BCG FY09+ Budget Forum on Monday February 11th starting at 7 pm in the Middle School Auditorium

[copy of email sent to 433 Amherst community members]

OK, folks, attached.pdf hot of the press from the schools (coming home in backpacks on Thursday, I think).

You can also provide a link to the Town website front page, middle:
http://www.amherstma.gov/

Get it out there, please. We need lots of people *throughout Amherst* to understand what's going on if we're going to do anything other than rearrange deck chairs while we decimate the elementary schools in FY09, and we need a *plan* that gets us on track to survive (and thrive!) without some magical infusion of funds from the state and federal governments, because they are *not* coming to save us, no matter how hard we lobby them! (although yes, you still have to do the lobbying:-)

Talk to a BCG member if you have any questions; this is their show:
http://www.amherstma.gov/departments/Budget_Coordinating_Group/default.asp?id=77&mypage=77&myName=Budget+Coordinating+Group

Thanks so much for helping make our community what we all want it to be!

Take care,
Alisa

Random wonderings about how Town Meeting is going to go this Fall 2007

Interesting excerpt from the David Brooks New York Times "Happiness Gap" column published in The Republican (Springfield, MA) pg A16 Thursday November 1, 2007:

"In 1933, Franklin Roosevelt could launch the New Deal because voters wanted to change the country and their own lives. But today, people want the government to change so their own lives can stay the same. Voters don't want to be transformed; they want to be defended."

The basic upshot of Brooks' take on some Pew Research Center survey results is that as individuals, American voters are happy with their lives and also expect their lives to get better, although at the same time they believe their country and their government is going to hell in the proverbial handbasket.

I'm trying to figure out why this resonates with me for local politics as well as for the Presidential election that Brooks is focusing on.

Amherst has some number of folks who want the Town to stay the same as it was the day they arrived -- and given the transient (oops - mobile) nature of our population due especially to the five colleges, that arrival day may be last week, or ten years ago, or thirty years ago, or four generations ago -- and those folks don't seem to want to acknowledge that things in Amherst have changed and will change, like it or not, even since just ten years ago (disclosure: I've been here almost that long).

I'm trying to figure out why the clearly unhappy people, who fight so many of the changes we are challenged to consider as a community, are able to organize their unhappiness so effectively, while many of those who are strongly supportive of some change are too busy to sit through meetings and proclamations based on consensus. Sure, a lot of it in Amherst is the "aristocracy of time," as my friend Rich M refers to it. The people who can "afford" to spend time in all kinds of meetings -- plus the uber-meeting, Town Meeting -- are definitely people of some varied viewpoints, but all together they are admittedly unlikely to be representative of the entire breadth and depth of Amherst-resident views. So much of life is based on who shows up, so...

When it comes to community bylaws, zoning, and budgets, do retired white academics view the issues the same way as a single mother of color who has lived in poverty for two generations or more? Do we need to find ways to have all of us hear from the single mother on an ongoing basis, or is the retired white academic "channeling" his/her hopes for the "downtrodden" enough? What about retired academics of color -- should we worry that they're not serving in our numerous volunteer government positions in representative-of-our-population numbers? What about the number of visibly mentally ill people -- where do their views get meaningfully considered during any part of this process? And what about the college students? Do they get any say?

Do the folks we're not hearing from at meetings, in the newspapers, and/or on the listservs want Amherst to remain the same?

Do they notice the effect of state Proposition 2 1/2 on our town services? Have they suffered any ill effects due to the failure of our 2007 override vote?

Do they want to see some denser development in some areas of town, or do they think it's better to have more areas with a single large house on a two acre lot? Does "denser development" mean small, close together, single family houses? Accessory apartments in already built-out neighborhoods? Mixed-use buildings with retail on the ground floor, offices above that, and condos above that? Where?

Do they depend on the PVTA bus to get to work, school, food shopping, and/or medical appointments? Do they agree that significant local tax dollars should be spent on serving 5-15 riders at any given time, or are the routes paid for mainly by UMass (e.g., the Old Belchertown Rd bus that goes to Valley Medical) adequate for their needs?

That's just skimming the surface, of course.

Questions like these have indeed been considered in the Comprehensive Planning Committee's Planning Amherst Together process, including a survey, multiple questionnaires, small meetings, large meetings, etc.. Some progress in reaching those not often heard from has been made due to huge amounts of thought and effort on the CPCs part, but we all know that there is simply no way for the results of all those efforts to seem as though they've perfectly captured every single nuance of the issues. I'm something of a perfectionist by nature, but I know the efforts and results of the CPC work enable me to say "the perfect is the enemy of the good." The draft Master Plan is still being worked on, and should get to the Planning Board for their statutory approval a few months before Annual (Spring) Town Meeting. This will give everyone time to consider the many ideas in the Master Plan as they develop their Town Meeting warrant articles.

