Selectman to Westborough Taxpayers, “DROP DEAD.”
April 6, 2011
Four Westborough selectmen said last week to taxpayers struggling in a recession who just wanted the opportunity to vote on a legal tax underride, “Drop dead.” Personally, I’d prefer that taxpayers don’t drop dead and instead stay alive and active in the democratic process and vote these four “non-representatives” out.
The cabal of four selectmen apparently believes our tax money is theirs – not ours. In an Obama recession they seem proud Westborough property taxes are “only” 64% higher than the state average! None would tolerate letting citizens vote on how much of their own taxes should be collected for exploding town spending. This defines tyranny – taxation without representation. 
In stark contrast to the crew of four, Selectman George Thomson had the integrity to assert, “The voice of the community should place greater weight than the voice of [selectman] committee members.” Courageous words on March 22, 2011.
As some of you readers may know, I was 30,000 feet over Kansas returning from a west coast trip when the underride discussion was occurring. But through the miracle of Westborough TV’s “Gov Meetings on Demand” link on the internet, it was possible to see the meeting broadcast. The experience wasn’t pleasant.
Without putting you to sleep, Dear Reader, the background of this issue is that Westborough’s tax levy limit – like all communities – was set based on tax valuations thirty years ago. Then it automatically compounds up 2.5% every year from that base, plus the value of new growth (new houses, inventory, buildings, etc.). This levy limit restricts the amount of increased taxes a community may raise annually to 2.5% of that limit unless citizens want to pay more and vote a tax override.
Thirty years ago when the levy limit was set for Westborough, it had many hi-tech companies like Data General, Digital Equipment and others here. So it was set way high and compounded up 2.5% since then in spite of the fact that those companies are long gone. The levy automatically rises 2.5% annually unless a tax underride is voted by citizens. Thus, taxpayers in Westborough (and probably many other communities) are not protected now from automatic high tax increases whether they are needed or not.
After hundreds of citizens pleaded for lower taxes in a survey of town services done last fall by the Finance Advisory Committee, I proposed a $4 million legal tax underride be placed on the town’s May 3d ballot. If approved by voters, this would have slightly reduced total revenues to the town only 2.2% and reduced the average Westborough home taxes about $237.
Here’s where the 2.2% revenue reduction comes from. Under Prop 2.5 law, Westborough’s $60 million tax levy base first increases by 2.5%. If an underride is passed by voters, then the limit is reduced by the $4 million underride -- thus lowering net taxes collected only $1.9 million. $1.9 million less is only 2.2% of the $89 million Westborough now receives including excise taxes, fees and “state aid” (getting back Westborough’s own tax dollars).
With this background of truth, let me re-cap some sound-bites. See if you can guess who these characters REALLY represent.
One selectman repeatedly distorted the net effect of reduced revenues to the town saying the $4 million underride would be an “8% cut.” This error was stated three times. That selectman is a union member.
“Where are you underserved?” another selectman asked constituents. An e-mail received suggested, “Cut union pay” (now about 30% higher than comparable pay, benefits and pensions in the private sector!) This selectman stated, “That’s not a cut in what she was willing to forgo in town services, it was a cut she was willing to suggest for others to forgo.”
So, apparently taxpayers paying 64% over the average can only reduce taxes by... getting less in services … ? This union shill does not represent the majority of taxpayers, it seems to me. As reported to you here March 25th, Westborough is the most inefficient delivering services compared to every single surrounding neighborhood community with taxes 1.82% as a percentage of home values.
Another of the gang of four explained, “I could never vote for this – we negotiate union contracts in good faith, and they can’t be changed.” Really? Even if taxpayers just don’t have the money to pay what has been promised in closed negotiations and then presented at town meeting for payment? Where nobody has seen the contract? Does this individual represent you? Or the unions?
Another bogus repeated sound bite was, “Town meeting is the place to question town spending and make changes up or down.” No offense, folks, but on what planet does this occur? Don’t you think parents who know special education swallows up $8 million of the entire $39 million school budget would be terrorized to stand up publicly and question the fairness of this expense to the chair of our school committee who is the leading advocate for special education?
When I questioned at Town Meeting whether our town can afford three-year union contracts promising pay, benefits, and pension obligations that projections showed would bankrupt the town I was booed off the floor by the back row of union attendees waiting to vote for their own payroll hikes and then go home toasting their good fortune.
Speaking of pensions, Dear Reader, are you aware the last estimate of our town’s unfunded pension obligation for 685 active and 340 retired employees done by Aquarius Capital September 7, 2010 was $49 million? Ready for the tax bill to pay for this?
Have our “representative” selectman reported this to you? Do they have any plans to either fund it or fix it? If it isn’t fixed, you’ll be bagging groceries at age 75 to pay the $50,000 per year pensions for 60 year-old retired Westborough employees enjoying life by the pool in Florida. Does that make you happy, folks?
The last distortion repeatedly expressed was that, “This underride is half a question – I need to see where the cuts are” as though it should be in the ballot question. This assertion is purely disingenuous because selectmen know the underride question must take the form presented. Law states it CANNOT say anything other than the amount requested. If placed on our ballot, THEN the suggested areas of reductions or cuts would come out in the public debate for all to hear.
So, who do these four selectmen represent? It ain’t taxpayers. These characters represent entrenched monopoly unions – bankrupting our town and every community across the state.
But since powerful government monopoly unions only support candidates supportive of unions, how can a conservative candidate supporting taxpayers ever dream of being elected? Beats me! You gotta either be supported by a new Westborough Tea Party group. Or call the mover.
Len Mead is a Westborough resident and can be reached anytime at mead170@gmail.com
PS: This is one of three recent articles not accepted for publication by the MetroWest Daily News which controls the Westborough News weekly publication. Yes, these are hard-hitting articles, but the reasons for rejection including statements that my articles are “harsh” and would inhibit local citizens from running for public office, my financial facts are too complex to “check” and that the format in which I submit the articles is difficult. (First time I’ve heard that one after 6 years submitting them the same way!) The regional editor claims pressure from our elected local representatives was not a factor.
In any case, I will no longer submit op-ed articles to the Westborough News.
It’s been fun, but probably it’s time for another conservative advocate to step up and do the job of holding our town public figures accountable with the truth and reasonable conclusions. If you’re interested, contact Liz Banks, Regional Editor, MetroWest Daily News at ebanks@wickedlocal.com.
As e-mail friends who haven’t opted out of my mailings, you’ll continue to receive my articles and opinions. I always welcome your input and thoughts. E-mail me anytime.
Best,
Len
Len Mead
Unwashed Conservative