? We have a minimum of open space left in town and that means all the expansion of homes and businesses means a swell in taxes collected. I know it cost money to provide services to the new housing developments but the taxes collected should be more than enough to cover the expenses, which means that the surpluses should be rolled into the general fund for disbursement or put into capital reserves. The article sights tough financial times in the near future for the City? Why? For one, maybe we should stop giving huge tax breaks and fee waivers to builders and large companies. These saved funds could be used better to fund public safety like the police and fire budget.
2) In regards to the schools budget we need to look at the cost per student to educate and go back to these landlords in town and have an additional assessment per child living in there buildings. It is not fair to assess addional tax burdens on the individual property owners while the landlords collect rents at the detriment of the tax payers. The only way to get new schools which we definately need is thru this type of tax assessment. We need to do a better job collecting, managing and spending tax dollars. In this City the majority cant pay more when others arent paying there true share! There must be a way to be fiscally sound and be profitable for the future? What are you going to do to make that happen? A tax increase is not the answer.
LikeLike
Jeff,
Your point about additional revenue is correct. The City has increased revenue every year. The problem is an overwhelming increase in fixed costs. The first thing to realize is that the budget consists primarily of personel costs. Some detail on the proposed FY2008 budget. With the latest collective bargaining agreements (of about 2.5 percent per year) salary costs have risen by approximately 1.2 million. Health insurance has increased by about one million dollars, the Methuen School Department (local share)(amount governed by state formula)has increased by about one million dollars, school transportation by about $200,000, the Greater Lawrence Technical School by about $200,000 )(amount governed by state formula)and pensions by about $100,000. Those lines take away all of the increased revenues for the City. The state increased non-school aid to Methuen by about $75,000. That increase is so miniscule as to be irrelevant. At this point I have had to cut every piece of discretionary capital spending to zero and essentially level fund the entire general government. The library has had huge increases in their fuel and heating budget, yet I had to level fund them as well. Additionally the level funded budget has to have me use one million dollars of reserves to balance, leaving a one million dollar hole in FY2009’s budget. We must convince the state that this methodology of funding Cities is insane. I have also aggressively sought out business. If you are referring to the FW Webb tax deal I can assure you that tax deal benefits the City financially. The break is only on the incremental increase in taxes. Even with the tax break we will collect far more in tax dollars with Webb than without. The site was a barren strip in a good location that had been underutilized for years. We converted it to a productive (lucrative) tax dollar generator for Methuen. I hope I have clarified. The property tax as a means of funding local education will lead to ruin!
LikeLike