So why are we going forward with the zoning articles on the upcoming Special Town Meeting (the one we have every Fall, but it's always "special" if it's not the Spring Annual) beginning Monday Nov 5, 2007? Why not wait for the Planning Board to approve the Master Plan?

Because the results have already been made widely available through the town website and a variety of meetings, and ongoing meetings can always be attended by anyone. The zoning articles on this upcoming Special Town Meeting are significant and they can proceed now. For a great perspective, see this week's Amherst Bulletin piece by my friend Carol S.

Back to Brooks and how it applies locally: maybe the folks who are afraid are the ones who want the government to change to ensure their fear remains codified.

We don't need to be afraid of our decisions. We can decide to pass these zoning articles with the necessary 2/3 vote, and move on to making more decisions in the best interest of the viability of our community in both the short and long term. Arguing zoning pieces to death (or referring them, again) takes up time we need for figuring out how to deliver programs and services our residents need during these extremely difficult -- and likely to get far worse before they get better -- financial times. Keep moving forward!

FY09 Priorities

Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 12:08:45 PM
To: Select Board
Subject: comments for priorities discussion

Hi all,

I thought I would send along a summary of my comments from last Thursday night's priorities discussion:

1. We need to stop looking at % of revenue from residences and businesses and look instead at the bottom line - dollars. If we have a $1.5M gap, how will we close it?

2. We have a couple of examples in town that can give us a glimpse of how we might generate more revenues. Veridian Village, the seniors-focused development going up at Hampshire College, is projected to bring in $700k in annual tax revenues. The JPI taxable student housing complex that was proposed for North Amherst was estimated to
bring in $500k in annual tax revenues. Maybe we could still do something like this, siting it in a different location if necessary. Anyway, that's $1.2M right there.

3. There was a column in the Gazette a couple of months ago [below] that noted that companies in Boston are having trouble getting workers because they can't afford to buy housing there. Our housing costs aren't great, but they're more affordable than Boston. We could recruit a company or two from the Boston area to set up a research-based shop here, consistent with our values and the higher ed strengths we have here - say alternative energy or software development.

The point is, there are real projects that can generate real dollars. I don't know all the details on this, and I would say most of us don't. But we have people on staff in our town who could do the research, crunch the numbers, and give us some options. Maybe we should ask them to do that.

Andy C

[Originally published in Daily Hampshire Gazette on: Friday, June 15, 2007]

The knowledge economy: How our region can help end the state's brain drain
BY WILLIAM POHL

'Attracting and retaining recent college graduates in an effort to create a knowledge-based economy is one of the hottest trends in economic development today," says Rob DeRocker, executive vice president of Development Counsellors International, a New York firm that helps companies relocate.

In the same June 11 article in The Wall Street Journal entitled "Stopping the Brain Drain," Lauren Tara LaCapra notes that "a large pool of well-educated young people can be just as important to creating a vibrant economy as big employers and real-estate development. But for that to happen, competitive jobs must be available, as well as vibrant nightlife and other forms of entertainment."

Reading this, I couldn't help making comparisons to our Five College community. We have vibrant culture coupled with a high quality of life in a pleasant rural setting. We have easy access to Springfield, Providence, Hartford and Boston. We have decent transportation infrastructure including Route 91 and the Mass Pike, a freight railroad, and Westover and Bradley International Airports. And we have a supply of affordable housing with acreage and superb school systems available for a fraction of the cost of a free-standing home in Boston, which today costs from $650,000 to $2 million.

Given all these local amenities, why don't more graduates of our colleges remain in our region? The answer is simple. It's jobs. According to LaCapra, research indicates that most college graduates choose to remain in the towns where they graduate, assuming they can get decent jobs that take advantage of an increasingly expensive education. But when it comes to the creation of decent-paying knowledge-based jobs that tend to raise living standards for all area workers, our community is largely missing the boat.

Consider the numbers. UMass-Amherst boasts "a distinguished faculty that has achieved a reputation for excellence earning national and international recognition in fields ranging from computer science, business, nanotechnology, polymer science and engineering." It educates some 25,000 students a year, including an impressive number of MBAs from the Isenberg School of Management. Add to that 20,000 more students annually from Smith, Amherst, Hampshire and Mount Holyoke, plus kids from local community colleges and trade schools, and you have a powerful degree factory capable of churning out America's future innovators at an impressive rate.

So, again, one asks, where are the cutting-edge jobs for graduates of our own knowledge industry? The short answer is: not here! Despite our brain trust, most positions in the local classifieds advertise unskilled or old-economy jobs that average from $15,000 to $25,000 in annual wages. No way are you going to entice a UMass grad student with a Ph.D. in nanotechnology to stay on in the area if the best job available is to be a big box cashier or a forklift operator. That graduate leaves, and the monetary benefits of his higher education go with him to places like New York and Boston.

