GilfordGrok

OK, NOW we are into the budget seaon - and yes, I'm back.  It's been a while; we've been a tad busy over at GraniteGrok and participating the politics that is NH.  And yes - no where else in the country do folks take the topic of self-governance so seriously, with so much passion, by so many people.  And it starts here, at home.  In Gilford.

I'm no longer going to be posting up the recordings of the BudComm meetings - I'm moving the hosting and presentation of them over to Blip.tv - last week is processing as I type and I'll put it up on my next post.  You can see it a bit further below.  Also, a new feature (if I can work out the bugs with my old webcam) - I'll be live streaming the video during the main meetings on Thursday.

The Steamer, the last two weeks, have run a couple of Editorials pertaining to the Budget - and I agree with them on what they wrote!

From 10/1's Steamer  P4:   What will budget season bring?

...The show is about to begin, as we all wait to see if and how the 2010 budgets can possibly be cut any more than they were last year without sacrificing the essentials needed to properly run a municipality.

It will require prioritization - in three rounds.  The first - Department heads watch out for their folks and their missions.  The second - the Selectmen with an eye to the overall level of service vs. the tax rate.

And then us.  I have said it before and will always say it again - my only role is to watch out for the taxpayers - their wallets, that is.  I congratulate the Selectmen that they brought the budget in under last year. It certainly shows off their philosophical bent - protect positions, offer a merit increase, offer more benefits to the part-time workers (dental) and sacrifice "stuff".

Is it the right philosophy?  My rule of thumb is the inflation rate (not applicable this year) and the economy.  People are losing their jobs, hours cut back, salaries cut back, and layoffs and furloughs abound.  Hardly anyone I know is getting an increase - unless one is working for the government.  Here in Gilford, last year and next year year.  At the State level, they got 3.8% last year and 5.5% for this year.  Federal - I think as much or more (have to check my numbers).

It always comes back to the question: who works for who? Whom is there for the benefit of whom?

Last year, budgeters had to struggle through economic woes likely unprecedented in their lifetimes. Throughout the Lakes Region, town officials were asked to pare down and do without whenever it was feasible.

Yeah, it ain't any better and the "pare downs" must continue.

Now, the economy is on the verge of bouncing back. We’ve heard good news in the media lately, notably from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke,who said recently that, based on the numbers, the recession has ended. Good news for sure, but the caveat, according to Bernanke is that "it's still going to feel like a very weak economy for some time."

Hardly - I expect rotten times for at least two more years - and possibly more.  With all of the added debt at the State and Federal levels, there will be much less capital to jump start things.  Add to that the ENORMOUS amount of uncertainty that the private sector faces due to the machinations of the State and Federal goverments as we undergo "the transformation" that President Obama promised, jobs growth will remain about nil or worse.

It’s expected that creating jobs and reinstating old positions will be an extremely slow progression, so many who have lost their jobs in the last year or two will remain jobless. What this means is that the people who were managing to hold themselves up financially this year will probably be worse off next year, when their savings dry up or unemployment runs out. And those who were struggling this year won’t be able to just bounce back to better finances even if they do find employment; many are accruing debt and losing their homes, and it’s going to take a long time after the economy starts turning around for people to regain financial stability.

Pretty much, that's the nutshell for me. Already, I've asked that anything that can be shelved for a year or so, even at the cost of a more expensive re-start later on, be done.  The GIS project, for one, has been shuttered for a bit (and I have been a "champion" for it in years past - but not now; time to put it to sleep for a while).  There are others.

So, while some budget committee members who weren’t as badly affected by the recession may put on rose-colored glasses when looking at next year’s budget, we urge them to consider the fact that, even as the economy (hopefully) starts turning around, next year will probably be worse for many than the previous two years.

I think that fight will be waged - I urge you to contact  the folks on the BudComm and the Selectmen and demand further cuts. After all, you might be the one hurting - or your neighbor. 

Most towns in the Lakes Region stuck to admirably strict budgets in 2009. We’ve seen what we can do without, and we need to continue to skimp for at least another year, until more people are back on their feet.Luckily, these budgeting trials have proven that we have a lot of thorough, bottom-line budgeters committed to reigning in spending. For the sake of our wallets, let’s forget the “recession has ended” talk and continue down the path of extreme frugality. It may not give us the same warm-and-fuzzy feeling as imagining a future of financial comfort, but we’ll all be thankful when we sit down to pay our taxes.

That's the ticket budget!

====================

And from 10/8's Steamer (P4):     Gilford in good hands

Speaking of budgets …  The selectmen diligently slashed department requests, notably $75,000 or so from the Department of Public Works. Based on how much money that particular department has saved this year by spending wisely and pinching pennies, it’s likely that every dollar requested was for something that’s truly needed, and the fact that the selectmen were able to cut from that shows a strong determination on their part to reign in the budget. The DPW may suffer a bit in the short term, but probably not as much as the family of four that can barely afford to get food on the table.

It’s safe to say that Gilford residents are going to be in good hands, unless the Budget Committee decides the selectmen have been too harsh and start adding requests back into the budget.

Not hardly with this one.  Nor Terry, or Doug, or Sue; I bet a few others as well. These are not normal or usual times - these are turning out to be the worst of time for many in town - the financial burden of town should be as light as possible on the taxpayers' shoulders as possible.

All levels of government are crying out "don't cut us - the people need the services more than ever - we need more!".  And we're back to the question - who works for who?  Those in government seem to believe that people always want more services - not less.  Me?  I am not that reliant on government that I always look to government to fulfill my needs first.  Family, friends, hustling my butt off - been there, done that; can do it again.  Think Katrina and the dependency vs the Upper Midwest flooding a year later and the "just get the sandbags to us and we'll handle it from there" attitude.  Need more of the latter and none of the former.  People can and will adjust.

Right now, I believe that they want to keep more money in their wallets to provide for their own families and will be ok with "less services".

Considering that the committee historically has been very stringent, that’s not likely. Just look at their reaction to the decreased 2010 budget – cautiously optimistic, but still unhappy to see a 3 percent increase in wages and salaries.

You bet - Terry was the only one that spoke up - I should have during the main meeting.  I did during the Admin meeting.  I do appreciate the change over from the COLA to merit system - but there are times when doing without is the right thing by the taxpayers.  After all, town government exists for the benefit of the town folk and not the other way around (at least here in NH, we're not NJ or CA, where almost literally, the taxpayers work for the militant, public unions (and I can back those last words up very easily).

We agree with the budgeters who want to hold off on the raises for at least another year and urge the committee as a whole to reduce those lines in the budget.

Terry said yes.  Now there are two.

If residents really feel like they can and want to pay for those raises, they can submit a petitioned warrant article, so it can be voted on separately. But it’s the Budget Committee’s job to make tough decisions based on what is best for the community, and it seems to us that the best thing for the community as a whole is to keep taxes as low as possible and stand up for the people who can’t afford an extra penny for non-essentials – and raises are certainly nonessentials, particularly in a time when the unemployment rate is reaching unprecedented levels.

Indeed.