Fwd: [Groton] Good Government Requires Good Process. Be Afraid of Bad Process

[E Lazaris]

Hello,

My apology for sending an add on to my previous email about tomorrow’s override vote, but I feel this is of such great importance for residents to understand and go to the polls making an educated decision. 

Please read the email below from Jack Petropoulos, former member of the Select Board. I trust his knowledge.

When I questioned why the town has not published exactly what the reversal of process means to the budget as Jack has described below, a member of the Select Board replied to me that a reply is coming but “much later”.  Well… the vote is tomorrow! We need to understand the impact, short and long term now.

The fact is, the town has not provided any information on the impact of the reversal in procedures (voting before Town Meeting). Comments to Facebook for discussion are not being approved for posting,, although this is not where we should have to turn to obtain accurate and truthful information.

Please read through this and ask questions. Know the answers before voting. And please pass these emails along to others.

Thank you.

Elena

Begin forwarded message:

From: Jack Petropoulos <jack.pet...@gmail.com>
Date: March 30, 2024 at 10:21:02 AM EDT
To: TalkAboutGroton <talkabo...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [Groton] Good Government Requires Good Process. Be Afraid of Bad Process



Proposition 2 1/2 is a wonderful, if imperfect, buffer against erratic tax growth.  It simply says that a town can raise individual household taxes by up to 2 1/2% per year with only a vote of Town Meeting, BUT if a town wants to raise taxes by more than 2 1/2% in a single year, that the town will require BOTH a vote of Town Meeting (to approve the budget that drives that increase), AND a vote at the polls to give the largest possible portion of the town the opportunity to decide if they are willing to accept the unusually high tax increase.   Presumably if the budget makes sense and a majority of voters agree that the increase is worth it, both the budget and the override will pass, and taxes will go up by the amount presented and debated.  Typically, those are known numbers because the override is traditionally tied to a one year budget and provides reasonable assurance that the unusual tax growth is capped by the increased costs associated with that year's budget.

WE ARE NOT DOING THAT

The unusual structure of a 3 year override based on estimated budgets in years 2 and 3, combined with the need to reschedule Town Meeting, has thrown the process and value of Prop 2 1/2 out the window.  It landed on its head.

1. Because of the need to reschedule Town Meeting, we are being asked to first raise the cap on our taxes without any assurance that the budget that is driving that raise will even pass. 
1. This means that the Override could pass (increasing the town's ability to tax us by an additional $5.5m) while leaving potentially no reason for the town to have that extraordinary new tax capacity if the budget that drove it does not pass.  
2. We are being asked to have blind faith in a notoriously difficult process of budget estimation. The Override seeks to cover 3 years worth of spending growth, but we are only provided real growth numbers for 1 year.  Years 2 and 3 are estimates.  The Town and schools readily admit that they cannot guarantee that those estimates are accurate.

WHAT DOES THIS UPENDED PROCESS MEAN?

If the Override passes and the levy limit is raised by $5.5m, but the budget does not pass at town meeting, we may end up with a municipal and school budget that keeps tax growth below 2 1/2% for FY'25.   BUT ...... because the Override was passed.... at any subsequent Town Meeting a request for growth in spending of up to $5.5m would take only a simple majority vote of Town Meeting to approve, and the associated rise in taxes would automatically follow.  That means that a budget that drew the crowds we saw on Tuesday night, a budget and tax rise that would have been subjet to the checks and balances of a two stage process, could instead be left to a Town Meeting of maybe 200 regular attendees plus 50 well organized single issue voters.  This is like agreeing to let the bank increase the credit limit on your credit card without actually intending to spend more than you usually do.   That is all well and good if you are the one that decides how much to spend.  But in the scenario above, once the credit limit is raised, a small group of potentially well organized people will be the ones to make that decision.

Let none of this suggest that there are devious people in our town, looking for easy ways to grow their budgets.  Our elected officials are absolutely all good people, and the single issue voters that come to Town Meeting are entitled to their focus.  Many good people feel that the proposed budget and associated override represent good government.  They can, and should, bring their spending proposals forward.  Likewise, many good people feel that proposals such as are before us now are unnecessary and / or unaffordable.   Good people will come to a democratic decision.  The value of that decision will hang on the quality of the process that it follows.

It is not bad people that I am afraid of.  It's bad process.  It's bad process to take a system of checks and balances, especially one that affects the second largest expense for most residents (property taxes), and turns it on its head.  Raising our tax threshold without having first approved a budget to justify it, nor the ability to confidently project future expenses, is a bad process.  Putting that power in the hands of a couple of hundred regular Town Meeting attendees is a very bad process.

I will vote no on the Override.  I sincerely hope that it fails, if only to assure that we get back to good planning and good execution on something as consequential as the growth of our property taxes.  I hope that we adopt a budget that we believe meets our needs and is affordable at our next town meeting.  If that budget requires an Override, I will be glad to consider an override for one year, and to go through this clunky but effective two stage process again next year if another override is proposed.  I think that the many people in our town who have an even harder time affording our growing taxes than I do, would appreciate that careful approach.  I hope you do too.

--
--
Remember: Think Global, but Post Local... And use Reply All to continue threads.
To post to "TalkAboutGroton," send e-mail to talkabo...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, e-mail: talkaboutgrot...@googlegroups.com
For archives and to manage your account: http://groups.google.com/group/talkaboutgroton?hl=en
***
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TalkAboutGroton" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to talkaboutgrot...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/talkaboutgroton/CAPGqb2_90iy8iZ7vjAPibvR0sq58i-%2BBrPkOHM%3D%3DoTr-VJ0YLw%40mail.gmail.com.