Now, in fairness, there are some bright spots in our area, including the Renewable Resource Energy Lab (RERL) at UMass, which focuses on creating wind energy, a handful of start-ups like Vegetable Energy Group LLC, and a growing health services sector anchored by excellent hospitals like Bay State Medical Center. We have chambers of commerce, a Western Massachusetts Economic Development Council and various research and industrial liaison offices at the university.

Still, it's the larger picture that is troubling. Given the huge scope of our academic community, knowledge-job creation here remains anemic and underwhelming relative to other parts of the country. We continue to be a net exporter of talent to intellectual centers like Route 128 and Cambridge with thriving biotech and high-tech knowledge jobs. Most of our local graduates are forced to take their diplomas and leave.

Given that our community's major industry - education - is tax-exempt, our selectmen and mayors and our college faculty and administrators should redouble their efforts to expand the tax base and remove an increasingly onerous tax burden on residential property owners. Amherst and Northampton in particular should think out of the box and become far more business-friendly. Understand that knowledge jobs at major tech companies bring in an average of $1.5 million of annual revenue per worker. (With a more diversified tax base, communities that host such companies are not voting on tax overrides to pay for basic services like police officers and teachers.) Furthermore, our towns should acknowledge that new economy growth need not be to the exclusion of existing small businesses: our farms, schools, museums, tourist industry or the arts and entertainment sector. Indeed, these very assets make our region a more attractive knowledge-economy candidate than many other college areas.

We can make excuses for the brain drain in the Five College region but while our area languishes, other academic communities are thriving. Over the past 20 years in New Jersey, Rutgers and Princeton have attracted companies from Merrill Lynch and Forrester Research to Bristol-Meyers Squibb and Tyco - concerns that employ thousands of local grads, which, in turn, generate millions of tax dollars that flow back to that community.

The same is true in the Raleigh-Durham collegiate area of North Carolina - an area comparable in size to the Pioneer Valley. Since the 1980s these pro-business towns have used tax incentives and other means to lure anchor companies like IBM to their academic communities. In a short time, they have created a virtuous cycle of knowledge businesses that has resulted in many high-paying jobs staffed by graduates and faculty of Duke and UNC, as well as people from our own area and the rest of the world.

Perhaps the most successful college town of all is Palo Alto in California. Just 50 years ago it resembled Amherst: a bucolic university town surrounded by fruit orchards and just a little closer to San Francisco as we are to Boston. Like UMass, its resident university, Stanford, found itself with vast tracts of land adjacent to its campus. It reserved this land for growing start-up companies that became the headquarters for world-class companies like Hewlett-Packard and Xerox Research PARC, and more recently Apple and Google down the road. The university fostered a vibrant entrepreneurial culture that attracted venture capitalists and the result today is Silicon Valley.

Contrast this with UMass. Business growth in the past decade adjacent to our university campus consists of a large horse farm, a new church, University Avenue sports bars, a few banks and professional offices, and a shopping center with some gas stations, a CVS and a Big Y. Is this the best use of real estate right next to a major research center? Why is there not a single solid knowledge-company in our area that could serve as a magnet to attract more business?

It's time for Western Massachusetts to stop playing second-fiddle to Boston or any other university community when we could be creating a more vibrant and healthier economy. Our towns, academic leaders, and the Isenberg school of business should emulate successful places like Palo Alto, and find more supportive and efficient ways to proactively identify promising entrepreneurs and emerging technologies, connect them with capital, and speed them to market.

We can be defensive or take offense at these suggestions and fall even further behind or we can take this as a rallying call to keep more of our considerable intellectual talent home where it belongs, to the benefit of our academic institutions, our students and ourselves. The choice is ours.

William Pohl was a speechwriter and communications adviser to the CEOs of IBM and other Fortune 50 companies.

What are we arguing about again?

One of the most difficult challenges I face in my role as a member of the Select Board is to not become impatient with conversations I feel are both repetitive and endless.

One of the most earnest conversations is the hand-wringing around "economic development isn't going to save us, look how much more growth we would need to get to x %"

Note that I said "hand-wringing," not "argument."

I read the local listservs and the local newspapers. I talk to you on the street, online, on the phone, in the shops, and listen at meetings. I know that many of you desperately want to come up with a set of numbers we can all agree are "the" numbers, yet the more we revisit this topic, the clearer it becomes that we may not in fact be that far apart on "the" numbers. Really, truly, I don't feel the need to become convinced that any particular set of numbers represents the one true reality of Amherst's possible economic development.

I know part of the problem is the original "80/20" designation that some people used as shorthand for strengthening and increasing the revenue the town receives from other-than-residential-property tax. I was part of those conversations, and I apologize if that figure seemed like a hard and fast demand. It wasn't.

