Voices clash over June 15 override vote
Published on June 9th, 2004
STONEHAM, MA - Despite their favorable stance on the proposed $2.9 million override, members of Stoneham Together just want citizens to vote during the June 15 Special Election.
But they would prefer you vote yes.
"Obviously my preference is that you vote yes, but even if you're not going to vote yes, just vote. I'd be much more comfortable with a large turnout because that way you have a majority of the people deciding this," said Stoneham Together officer David Gardner.
Addressing two prominent arguments presented by override opponents -- that the budget is filled with waste and that many revenue sources still remained untapped -- override supporters point to the dozens of cities and towns across Massachusetts facing similar financial woes as evidence that Stoneham's problems don't stem from the mismanagement of funds.
Adding that Stoneham has weathered several similar deficits without a call for an override -- at a time when surrounding communities were forced to consider the measure -- the pro-override faction charged that many of those espousing such viewpoints have been largely absent from the public budget hearings held over the months.
"If people have these issues, they need to go to Selectmen meetings, Finance Board meetings and School Committee meetings and voice their concerns. It's very easy to be critical and not be involved," said Stoneham Together Chairman Lori Gordon-Sack.
However, Gordon-Sack, Gardner, and other override supporters don't deny that additional cost-savings and revenue sources could be identified to lessen the financial burden being shouldered by taxpayers.
What they do dispute is the claim that those savings and revenue sources would plug the gaping $4.3 million hole Stoneham faces in FY05.
"First and foremost, it's important to note that a no vote decreases services and turns us back in time. And some of these losses will have critical implications." said Gardner. "That doesn't mean that we can't decrease costs and increase revenues. But if these services and programs are eliminated, it will almost take an act of God to bring them back."
Selectman Charlie Smith agrees. While Smith believes the $2.9 million override figure could be reduced while still preventing the loss of key services, he claims a yes vote will, "correct things for the next three years and give us time to get our house in order."
While Finance Board member Richard Gregorio didn't offer his opinion on the override, he has the figures to back Smith's assertion. The same town official who predicted the FY05 deficit a year before the issue exploded on the public front, Gregorio's budget models show the town facing a $1.2 million deficit over the next two years without an override.
"If we implement the cost reductions [from a no-override vote], I think I showed an $800,000 deficit in FY06 and a $400,000 deficit in 07. That's compared to a $288,000 deficit in FY06 and a $4000 deficit in 07 [with the override passing]," explained Gregorio.
Tackling another criticism commonly aired by the opposition, override supporters agreed that some elderly and low-income residents would be unable to afford the cost of additional taxes -- a projected $468 for the average Stoneham homeowner, according to figures from the Finance Board.
According to Standish Road resident John Ellis, that troubling impact is an part of a larger natural cycle.
"It's unfortunate, but that's just the way it is. People sell their homes and younger people move in. If I was an elderly person and I couldn't afford the taxes, I'd sell my home and move to an apartment. And with the way home values are, that money would probably cover people well into the future," Ellis remarked, who added that he'll have to get a part-time job to pay for the tax increase.
Gordon-Sack agreed that options such as reverse-mortgages and moving to less expensive dwellings could solve some of the problems of those worried about the costs of the taxes. But she also added that there are senior tax-breaks and tax-credits available to income qualifying residents.
According to Selectman John DePinto, who is also a certified public accountant, the tax breaks would at least offset the impacts of the override costs for many low-income citizens.
"It's up to $810 you can get for a refund depending on your income. If your taxes are going up $400-500 and you can get $800 back, at least that would minimize the impact," said DePinto, who said any resident with questions about the tax-credits could call him for more information.
Sympathizing with those who would be unable to afford the cost of an override, Gordon-Sack made a distinction between those who can't afford the taxes because of income restrictions and those who can't afford to pay because of lifestyle choices.
"There's definitely a group of people who can't afford this. But there's a tradeoff between [the override] making it tighter on your pocketbook as opposed to tougher on your life," said Gordon-Sack.
"I've been part of a one-income family for over a year. But I value my children's education and the safety of my family first. So I don't vacation a lot...I don't go out to eat a lot," Gordon-Sack elaborated. "It means some people have to change their lifestyles. I can't make those decisions for people; they'll have to decide for themselves what their priorities are."
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!