Time for "temporary" trash fee to go

I was surprised to read Martha Buckley’s opinion about Article 22 which, uncharacteristically for her, was full of inaccurate information and was more geared to creating fear in people instead of assisting them in making an informed decision. I beg to differ with her on her “sky is falling” attitude with respect to Article 22 which would create a one-year trash fee holiday and give back to the taxpayers something that they have been forced to give to the Town for nine “temporary” years. Here are some facts that I think will assist the citizens in evaluating Ms. Buckley’s alarmist and unfounded arguments:

Fact #1: Martha Buckley was an outspoken advocate of the initiation of the meals tax here in our town. The Meals tax tax created a surcharge which raised the cost of all “meals” purchased here in Stoneham.

Fact #2: The Stoneham Taxpayer Advocacy group was formed for exactly the reasons that Ms. Buckley states in her letter. The people of Stoneham who formed this group feel that town government is not serving them well or creating any accountability or transparency as of the past year or two. An example of this is the DPW workhours being charged to water and sewer when not working in water and sewer. This directly impacts our rates. It is our hope that the same members of the Finance and Advisory Board who oppose the trash fee holiday would apply some long overdue oversight to the water and sewer accounts. The trash fee holiday gives residents a savings in their household budgets. Town government raising fees deserves the same or greater level of scrutiny and public discussion.

Fact # 3: The water rates are being raised without the town addressing any of the operational issues that plague the accounts. 58% of the DPW payroll was charged to water and sewer just 2 weeks ago, and neither the director of the DPW or the Town Administrator could tell us why. I am held accountable on my job, and the town leaders should know why 17 of 28 employees were charged to water and not get amnesia when asked to explain why.

Like State Troopers, according to information shared in public meetings, town employees that work in the water and sewer get repetitive overtime every weekend regardless of the weather and regardless of the circumstances. This overtime is submitted on Monday after it is worked. We are asking the town administrator to explain: who, what, where, when and how as to the details of this work. Is this overtime built into the department? The Stoneham Taxpayer Advocacy Group is asking the Town Administrator to publish all town employee salaries including overtime for residents to view as a public record. We hope the town administrator honors this request.

Fact #4: The town has historically spent the majority of free cash with the majority of the funds going towards town departments in crisis mode for new equipment of questionable necessity. These transfers have always been in the form of a warrant article not a budget amendment.

Fact #5: Our current free cash is nearly 4 times the amount of previous years. In 2013 it was $781,512; in 2014 $1,138,074; in 2015 $1,111,078; in 2016 $788,182; and last year $3,396,518

Fact #6: Our town is thriving with new small business growth and property values are at an all-time high. [don’t say this, it makes it look like we’re connected] In the past, we have been able to lower both the trash and the water rates without the alarmist attitudes of Ms. Buckley and many others on social media.

Fact#7: Stoneham residents were told that the trash fee was a temporary expedient due to difficult times for the town when it was first established nearly a decade ago. It is about time that the town keeps its word and gives residents a temporary break that they well deserve now that it can afford to do so.

Contrary to Ms. Buckley’s and others’ opinions, providing a year suspension of the trash fee does not take away from stabilization fund or materially affect our bond rating. Passage of Article 22 won’t raid our rainy day fund, and it won’t unbalance the budget. It relies of a portion of the excess collections due back to the Town in the form of free cash to refund this onerous fee to the beleaguered taxpayer. Voting YES on 22 will keep our government honest, and provide a symbolic and serious rebate that the Town can afford and that many of our elderly and other residents on fixed incomes would welcome.T