I know part of the problem is people hearing something along the lines of "three projects the size of Veridian Village and/or that JPI student housing project located somewhere less offensive than they proposed, and we're all set." Please don't assume that anyone mentioning that scale of project imagines that just doing three projects like that will solve our structural deficit from now until eternity. Everyone I know who's mentioned that scale of project knows that while doing three or so of those would make a big dent in the problem in comparison to many more small projects; they do not imagine it will solve our structural deficit.

So please try to be patient with me if you see my hair stand on end when some variation on the following gets repeated:

"we need to stop thinking we can simply grow our way out of the Town's financial mess"

"nevertheless, the simplistic mantra for more development goes on"

I have not yet met a single soul -- from the wealthy developer to the business operator to the academic to the sixth generation farmer to the online entrepreneur who could live anywhere to the single parent family to the retiree on a fixed income to the two-income 7,000-square-foot-home family -- who says "more development" or "growth" is the answer to our structural deficit. Again, no one believes development is the answer.

Many people believe it must be part of the answer. Part of the answer. So we really, truly, can stop arguing about exactly how many dollars some theoretical level of growth will produce, OK?

Here's what we need to be arguing about (if arguing is indeed necessary in such a genteel academic small-town environment):

1. Since more people want to live in Amherst than currently live here, and more people want to work in Amherst than currently work here, what types of homes are we willing to let them live in, and what types of businesses are we willing to let them work in?

2. Since a lot of the people who already live here are a couple of paychecks, or an accident, or a medical problem away from not meeting their daily living expenses, they can't afford regular property tax overrides of the state 2 1/2 limit. So what do we do?

Sure, some communities don't seem to mind passing override after override, but Amherst isn't one of them, and I don't know anyone who wants it to be one of them.

No matter how hard each and every one of us works, the people of Amherst are not going to stop the war in Iraq, or create universal health care. The people of Amherst are going to contribute a lot to both of those things happening, and I hope you'll share my pride in that, but it isn't going to happen in time to eliminate our town structural deficit. Same situation on a smaller scale with increasing education aid, closing state corporate tax loopholes (or as one legislator said recently, your loophole is my incentive), and/or allowing a meals tax. That doesn't mean we stop working on any of those issues and invite Walmart to the Town Common and a gas station to your neighborhood. It means we keep plugging away on the issues we know are important, work with our legislators, our neighboring communities, and our lobbying groups, and in the meantime, we do what we can to maintain the kind of community we choose to live in.

The community we choose to live in is safe, with shared green spaces and good schools.

And if we change nothing in our FY09 budget from what we're doing for FY08, the "normal" property tax increase many of us struggle with each year will not cover increased energy costs plus health insurance benefits costs. It's really that straightforward. We can't cover our fixed costs increase with the revenue coming in. So what's going to give?

My definition of core services is possibly not your definition of core services. That's why the Select Board continues to seek your input on our community's priorities. We all -- all of us in this community, not just a few elected officials who imagine we know better than the rest of you -- have a good idea what the people of Amherst want, and the Planning Amherst Together process of developing our Master Plan will provide some strategies to help us get there.

So let's move past arguing about the development dollars, and talk about the specifics of what our community is willing to do to:

1. Control Spending
2. Seek New Revenues
3. Preserve Vital Services

Let's stop hanging back and being afraid of what might change. Too late, folks -- things have already changed! This isn't the same Town it was 15 years ago, 30 years ago, or 250 years ago. The same strategies are not going to allow us to retain the same core values.

So what are we willing to embrace?

FY09 Priorities

Select Board Meeting for Citizen Comment on FY09 Budget Priorities
September 20, 2007

Comments from Elaine B
Woodside Ave, Amherst. – 28 year resident

Inherent in this list of budget priorities is my belief that the town must strongly support increased economic development, must establish a multi-year fiscal plan including planned increases in revenue, and must make fiscally responsible choices which are based on identified priorities. Building and maintaining a strong Reserve Fund is a required responsibility of the town government in order to ensure the economic health and survival of Amherst.

No real set of priorities is going to be strictly linear, but a list is convenient way to order priorities for discussion. I hope that the Select Board will make FY09 budget decisions based on the following priority list:

1) A primary town government responsibility is to ensure the availability and safety of Water, the Sewer systems, and to protect against potential dangers to the town population’s health.

2) The second priority is providing the necessary safety for the town. The Fire Department and the Police have to have sufficient funding to serve the town well. The police budget particularly has been cut too far and must have a much higher priority than last year.

3) The third level of priority for me is the Education of the town’s children. Strong financial support of the Amherst Schools and Amherst-Pelham Regional Schools has to be one of the town’s very highest priorities not only because of its importance for the children and families in Amherst, but also for the economic health of the town.

