O.P.M.

A late start for me this morning.  Had a meeting last night, and as much as I hate to admit it, there appear to be times we do in fact need someone to step in and save us from ourselves.

No, not from something spectacular, but rather the size of my preferred soft drink as of late when I go to my meetings.  NYC Mayor Bloomberg might be on to something.  Either that or a got to find the caffeine free version.

I really am not serious (just in case you weren't sure).

Anyway, today's topic is O.P.M.  if you don't know what that is now, hopefully you will get it by reading on ...

First, how you get to spend it ...

One of the ways will be decided by voters in Westport in the near future.  A reader sent me an e-mail wanting to know my opinion on the a la carte approach being taken there on the various overrides and debt exclusions.

It was noted that "it seems most of the time overrides are all or nothing".

Isolated, an override vote is all or nothing.  It is a permanent (unless there is a subsequent under ride) increase to your tax base.  You are entitled to raise that amount year in and year out.  For the first year of the vote only, the funds can be designated for a specific purpose, thereafter the money becomes part of the general fund.

Debt exclusions are specific purpose votes, authorizing expenditures for specific purposes for a specific duration.  Once you have paid off the amount, the cost of funding is removed from the tax bill.

Very simplified but should do as a basis for discussion.

The a la carte approach is used more often than people may realize.

You are faced with a bunch of big ticket items in a given year.  You feel they cannot wait to be done, but you don't have the money to do them.  You don't want to pick and choose from the list so you go to the voters and say here is what we need, what are you willing to do.

You are free to included override matters and debt exclusion matters on the ballot, but all are voted separately.

When you pile them up like that you are essentially looking to get somethings done and are willing to sacrifice others.  The more items on the list, the more likely some will fail, but believe it or not, you also increase the chances of getting something approved that standing alone on the ballot might not pass.

Why is that?  Simple human nature.  Put five things on the ballot that, standing alone, most people would save no too.  Combined, people are inclined for a variety of reasons to vote yes for something.

Makes them feel good.  Let's them say hey, I looked at it, but a, b and c really can wait, but d, well we need d.

Think of the Christmas list concept, I want this that and the other thing. You know you won't get everything, but it will still be a good day if you get something.  Makes the receiver feel good, makes the giver feel good.

Again, a simplified explanation due to space and time constraint, but I think you get the picture.

My personal opinion, running government should not be as simple as preparing an a la carte menu.

I am not talking about really big ticket matters here, such as new schools or multi-million dollar new projects.  Equipment replacement, new roofs, maintenance are all things that should be built into short term and long term planning.  Unfortunately it doesn't happen the way it should anywhere, Fairhaven included.

Yet I understand why it is done at times.  The a la carte is needed when you propose debt exclusions.  My personal opinion is such matters either need to have at least seven figures attached, with the lead off number being a 2 before you do so, otherwise the borrowing costs don't make sense.      

I am just not a big fan of it because it leads to choices being made and not being made for the wrong reasons.  Yes it gives the voters the right to decide what they want.  There is always appeal to that.  But it also tends to ignore the reasons behind why you need the votes in the first place.

That being said, there is a fundamental flaw in the whole 2 1/2 process to begin with.  In a nutshell, a 2.5% adjustment on a base number established decades ago does not keep pace with the reality of life.

One could write a book on what is involved in prop 2 1/2, no one would want to read it, but you could write one.  The digest version would contain a statement though about the fact that the law contained the mechanism to leave it to the local level to make adjustments to the amount of the base to meet needs through overrides.

But in terms for Fairhaven, based on the law, we could essentially double the amount collected in taxes based on present valuation and the rules of 2 1/2 if we choose to do so, by an override vote (so when you fell on the floor reading that, it is pretty safe to get back up.  Don't see anyone going to the polls to double taxes).

We all complain, myself included, about how high taxes are, that they go up every year, etc.  We all expect however the same level of services.  We will soon reach the point though were continued operations at present levels will not be possible.

Thus we will be faced with the same options as some of our neighbors and communities everywhere: an override, operations determined by debt exclussions, or cuts.

So now that I have zigged zagged all over the matter, I will let you let me know whether this helps you out with how to spend O.P.M.