Proposed budget decisions explained
By Bruce Keiser

In the accompanying opinion piece, Sav Rebecchi has challenged components of the proposed Town Budget and suggests that the proposed expenditures are not merited. I would like to respond to some of his observations.

State property tax levy limit

To slow property tax growth to fund school and municipal services, state law has established a 2009 property tax levy limit of 5 percent over the current year, declining to 4 percent in 2013. Other cities and towns are raising serious questions about their ability to live within the cap due to rising service demands and inflationary cost impacts. Despite frozen or decreasing state aid, Jamestown is not confronted with these fiscal pressures and will continue to maintain a stable tax rate. This stability is one of the key reasons why Moody's investor service upgraded the town's bond rating to Aa2 in 2007. Without service cutbacks, annual property tax rate increases at 4 percent or less are attainable into the foreseeable future.

Proposed spending

Mr. Rebecchi says that we are "stuffing the budget" in order to spend to the property tax cap limit. On the contrary, with the added debt service to fund town approved projects (Town Hall, farm preservation, highway barn) and fixed expenditures, we have had to structure spending to keep under the levy limit.

He also recommends a budget strategy based on finding more individual line items to cut than to increase. This approach would only make sense if the primary budget goal were to curtail services to reduce overall spending. This is not the premise of the proposed budget. The spending plan is based on maintaining the current level of previously adopted programs and services. As in each year, department heads are instructed to get the most "bang for the buck" where possible through economies and effi- ciencies.

Alternative revenues

With frozen or decreased state aid, and faced with significant loss of other town revenues (e.g. investment income is projected to drop by $50,000 due to a decline in interest rates), we do need to look at alternative non-property tax revenue sources that are user-driven. A few examples include transfer station, building permits, and camper fees.

The annual cost of a transfer station sticker is $65. With just over 1,000 users last year, the town received $67,000 in sticker sales. However, staffing and hauling costs topped $90,000. I have proposed an increase in fees to balance the income with the operating expenses. If this action is not taken, the general fund will continue to underwrite the expenses of a specific benefit service.

Building permit fees for new construction (last set in 1998) are based on house square footage, not on value as is the standard in most other towns. For example, the owner of a 4,000 square foot house with a construction value of $1 million in Jamestown would pay $1,200 in permit fees. In Narragansett, South Kingstown, and Charlestown, the same permit fees would exceed $3,500.

Fort Getty trailer sites currently rent for $3,175 from May through September ($635 per month). The Recreation Department has a waiting list for seasonal rentals. We are proposing a 10-percent increase to reflect the market value of this unique summer campground. The Recreation Director reports that the sites are already filling up with repeat customers.

Salary adjustments

The budget approved at the Financial Town Meeting last June included a line item: Salary Study Adjustments for $45,000. During the budget workshops in March 2007, I explained that many of the department head salaries were substantially lower than compensation paid in other towns. This observation was made by the two prior Town Administrators and, as requested, the Personnel Board had already initiated a pay evaluation study.

The prior Town Council recognized the salary disparity and approved the requested appropriation, which was included in the FTM adopted budget. The Personnel Board has prepared a report on comparative salaries that documents the inter-town variances.

I believe in a management philosophy that says personnel should be paid what they are worth as measured by prevailing salaries in the competitive marketplace. Contrary to Mr. Rebecchi's assumption, all employees have ready access to comparative salary information through the annual survey published on the RI Office of Municipal Affairs Web site. The notion that a position salary should only be pegged to the employment market when actively recruiting a replacement is one that I do not support. This view suggests that the employer does not value the services of the incumbent employee and, inevitably, diminishes morale and productivity.

Mr. Rebecchi rightly observes that Jamestown is a nice community to work in. In fact, most towns in Washington and Newport counties could be described as such. How much of a discount should be applied to compensation for this work environment isn't clear. According to the salary levels of professional staff in other regional communities, the merited discount apparently is not as much as Mr. Rebecchi would like. The innuendo that our department heads are picnicking at Beavertail for lunch also suggests an underlying bias against the working conditions and pay of public employees. More often than not, for most of us, a hasty lunch is consumed at the desk. It would be interesting to see if evidence exists to back Mr. Rebecchi's thesis that quality of working environments correlates with reduced pay.

If Mr. Rebecchi had asked for salary detail, I could have shared the composition of the year-overyear increases. The 12 percent, 18 percent, and 24 percent hikes mentioned include the value of general wage increases over two years granted to all employees. A compounded, two-year cost-of-living adjustment accounts for 7 percent of the above increases. The balance represents the upgrade of the salary level to make compensation more competitive.

Clearly, public employment, including benefits, should not outstrip compensation for similar jobs in the private sector. Fortunately, salary and wage data for over 500 occupations is collected and reported on the state's Department of Labor and Training website (see labor market information). A review of salaries for related private sector jobs shows that professional public employee salaries are measurably lower.

Due to space constraints, comments on the cost and adequacy of retirement plans cannot be dealt with here. I would be happy to discuss the status and cost of the town's plan and relevancy to national norms.

I urge all to attend the upcoming budget hearings on March 20 and 25.