They want to raise your taxes – again !

On June 3rd, Shrewsbury voters will decide whether to permanently raise our property tax rate by a record 11% that will increase the average homeowner’s property tax bill by over $400.  This would be in addition to the tax increase of over $100 that was approved just last November for the $23 million library project.  Two tax increases in less than a year is a heavy burden on young families and those with fixed incomes.    But this override proposal will NOT solve the town’s financial problems, so more Prop. 2 ½ overrides will be needed – as even its advocates have admitted repeatedly and publicly.                                                                                                                                                            Fiscal year Average teacher’s salary % change from previous year 2008 60,915 +8.72 2009 63,843 +4.81 2010 66,886 +4.77 2011 72,532 +8.44 2012 71,957 -0.79 2013 74,298 +3.28 The basic problem is poor management by the School Committee.  Their spending has been rising much faster than the income to pay for it.  For years, teachers’ salaries have been increasing at about 4% per year.  Those raises increase the School Department’s expenses by over $1 million each year.  Meanwhile, by state law, the total amount of money that the town can collect from property taxes may increase only 2½ % per year.  Most of the increase in our property taxes is consumed just paying for increases in the salaries and benefits of school personnel.  Thus, the critical goal must be to reduce the 4% annual increase in salaries.     It’s the School Committee’s unwillingness to restrain the growth of salaries that’s forced all of the other departments in town, including the schools, to scrimp and cut back.  It’s the School Committee’s weak management that’s led to this override.  Yet even now, nothing has been done to slow the salary increases.   Shrewsbury has tried one tactic after another to get more money for the schools.  Trash service was once free; now it’s pay-as-you-throw.  Water and sewer rates have jumped.  Students are now charged fees for what was once free – bus transportation, after-school activities, and sports.  Thus, both students and residents have sacrificed just to fund generous raises for school personnel.   Because the School Committee hasn’t restrained raises, the money from each new sacrifice was quickly spent.  That’s why this override will also fail to solve the problem.   This override would actually make the situation worse because the School Committee intends to hire 71 more personnel at a cost of about $3 million.  The schools would get $4.3 million of the $5.5 million override, but the new hires will consume almost all of this new money.  To pay for future increases in salaries and benefits, additional overrides will be needed – as even override proponents and members of the town’s Finance Committee have admitted.   This is not speculation.  In 2008, the town of Natick passed an override, hired 55 new employees, and now finds that it can no longer afford them.    Other costly consequences of the School Committee’s poor management:   •  Larger class sizes:  Total school staffing levels and total enrollments have been stable for years. If some classes are large, that’s because the School Department has been replacing retiring teachers with non-teachers.  State records list the current student/teacher ratio as 16.7 to 1, so there shouldn’t be any large classes.   •  Special education (SPED):  SPED costs are 25% of the School Department’s budget; statewide, the average is 21%.  That 4% difference means that Shrewsbury spends $2.5 million more on SPED than most other communities, resulting in fewer resources available to other students.   Other arguments for the override don’t hold up under scrutiny:   •  Student performance:  Despite claims to the contrary, Shrewsbury’s students continue to show improvement on standardized tests, but the rate of improvement over the past year didn’t satisfy the state’s unrealistic goals – nor did students’ performance in Westborough, Northborough, Southborough and other nearby towns.   •  Per-pupil spending:  Shrewsbury’s per-pupil expenditures are lower than the state average because smart shopping by the town manager has substantially reduced the town’s costs for cleaning services and health insurance for school staff – some $1,322 per pupil lower than the state average.  (If Shrewsbury spent the state average for those two services, it would be spending as much per pupil as Northborough does.  So Shrewsbury’s students are getting an education that’s at least as good as Northborough’s, but for $1,322 per pupil less.)  In addition, town departments and SELCO provide services to the schools at substantial discounts or for free.    In conclusion, there should be no override until the School Committee gets rising salaries and special education costs under control.  Otherwise, in a couple of years this override will be completely spent to pay for raises, and they’ll be asking for another.    The money from this override will have been wasted, and yet there will be 71 new mouths to feed.     Don’t forget to vote NO on Tuesday, June 3rd – otherwise your taxes will soar by a record amount.