Candidate Q&A: Paul Welch

CANDIDATE: Paul Welch, seeking a three-year term on the Salem Budget Committee

AGE: 53

ADDRESS: 69 Salem Street

LIVED IN SALEM: 10 years

OCCUPATION: Retired Wilmington, Mass., fire lieutenant; current part-time bus driver for Lawrence, Mass., High School

FAMILY: One daughter, two step-daughters

PREVIOUS GOVERNMENT EXPERIENCE: None

Q: Why are you running for Budget Committee?

A: I've seen the taxes inevitably just keep going up and up and up. When I first moved here, one of the reasons I chose Salem was because of the affordability. It's easy enough when you look around the other towns and see what the tax rate is. I said, "Salem is pretty reasonable, I'll look around there."

It was $3,400. Now it's $5,000. And they want to keep passing these bonds for schools and roads and salary increases, and that all has to be paid for. Now we're marching toward the upper-end towns near us like Windham and Londonderry and Derry.

Living on a pension, I think the last cost of living raise I got was 3 percent and that was four years ago. So I'm obviously falling behind. It's not just me, it's everybody. So I thought I would try for the Budget Committee because being a public employee I know what goes on. I can see through some of the politics of all this stuff and try to keep the budgets and taxes reasonable.

Q: What do you think is the most important issue in town and as a Budget Committee member how would you address it?

A: It's the property tax. We don't have too many conservatives on the different boards. We have a few but we need some more. I don't know if people think they're going to keep voting to raise their own taxes. It's starting to get a little fatigued now from the people I talk to. That's my overriding concern.

Q: Where are some areas you think the town can cut back and other areas where town can invest more?

A: More investment? I think we're at the limit right now. On the school side, I know they want to renovate the schools and they're old and all that, but they're trying to do everything overnight.

I think we can slow the pace down a little bit. The next bond that is coming up is $21.5 million on top of all the other bonds we're already taking out. There are more bonds coming up for the roads and the high school and the Woodbury. All this stuff has to be paid for. I think all the bonds the town holds now are up over $100 million and it might get to over $200 million very quickly.

I'm not against upgrading the schools. I have two stepchildren that go to the Soule School, which has seen better days. I think they can slow it down and try to keep pace with the taxpayers.

Q: Do you support School Article 2, the $21.5 school renovation bond?

A: No, I don't support it. I believe it was Bernie Campbell who came up with the unofficial plan that wasn't sanctioned by the School Board to take the Haigh off the list and put the money into the other two schools and put the students over there and maybe use that building for a police station or something like that. Or sit on it for a while and wait for times to get better.

The one I know the best is the Soule School. They have a very bad roof leak, it's visible when it rains heavy. It seems to me like they are holding off on fixing anything, as to try to use that as a way to get people to totally renovate the schools. I don't like to reward bad behavior. I think it's outrageous they've held back purposely on maintenance to make the schools as poor as they can be with the hope other people will decry the conditions...I'd rather leave Haigh off the list and revamp the other two.

Q: How do you think the town's infrastructure issues should be addressed, while keeping the needs of the taxpayers in mind?

A: They have to keep fixing the roads. I live in the south end of town and if you've ever been down Lawrence Road, tighten your seatbelt. It's a rough ride. But it's the same idea. I don't think they have to repave the town entirely in five years. Pick the worst ones, take care of them. Maybe some of the other ones that aren't in too bad of shape, give them a coat and make them last a few more years. See if you can stretch it out over time.

For the other public buildings, as long as people vote on them I don't have a huge issue with it. The police station looks like somebody's tool shed. It is pretty bad. The last time they tried it, they lumped in with the high school and it lost. That was a mistake. Put it on the ballot by itself. I would vote for it...

The fire station is bursting at the seams but it's not in as bad a shape as the police department. I think they should also slow down their pace of growth. I think there is roughly the same on each side, 60 police officers and 60 firefighters. That number's not too far from the Methuen Fire Department, which has I think about 55,000 residents and we have about 28,000 or 29,000. I don't want to accuse them of being over-staffed but if they have some retirements coming up I think they can let the level drop down a bit. The biggest cost to the town is the employees...

Q: Is personnel an area you'd like see addressed?

A: Well, in the Fire Department they have too many chief officers down there. I would paraphrase Winston Churchill, "Never have so few been commanded so much by so many." I think that could be trimmed...

I think (the town) fattened up a little in the 1990s when times were good. Nobody ever cuts back on anything. You'll never hear a department head sit back and say, "I've got everything I need. All set." They always ask for more, and usually they ask for it when they don't need more. At least that's my experience from when I was a firefighter. If you don't get more now you won't get any more later...

Q: Where do you stand on Senate Bill 2? What do you think it means for the Budget Committee?

A: I'm all in favor of Senate Bill 2. They have that second deliberative session after you think that the budget has been voted in and, lo and behold, they can bring it up again and do whatever they want. Everybody knows you can stack the meeting with a couple hundred people like they did last year. They pushed through that road project for $2.5 million and that shot up the tax rate 16 percent on the town side.

It's a lot better to have people vote on it and have more voter participation. It's better to have 3,500 people decide something instead of 200.

As far as what it means for the Budget Committee, I don't think it will effect it a whole lot. You still have to have a review. You just aren't going to have the town manager submit the budget and vote on it. It might change a couple of things but all of this stuff still needs to be reviewed.

Q: Where do you stand on curbside pickup?

A: I'm completely opposed to it. We've never had it before. There are a lot of people who take their own to the transfer station. I myself have a local guy who comes to pick up mine for $6 a week, which seems fair to me. Sometimes I have two barrels, sometimes I have four, he doesn't care.

The idea that the town government is going to take this over and make it cheaper to me is laughable. Government never takes over anything and makes it cheaper. I can't think of one example...They might get a sweetheart deal on the first contract...but trust me, the next contract will be substantially higher especially with the fuel costs that are coming down the road.

Q: There are new, multi-year union contracts on the ballot for both the town and school sides. Do you support the contracts?

A: I'm OK with multi-year contracts. That's what we had when I was on the fire department in Massachusetts. It was usually either two or three years and you don't spend a whole lot of time bargaining. I was on the bargaining committee for a two-year contract and the negotiations just seemed to go on and on and on. I don't think there would be a huge difference in the salary increases if we go year-by-year.

I think the advantage you would get, especially on the budget side, is you have the numbers ahead of time so you know how to deal with it. So if the budget constraints are tight and you've got some salary increases coming up, you can look somewhere else in the budget to cut instead of trying to piecemeal it together every year.

I'm in favor of it. It can also be a bargaining chip for the town with the unions. Unions like multi-year contracts. It gives them a sense of security. They are more willing to give back on things if they get a multi-year contract...

I'm OK with these contracts. There aren't any outrageous increases in there...

Q: Why should voters give you one of their three-year Budget Committee votes on election day?

A: I haven't served on any of the boards before. I ran last year and came close for the Budget Committee. I think it's just a good idea to get some fresh blood in there. It's good to have people of different perspectives and not somebody that has been on there for years or worked for the town for years. I don't think it's a good idea. I was a public employee but not here. I don't have any axes to grind with anybody and I'm just trying to keep the tax rate down.

I might be a bit young to be on a pension but that the circumstances I was dealt. There are a lot of people in that position. So I have better empathy with them. People just aren't going to vote to keep raising their taxes. It's not going to happen.

I'd like to think I'd be a help to the whole budget process and bring a little different perspective to it, having worked on the other side.