Obviously, the Select Board does not make School budget decisions, but the Select Board needs to place education and the public schools at the top of their list of priorities because every financial choice that the Select Board makes can affect the schools and the school budgets both directly and indirectly. The Select Board’s decisions affect the town funds available for a school budget and affect the availability of other town services needed by the children and by the schools.

Every year for the past few years, all of the boards have agreed that real budget prioritizing must be done across all departments and across all budgets, not just within a single budget. Cutting every budget by the same amount each year doesn’t result necessarily in funding decisions based on the town’s actual priorities.

4) Fourth in my priority list is funding the Town services that assist the poor, the disabled, and the elderly who need assistance. This priority is different from the line item for Human Service Agency funding. This priority includes a wide range of items in a variety of budgets: some of the bus/van transportation, Bangs Center activities and services, sidewalk curb cuts and other ADA access changes, providing sufficient recreation opportunities for low socio-economic families, etc.
5)The jobs done by the Public Works Department are the set of basic services a town has to provide that individuals cannot do, or cannot do as effectively for the town. town government has the obligation of providing and maintaining roads, sidewalks, pipes, plowing, etc etc

6) Town buildings must be maintained, repaired, and renovated. Some buildings must be replaced as well for reasons of safety and efficiency.

7) Town employees must be sufficient in number to accomplish the needed work that is highest priority, and they must be paid well enough to retain valued employees. Any departments dealing with finances and town planning must have adequate staffing to do their jobs really well.

There are many more items and services to prioritize, of course, libraries, conservation dept, etc; however, the top priorities are the most critical to identify and fund, especially when money is so tight that many lower priorities will not be funded at all.

Thank you for your consideration of my list of priorities

Elaine B

FY09 Priorities

AMHERST TAXPAYERS FOR RESPONSIBLE CHANGE

Amherst continues to face an ever increasing structural deficit. Last year, the voters said NO to additional taxation as the way to close the deficit.

In our campaign vs. the override, we put forth our funding priorities to the voters:

Support for teachers not administrators
Support for current police and fire staffing

We suggested that the monies to fund these priorities come from Leisure Services; Cherry Hill Golf Course and the nearly empty buses appropriations. We also identified 29 positions totaling over $2 million between the schools and the Town that should be combined in some manner.

Given the limited resources we have for next year, priority funding based on available new resources and funds gathered from zero budgeting for non-essential programs should first go to essential services: police; fire; libraries; school teachers and para-professionals that interact with children; Public Works and essential Town Hall personnel that are required by statute.

All other programs should be zero funded and placed on a menu override, requiring majority support from the taxpayers to continue.

Some will say that this approach is to drastic and divisive. One has to balance that opinion with the fact that many Amherst residents are being forced to leave because of the high tax burden. That is a drastic situation as well.

Over the past two years, I have observed a continuing inability of the elected officials to make budget priority decisions that protect essential services.
Maybe now is the right time to let the taxpayers do the priority setting.

Stanley G, Treasurer

FY09 Priorities

Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 9:17:21 AM
To: Select Board
Subject: Input on Amherst Budget

PLEASE CONSIDER THIS MONEY-SAVING IDEA:

My husband’s company pays our $165/month premium for a family health insurance policy through my company.

This has been a great incentive for us to use my company’s plan instead of his, and it saves his company around $800 a month for our family alone.

If Amherst (town and schools) could offer to pay employees’ partners’ premiums—in part or in full—the town could save a lot of money. It’s really a win-win plan.

Thanks for asking for the community’s input.

Carolyn M

FY09 Priorities

from Irwin S, handed out at Select Board Priorities Public Hearing Thursday September 20, 2007, and available at AmherstInformed.com

FY09 Priorities

Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 6:30:20 PM
To: Select Board
Subject: FY 09 budget guidelines

Dear Select Board:

I am finding it inordinately difficult to know how to respond to your invitation for public comment. I would expect -- in fact, I would hope -- that comments from Town Meeting members and others who have been closely involved with budget struggles for some time would differ significantly from the comments offered by members of the public who have not been paying much attention and will primarily voice personal wishes. And while that is natural, I am concerned about the comparative weight you may be inclined to give to each. Moreover, since the number of closely involved citizens is inevitably smaller than the general public, the potential danger exists that taking primarily personal requests and demands out of the overall context of our current situation may further jeopardize adequate funding for our core services. I do hope that you will not allow that to happen.

I'm not suggesting that nothing but the "core" matters. What I am suggesting is that adequate, even minimal, support for the "core" should not be reduced to fund other programs and services we treasure, when we may not be able to afford these to the extent we have in the past.

Here's my view of the "core":

1. Public Safety:

The Police Department must have the two officers and support staff restored. The officers: Please remember the Police Chief's plea that these cuts would be "devastating," and be aware that he has consistently understated, not dramatized, the needs for his department. I have never heard him use such language before. I think that the Town Manager fully understands, but in his budget strategy last year misjudged the political reaction to his proposal. Please encourage his support of staffing in both public safety departments in your guidelines; for FY 09, that primarily applies to Police, since the Fire Department lost no positions this year.

