This Just In ...

Franklin alderman Olson asks residents to support 0% property tax levy increase

Posted by Kevin Fischer on Nov. 15, 2009 | 0 comments

Franklin alderman Steve Olson sent an e-mail to residents in his district calling for support for his proposed 0% property tax levy budget. Some time ago, I asked Alderman Olson to include me on his mailing list. (I am also on Aldermna Wilhelm's e-mail list).

I wholeheartedly support Olson and the idea of a property tax freeze that will restore unfilled police and firefighter public safety positions in the 2010 city of Franklin budget.

Here is Olson’s e-mail with a message that while sent to his district is intended and meant for all Franklin resdients:


Dear friends and neighbors:

I need your help.

The Franklin Common Council is set to pass the budget for next fiscal year on TUESDAY EVENING, 6:30PM IN THE COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS after a public hearing.  We need citizen involvement.  You can have an impact on your tax bill by spending an hour or two expressing your views at this meeting.

In the years I’ve served you (and the 2^nd district before you), there are typically one or two people who speak up at the public hearing and they typically have a line item somewhere in the spending portion of the document.  The budget hearing is usually short and the Mayor’s proposed budget sails through without much opposition.  Over the past two budgets and now this one, I’ve spoken out against the budget, the revenue projections and the amount of spending.  This year the situation is, in my opinion, much worse.

You may recall last April and May articles in the local papers about a “budget shortfall” in Franklin.  Some estimates had it as high as $2.4 million and a couple of politicians said “it’s not a problem, it will be $0.”  As it turns out, about a month ago, the Common Council balanced the 2009 budget by taking more than $700,000 out of the reserve (savings) account to cover the lack of revenue and the minimal reduction in spending.  You may know that along with Alderman Sohns, I spoke out loudly and often about the failings in our budget.  I specifically pointed out the very rosy projections for Building Inspection revenue (inspecting new homes and businesses) and Planning revenue (reviewing plans for residential and commercial developments).  

Let me give you some of my red flags:

Planning:

Revenue         2007:  $114,000

                        2008:  $60,000

                        2009:  $61,000 (same as budget for ’09)

                        2010:  $90,000 (Mayor proposed $101,000, Finance recommended

                                   $90,000

Question:  Do we, as a community really believe that we’ll have 50% more requests for development next year?  (Assumes that the forecasted year ends at budget.)

Inspection:

Revenue         2007:  $830,000

                        2008:  $548,000

                        2009:  $405,000 ($602,000 budget for ’09)

                        2010:  $510,000 (Mayor proposed, Finance recommended)

Question:  Do we, as a community really believe that we’ll have 25% more requests for building inspections next year?  (Assumes that the forecasted year ends at budget.)

These are just two departments that I’ve highlighted.  These departments have revenue streams much the same as a corporate sales department.  Ambulance fees and Fire Inspection Fees (from the Fire Department) are well below budget for ’09.  Fines and forfeitures (municipal citations by the Police and Inspections Departments) are also below budget.

Interest revenue on monies invested by the city fell well below budget.

That’s the revenue side. 

On the expense side, our management team tried to be responsible with their budget requests.

Given the state of the economy, there’s much, much more that can be done with our expenses to provide relief to us taxpayers by making our levy (total amount spent) increase at least 0% or perhaps a reduction.

The proposed budget boils down to this:

·         Increased spending by $584,000

·         Staff reductions due to resignation/retirement of 5 positions

·         Increase in tax rate of 1.84% to a $5.95 per thousand rate from $5.84 

Last summer, in part from pushing from Ald. Sohns and me, the Mayor demanded that departments reduce their budgets by 4% and imposed a hiring freeze.  Some departments did well with cost reductions, others were unable.  The major impact of this action was the hiring freeze.

During the year, the city lost one firefighter, two police officers, a light equipment operator and a custodian.

The Mayor recommended that these positions remain unfilled for budget year 2010.  The Finance Committee agreed.  (Ald. Solomon, Taylor and Wilhelm sit on the finance committee.)

I believe that a hiring freeze is appropriate for the budget year it is imposed in an effort to mitigate potential shortfalls in revenue but is not a valid tool for creating a new budget.

So, considering that firefighters and police officers cost about $85,000 in wages and benefits and the other two positions somewhat less, what value does the community place on each of these positions?

It’s my experience that firefighters and police officers are extremely important.

At the Common Council meeting two weeks ago, I recommended hiring the firefighter and at least one police officer.  That action would require spending off-sets of at least $200,000 to be levy neutral. 

I began to suggest cuts to allow us to hire the firefighter and two police officers without additional layoffs.  My proposal for THIS particular issue was to reduce the money budgeted to buy snow plows by $288,000.  Because of the meeting notice, no action could take place.

I have other cuts to propose, but here’s where I need your help.

It’s my feeling that my colleagues on the Common Council are content to make cuts necessary to hire the firefighter and perhaps the police officer(s) but not go any farther.  That is unless there’s a crowd demanding better.

I need support for additional cuts to reduce spending by an additional $500,000 for a $0 levy increase.

Please take a couple of hours out of your evening and make your voice heard.

Call if you have questions.

To see the entire budget, click here.

PLEASE FORWARD TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS IN FRANKLIN.

Thanks.

Steve

(Levy is the amount of spending that is paid for through property taxes)

(Tax rate is the levy amount divided by the assessed value of property in Franklin expressed in “dollars per thousand of assessed value”)



Steve Olson
Alderman, 1st District
8091 S. Meadowcreek Ct.
Franklin, Wisconsin  53132

414-425-9060
solson@franklinwi.gov
www.steveolson.us
www.franklinwi.gov