Give Councilor Elliot credit for trying..He has a motion on this week’s City Council Agenda to try and help the Lowell Home and Business Owners.
23. C. Elliott – Req. City Council vote to instruct City Mgr. to develop the FY13 Budget without property tax increase
With the potential savings from the Health Insurance moving to the GIC and at least level funding in State Aid it would seem a good time for the council to support this motion.
We the people, all stand with Councilor Elliot. Please do not raise taxes. In fact, I hope they find ways to trim the budget. Other large cities in our state are looking at turn off street lights early morning or turning off completely. Saving hundred s of thousand s of dollars. There are many, that would nt compromise safety. Would nt it be nice to have neighborhood schools again, the childern would get to know the childern in there own neighborhood like we did when we where kids. I know jobs would be sacrificed , we as a city or a nation needs to reinvent ourselves or we all be in real trouble. let s hope this motion is suported.
The CM will need to hire a few folks, just to babysit C. Elliott’s fetish with the LHA!
On a serious note, how about we let the CM figure out the right budget for our times. Then, the Council can figure out where they want to trim it back. Why does C.Elliott want to abdicate his authority to trim the budget?
You don’t start a budget with a ceiling. You design what you should have to fit the need. Then you make tough decision, in line with our priorities.
Let’s see what the Council’s priorities are. Let them use scissors.
PS. We sure talk a lot about Lowell’s Schools. Talk, Talk, Talk.
Why does C.Elliott want to abdicate his authority to trim the budget? He doesn’t
But his fellow Councilor’s have NOT supported his efforts in the past, so he is being proactive and trying to get the budget crafted beforehand so he doesn’t have to ask for cuts.
He is supporting the taxpayer. Give the guy his due..I may not always agree with hom but this time he is 100% correct
You may not be surprised, but I reject the wailing of “overburdened” taxpayers. How this City is administered. How it’s fiscal needs are assessed in line with the services it provides. Those details are known by the CM and his Dept. heads.
Allowing taxpayers to steer the fiscal ship is a mistake. Talk about COI.
Elliott’s annual stunt, proposing a flat rate cut across the board, is rejected because it is little more than pandering. This year, he disguising the flat rate cut, as a ceiling. By not allowing the budget to bump from fixed cost increases, ect., the net result is a cut. A cut without your name next to it.
Now, even without Elliott’s motion, I wouldn’t have been surprised if the CM held level or raised minimally. Though Elliott like to pose as the protector of the taxpayer, it was clear from the 2011 campaign, that the candidates were going to be holding the CM back, if they became Councilors.
What I see is Elliott, jumping ahead to grab the limelight. This budget will be lean and Elliott wants credit for it.
The parlor trick Elliott is employing, is forcing a vote in which his peers have two options: 1) Annoint him “Fiscal Super Hero!” 2) Vote for allowing the CM to raise taxes. Slick, ain’t it?
…..
Lowell’s Schools have been laying fallow. Paul Georges wrenches salaries and bennies from the School Committee. Folks like John McDonough constantly remind us how high the average teachers salary is. About $81,000. How does this happen? Teachers vote! Buildings don’t vote. Technology don’t vote. Students don’t vote.
When the new SABIS Charter School starts preening in the sunlight, attracting parents to pull their kids out of the public schools, the funding of public schools will only become harder.
Now is the time to invest in Lowell’s schools. Not teachers salaries, but everything that has been neglected over the years.
Let the City Manager make a budget based on NEED. Then, if that budget is out of touch, let the CM and Council whittle it down.
The CM and Council need to show us what their priorities are. They should not take the lazy way out, as they pandering for votes.
The Council is elected by t6he voters Jack so it is NOT pandering for Councilor Elliot to ask on behalf of the people that elected him that we don’t need to automatically raise taxes 2.5% because the Manager can.
Last year I wrote this after the 1st budget meeting:
I do give Councilor Elliot credit for coming in with defined cuts. he waiting for the particular section and made a motion to cut $100,000 or $50,000 or $300,00 but the best he could do was get 2 votes to cut the $100,000.
He must feel like Alison Laraba because he couldn’t get a 2nd on two motions and was on the losing side of 8-1, 7-2 or 6-3 votes on 6 occasions tonight.
So in my opinion he should bring up the issue now and put pressure on his fellow councilors everyday until the budget is passed. Hopefully the Sun, myself and others will continue to say it is time we STOP raising taxes for us good ol boys while the Manager and his administration offers tax credits for newbies and affordable housing non profits.
Councilor Kennedy has been thinking oputside the box to generate revenue and along with the health insurance savings it is time for the working homeowners of Lowell to get a break.
Hopefully the Sun, myself and others will continue to say it is time we STOP raising taxes for us good ol boys while the Manager and his administration offers tax credits for newbies and affordable housing non profits.
What an intriguing blurt.
First, being in Lowell all your life does not make anyone a “good ol’ boy.” Don’t make that mistake. They don’t care about you, except for what you can do for them. When they buy you a drink or pat your back in front of your friends, they are playing you. We all want to hang out with the cool kids. Maybe, we define “cool” differently?
Second, I love the assertion that blow ins bring higher taxes. That is quite a twist on what the usual parochial blather. “If we could just have our City back!”? Is that it? With a splash (affordable housing non profits) of freeloader for staleness.
Guess who profits from the blow ins and the freeloaders, Gerry? Hint: G-O-B
I wish I could believe that this is how budgets are done.. instead they often are based on last year’s budget and just moved up (if you have extra money in your account at the end of the year, you better rush out and spend it!)
I would prefer zero based budgeting at least once every 5 years. Validate the actual need for every line item.
And I have no problem with setting a cap.
The council sets the cap and priorities, the manager goes out and does the job of meeting those priorities as best he can based on the given income.
The council should not be made the “bad guys,” having to make the cuts that are presented to them as options. That way the manager controls the conversation. He’s the employee, not the elected sovereign.
Wow the councilor is finally doing the citys business, its about time. As a taxpayer these are the things i and others want addressed, lets see how long councilor Elliot can stay focused on the real issues, and stop his bickering with the Mayor and the manager.
Good post Gerry,
I like to hear the councilors discuss the budget. We, voters are not present when the initial budget is discussed since it is thru the Manager’s Office, which is how it should be under the form of government we have. But, I like to hear suggestions from the elected councilors. I like to hear what they are asking about. I like to know their thoughts about what changes can be made or not made. The more dialogue, the more the residents understand what can be cut, what cannot be cut and help us understand the process and the decision makers reasoning.
If we understand and learn you will have a more informed citizen and voter. There are always 3 sides to a story