Support staff: Right now, the Police Chief has no secretary, and his payroll is being done in Town Hall, whose Finance Department just lost another full-time position, in addition to staff cuts in that department in prior years.

Point of information and perspective: As newer members may not be aware, hundreds of thousands of dollars in equipment acquisition by a variety of departments have been saved over the years thanks to the Police Department's initiative to procure quality used vehicles for the Town from auctions and other sources .

2. General Government

This is the area utterly taken for granted, and often the first one targeted for cuts that are assumed to be inconsequential. Of course, it is easy to understand why the public would be unaware of what people do in the back offices on the first floor of Town Hall: Most are largely invisible and unknown. And yet, they are the ones who project, collect, invest, manage, and account for our resources, to the tune of between $60 and $70 million a year. Together, the staff of the first floor in a way keeps the Town running and on an even keel. The public cannot be expected to understand the inner workings of these departments; but the Select Board should articulate to the Town Manager their awareness of the importance of having these services rendered well; support the restoration of positions like the one currently lost in the Finance Department; and resist any further reductions in support, in the interest of ensuring that the small number of employees charged with providing these essential services are not overtaxed to the point where the quality of their work may be compromised, or good people become too discouraged and overstressed to continue to work for the Town.

3. DPW: It is ironic that this may well be the department uppermost in the public's sense of services they depend on: whether they complain of potholes or want traffic-calming devices installed, or lines painted, or sidewalks repaired or plowed, it's all the job of -- or one more job for -- the DPW. Highways, trees, cemeteries, sewers, drinking water -- people know about and depend on all of them. And yet the budget for this department is one of the leanest in town, and has been for years, thanks to the good management and ingenuity and willingness-to-make-do of the Superintendent. So when Guilford Mooring indicates that his resources are stretched to the limit, as he did to the Finance Committee last spring, I would urge the Select Board to take that into serious account in their guidelines to the Town Manager. He should be asked to review thorougly, as he makes his budget recommendations for that department, what it is possible for the department to do, and what is being neglected, because of inadequate resources.

I will not attempt to prioritize the rest of the services we provide.
I deeply appreciate them all and want to see them preserved and fostered to the extent possible. I do think the guiding criterion needs to be the extent to which they are considered to be municipal functions or responsibilities.

But the three above I think should be basic in your guidelines to the Town Manager. I know you won't all agree, but I hope some of you will.

As to the envisioned economic development director: I continue to think that is an excellent idea, depending on how the financial situation evolves.

In any case, I hope you will instruct the Town Manager that, in building his budget, he should assume a) no use of reserves and b) the use of no less than 8% of the levy for capital expenditures in FY 09, with a multi-year goal of increasing that to about 10% of the levy.

Thanks for reading.

Eva S

FY09 Priorities

Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 3:47:17 PM
To: Select Board

I like these. I found it helpful to strip out the philosophy and focus on the specific suggestions, so I edited them to do that. In case it helps you, too, here's the "abridged" version.

Andy C

Bryan H’s budget suggestions

1. Ask the Manager to present his recommendations in a way that provides clear programmatic implications (not just financial amounts) for different funding levels.

2. Ask the Manager to set his priorities in light of the town's obligations vs. its choices. The town and only the town can provide police and fire protection, discharge the municipal corporation's fiduciary responsibilities to taxpayers and bondholders, satisfy statutory requirements relating to public health, and so forth. It would be very helpful if the Manager
annotated his budget recommendation in a way that relates these obligations to actual expenditures.

3. For discretionary expenditures, ask the Manager to give the highest priority to activities that fall the closest to the set of services that citizens customarily associate with local government. Some examples of common expectations might be many aspects of library services (albeit not in the Manager's purview), programs for seniors, and recreation programs for kids. Urge that there be clarity in the Manager's budget about what kinds of expectations we are trying (and not trying) to meet.

4. Ask the Manager to give special attention to the necessary but unglamorous components of the municipal budget. If the Selectboard is not "the constituency" for these activities, then I do not know who is.

5. Focus on the reasoning behind and criteria for the decisions the Manager will make, not what outcome you want to see.

6. Ask the Manager to organize his budget proposal in terms of the most significant challenge facing our community's ability to meet the needs of our citizens now and in the future: broadening the revenue base so as to minimize the reductions in services with which we are currently grappling, and will surely grapple for years to come. Much discussion has already been devoted to this topic, but the Manager's budget must reflect the urgency of that task.

FY09 Priorities

Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 12:08:40 PM
To: Select Board
Subject: Matching resources with needs and values

Dear members of the Amherst Select Board,

Thank you for the opportunity to weigh in on a conversation that needs to happen with members of our community.

