The Budget Process: Part 4
 

 

Finance Committee Finalizes Override Recommendation

Fourth in a Series of Commentaries by the Finance Committee

The Finance Committee has attempted this year to consolidate a subtle but important shift in its approach to building the town’s FY04 Operating Budget.  We began the process, and have asked each of the town’s four principal Budgeting Agencies to likewise begin, with an examination of the town’s available revenues, rather than a stipulation of its needs.  Initial budgets were all built to a no-Override premise in an effort to ensure the most responsible budgets possible in the event of such an outcome. This focus, we hope, has sharpened our understanding of what services are most essential and put the burden on policy-making boards to identify those service restorations, additions or improvements that they believe merit an override.

The Finance Committee began the development of the FY04 Budget last summer, with an examination of town revenues and necessary expenditures called the Funds Available Analysis (FAA).  This analysis represents the Finance Committee’s estimation of likely revenue from all sources, subtracts those expenditures the town is obliged by law to make (e.g., debt service, pensions and insurance, NESWC contract), and yields the percentage growth (or reduction) in discretionary spending required to achieve a No Override Budget, or what we call the Base Budget Based on this analysis, the Finance Committee issued its Budget Guidelines in September, directing all Budgeting Agencies to build their Base Budgets to an amount originally calculated at 0% but later revised to 1.8%. Budgets whose growth is limited to zero or even to 1.8% are obviously not status quo budgets. 

As each policy-making board has built its Base Budget for FY04, it has had to rethink its core services in order to identify what economies were most desirable or least undesirable.  The Finance Committee’s Budget Guidelines also requested that each Budgeting Agency identify service restorations or improvements which would warrant an individual Override Request, but only after each of them had created a Base Budget that met the no Override criterion.

In a series of public meetings with each of the principal Budgeting Agencies throughout the fall and early winter, the Finance Committee has reviewed each agency’s Base Budget and their individual Override Requests at length and with great care.  Based on this review, it is the Finance Committee’s recommendation that the town adopt an Override in the total amount of $350,000, apportioned as follows:

$97,000 for Town Operating, an amount which is 1.9% over its Base Budget and which represents a total growth of 3.7% over FY03;

$11,000 for the Library, which represents l.8% over its Base Budget and total growth of 3.6% over its FY03 appropriation;

$185,000 for the K-8 School, equaling 2.5% over its Base Budget and total growth of 4.3% over FY03; and

$57,000 for Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School, which is 3.2% over its Base Budget and represents 5.0% growth over LS’ FY03 assessment.

In regard to the LS portion of the proposed Override, it is important to note that because the assessment formula reflects enrollment shifts between the two towns, the 5% figure corresponds to an overall budget increase at the high school of less than 3%.  It is also important to note that a budget increase of this amount depends on the success of a Sudbury override, although it is possible that Lincoln will contribute this portion of its override to LSRHS regardless. 

In arriving at its Override recommendation, the Finance Committee has sought to balance three risks:

1.     the risk that state and/or local revenues, despite our careful calculations about presumed State Aid reductions, will fall short of expectations;

2.     the risk that resources available to policy-making boards would be insufficient for them to provide leadership and services commensurate with the town’s standards; and

3.     the risk that the tax burden imposed by the Override would be unacceptable to taxpayers.
 

If one assumes that the average assessed value of a Lincoln home is $875,000, the town’s Base Budget for FY04 will increase the average homeowner’s tax burden by about 4%, or roughly $339 more than that homeowner’s FY03 tax bill.  An Override of $350,000 results in an additional tax increase of 2.2%, or $192 more on that average home’s tax bill, for a total increase over FY03 of 6.2%, or $531 total additional dollars. The CPA surtax will add another $107 to that average increase, for a total average increase of about $638. 

Given the tax increases of the last several years, and the probability that similar increases and overrides will need to be sought in the future, the Finance Committee believes that there are several items that require immediate and sustained attention. 

1.     The first concerns tax relief, where the Board of Selectmen’s important first steps are currently stalled at the State Legislature; action on the pending legislation and expansion of available relief need to be high priority items. 

2.     Secondly, the Finance Committee believes that the town needs to exercise constant vigilance about the costs and benefits attendant on new growth, including the service and tax implications for the town of hostile 40B housing development.

3.     Thirdly, because of uncertainties regarding State Aid both now and in the future, and because of the town’s heavy reliance on the property tax, it is important to regularly and rigorously review and assess potential new revenue sources. 

4.     And finally, the Finance Committee believes that, whatever the general economic climate, extending the town’s planning horizon will help minimize extreme shifts in budget size or tax impacts.  To that end, the Finance Committee will seek to renew its three year approach to budget planning in Fiscal Year 2005.

 In the weeks between now and Town Meeting, please look for the FY04 Budget Road Show, coming soon to a venue near you!

 The Lincoln Finance Committee
Susan Brooks, Co-Chair
Paul Giese, Co-Chair
Mary Cancian
Pat Phillipps
John Robinson
Al Schmertzler
Robert Steinbrook

 


CLICK HERE to read Part 1

CLICK HERE to read Part 2

CLICK HERE to read Part 3

 

 

to Lincoln Independent