Hilda and I came to Amherst to be near our family at a time in our life to share our "golden years", with family and new friends in an environment that was conducive to continued learning and the opportunity to be a part of a challenging vital town.

We were not dissapointed.

It was amazing in the ten years we had together... to feel we are a part of Amherst.

Hilda was an important part of the Town's committee to address the needs of human services. And now thanks to you folks, I will continue her work for parity, fairness and justice.

I would like to call your attention to my interview with Larry Shaffer on ACTV Conversations, on September 12, 2007.

Larry addressed the Select Board's concerns to explore new ways to address...matching recources with needs and values. Copies of that program will be made available to the Board. I request that it be made a part of the record of tonight's proceedings.

Mr Shaffer's interview will continue to be aired on ACTV to enhance wide distribution to members of the
community.

I look forward to enabling other voices in the community to join in discussion. Pleased to be a part of ACTV to make those voices heard.

Respectfully,
Isaac B

cc Larry Shaffer

FY09 Priorities

from Paulette B & H Oldham B

FY09 Priorities

Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 11:58:49 AM
To: Select Board

To the Selectboard:

As you consider guidelines for the Town Manager as he prepares his proposed municipal budget, I would urge you to incorporate the following principles:

1. The municipal budget is one component of the town's total spending plan, and ultimately Town Meeting must determine the right balance among municipal, school, and library expenditures. That is hard to do, because the budget is organized in large, abstract groupings like "public safety" and "elementary schools." Setting the town's priorities requires getting inside those groupings (i.e. the question is not whether we will have public safety or public schools, but rather how much of each). I therefore urge you to ask the Manager to present his recommendations in a way that provides clear programmatic implications for different funding levels. For example, the Manager will recommend a fire budget based on some specified level of staffing per shift. If that represents an increase over current staffing levels, then the Manager should articulate what the difference buys in terms such as response time, number of occasions upon which all firefighters are out on call, and so forth.

If the recommendation reflects a decline in staffing, then that should be expressed in similar terms.

While there is always some attempt to do this, the structure of the budget exercise tends to emphasize numbers over actual impacts. The Manager's budget includes all kinds of data on service levels, but that does not easily translate into a practical sense of what is lost or gained at various budget levels. Often, this kind of context does not get broad discussion until the actual vote at Town Meeting, with a police chief or an LSSE chair trying to articulate the consequences of various budget levels on the fly. If the Manager's budget proposal (particularly the transmittal memo) carefully places the budget numbers in programmatic terms from the beginning, and provides a context for what a higher or lower number means, the process of determining townwide budget priorities by Town Meeting will be greatly assisted.

This cannot be done for every budget area, of course, but usually the budget debate tends to focus on some major questions lending themselves to this kind of treatment. I will make the same suggestion to the library trustees and the school committees.

2. I hope you will ask the Manager to set his priorities in light of the town's obligations vs. its choices. By this I mean that the highest priority should be given to those activities for which the town is legally responsible, vs. those for which town funding is discretionary. My reason for this is simple: it is very important that what the town does, it does well. Taxpayer confidence quickly erodes when we try to spread the butter too thinly, and service levels fall below citizens' expectations. What are these obligations? There is obviously some room for debate, but probably not too much. The town and only the town can provide police and fire protection, discharge the municipal corporation's fiduciary responsibilities to taxpayers and bondholders, satisfy statutory requirements relating to public health, and so forth. It would be very helpful if the Manager annotated his budget recommendation in a way that relates these obligations to actual expenditures.

3. Even in our current financial straits, we still pay for a lot of things that are not legally required. For discretionary expenditures, I hope you will ask the Manager to give the highest priority to activities that fall the closest to the set of services that citizens customarily associate with local government. While not strictly speaking obligations, there are certain kinds of things that people expect from local government, and when they are missing or severely compromised, taxpayer support for the whole municipal enterprise erodes. In many communities, for example, trash collection and recycling are tax-supported activities. That is not an option for us, at least at this point, but it illustrates the kind of expectations that folks may bring to the budget debate, and that may cause them to begin the process somewhat disappointed. Some examples of common expectations might be many aspects of library services (albeit not in the Manager's purview), programs for seniors, and recreation programs for kids. My purpose is not to suggest what the list should be, but to urge that there be clarity in the Manager's budget about what kinds of expectations we are trying (and not trying) to meet.

4. There is a stark asymmetry in public budgeting that I believe you can help address. Some programs and activities, by their nature, have constituencies to support them (because they appeal to some interest on the part of a group of citizens). Others do not, even though they may be very important to the overall success of local government. The myriad "green eyeshade" functions that ensure financial integrity and efficiency might be an example. I hope you will ask the Manager to give special attention to the necessary but unglamorous components of the municipal budget. If the Selectboard is not "the constituency" for these activities, then I do not know who is.

5. You will undoubtedly receive many requests to include one specific program or another in the budget. I hope you will not pass these along, or try to come up with your own list. I hope your guidelines will focus on the reasoning behind and criteria for the decisions the Manager will make, not what outcome you want to see. This seems important for two reasons. First, under our system of government making these recommendations is a central part of the Manager's job, and we should try to support him in that process. Second, the absence of an early and clear focus on criteria and the framework for decision-making is, in my opinion, a weakness of our current system. The Selectboard can make an important contribution by bringing these issues to the forefront before the inevitable haggling over preferences begins.

6. Finally, as part of that framework I hope you will ask the Manager to organize his budget proposal in terms of the most significant challenge facing our community's ability to meet the needs of our citizens now and in the future: broadening the revenue base so as to minimize the reductions in services with which we are currently grappling, and will surely grapple for years to come. Much discussion has already been devoted to this topic, but the Manager's budget must reflect the urgency of that task.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Bryan H

FY09 Priorities

Here's the first emailed feedback the Select Board has received re: FY09 Budget Priorities. Please come to Town Hall Thursday September 20 -- yes, this week! -- to share and to listen from 7:00 pm - 8:30 pm. I'll post anything I get electronically without the sender's e-mail address and just showing first name last initial, so you don't feel like you've missed anything:-)
============================================

Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 8:06:46 PM
To: Select Board

First, I commend you for the approach you are initiating this year. I believe we could save a great deal of time and energy during Town Meeting if we could spend more time up front ensuring that the Town Manager's budget was, in fact, prioritized.

I appreciate the difficulty of the choices that have to be made. Here is my input for your review and consideration:

I strongly believe that we have to stop trying to do public safety on the margins. We need to have an adequately-staffed force to respond to all manner of incidents, specifically UMass's out-of-control students. The police are overworked during the school year and do not have adequate resources to address other aspects of public safety, e.g., traffic enforcement, community policing, etc.

The fire/EMS is also chronically understaffed, and many times the first responders are college students, not professionals.

UMass needs to be forced into paying what it actually incurs; I suggest we start billing them in 18 months' time for actual costs, not some PILOT shell game like we do now.

We need to adequately fund the schools. All children are being short-changed, and the effects of the past four years are going to take many years to undo. The physical plant at Wildwood is appalling - it seems the school hasn't had cleaning or upgrade since it was built almost 40 years ago. And, the design is for an educational fad that failed, leaving kids in cramped, noisy, really dreadful "classrooms."

We need a staff position that addresses two issues on a full-time basis: economic growth/development and UMass relations.

We need to upgrade all major intersections in downtown - Rte 9/116, Amity/University Dr., Triangle/N. Pleasant. They can't accommodate the traffic they should, resulting in huge impacts to residential neighborhoods.

We need to actually cut some services. You decide which ones, but we can't keep funding everything on the backs of staff who are cut.

Thanks,
Phil J

Bring your priorities this Thursday Sept 20 7:00 pm

Town of Amherst

Press Release September 11, 2007

Select Board Schedules Public Hearing to Solicit Comment on Budget Priorities

Questions Regarding Press Release:

Gerry Weiss, Chair, Select Board - 413.259.3001
Laurence Shaffer, Town Manager - 413.259.3002

At its meeting of September 10, 2007, the Select Board of the Town of Amherst decided to schedule a public hearing to solicit input on community priorities for the upcoming FY 2009 Town of Amherst Budget. The public hearing shall be held as follows:

Select Board FY 2009 Budget Priorities Public Hearing
Town Room, Town Hall
4 Boltwood Avenue
Amherst, MA 01002
7:00 PM – 8:30 PM
Thursday, September 20, 2007

The Select Board intends to deliver priority guidelines to the Town Manager prior to the creation of the Town Manager's budget and simultaneous with the fiscal guidelines established by the Finance Committee. The priority guidelines will be established, in part, from input received from members of the community. The Select Board's priority guidelines may then be incorporated into the Town Manager's budget proposal scheduled to be delivered to the Select Board on or before January 16, 2008. For those who wish to comment but are not able to attend the public hearing, written comments may be submitted on or before October 15th as follows:

FY 2009 Budget Priorities Public Hearing
Amherst Select Board
4 Boltwood Avenue
Amherst, MA 01002
Or: E-mail SelectBoard@AmherstMa.gov

Gerry Weiss, Chair, Amherst Select Board said, "It is very important that the Select Board receive public comment regarding priorities on the upcoming budget before the fiscal discussion of the FY 2009 budget begins. That will allow the Select Board an important head start in the budgetary process. It will also assist the Select Board in completing its obligation to fix policy prior to the Town Manager's budget. I hope that you will be able to attend the public hearing on Thursday, September 20th."

SELECT BOARD
Phone: (413) 259-3001
Fax: (413 259-2405
E-mail: SelectBoard@AmherstMa.gov