An Oxford constituent recently wrote to Senator Moore in response to some legislative rumblings of imposing local aid cuts on municipalities.  Senator Moore responds to the constituent and shares with him his concern that any future cuts to local aid would seriously hurt families within the communities he represents.  Furthering their discussion, Senator Moore also talks about the distribution of local aid from property and income taxes, and offers his thoughts on how we can best sustain our essential services like education, safety, and public service.  Read the full conversation below:

---

From: An Oxford Constituent
To: Senator Moore

Senator Moore:

I don’t believe I have to tell you what a spot you will be placing Oxford in if cuts to local aid are made. As you know we are a town dependant upon the Chapter 70, Chapter 90 and lottery monies we receive. Cuts of 3% - 5% would have drastic consequences upon the services we will be able to provide to the residents of our community.

All of the employees of Oxford went without any pay raises or step increases in FY10 so we as a town could continue to provide all of the necessary services. These folks should be commended for their sacrifices. Now, we were already in a seriously bad place before these proposed cuts and now you’re proposing we work with even less than we did in the past?

I’m sure there are things that could be done in other areas of the budget that don’t effect our local services the way these cuts would. 

Please, when the vote comes up remember the impact it will have on your Oxford constituents should you allow these cuts to go through.

Thanks

An Oxford Constituent

---

From: Senator Moore
To: Oxford Constituent

Dear Oxford Constituent:

I share your concern, not just for Oxford, but for many communities. Even level funding is hard for some communities since costs increase. I am pushing back on the discussions of cutting local aid, and for a municipal relief package to provide greater flexibility. I am also worried about FY 12 and 13. If we get by FY 11 with little or no reduction, I don't know how we balance budgets after the federal money dries up. We're supporting a local spending level that neither state or municipal revenue can sustain and people don't have the money to pay higher taxes at either level, let alone have the desire to pay more if they could. The recovery isn't happening fast enough! On top of that there are going to be ballot questions like cut the sales tax to 3% that will be further devastating for local services. I will keep fighting for Oxford and my other towns, but sometimes it's like sticking a finger in the dike as more leaks keep popping up.

Senator Dick Moore

---

From: Dudley Constituent
To: Senator Moore

Senator Moore:

As always, you are right on top of answering the questions of your constituency in a timely/quick manner. Thank-You! I do not disagree with your comments about FY12 & FY13. I too believe we will NOT be out from under these difficult economic times when these budgets are presented. Having said this, and understanding that tax increases and or large fee increases is NOT the answer, it is truly time for our State Officials to begin thinking outside the box.

As a community of nearly 13,000 people with an annual levy charged of $ 16,503,365, I believe we could maintain our level of services on our own without you providing us lottery money IF you took over the running of the schools. You could keep all the Chapter 70 money, force the Town to maintain the school buildings and make all the school employees state employees. When you look at the $11,664,044 you give us in local aid, then deduct the $ 8,372,239 you make us contribute as the minimum required contributions to the schools, the $ 987,029 we give to Bay Path, the $697,345 we give to Charter Schools and the $ 1,024,543 we spend on transportation, You will see that these items equal $ 11,081,156 leaving a true local aid number of only $ 582,888.00!!

Dick, if the State had the schools, you’d have more control over health insurance costs, salary increases/union negotiations and administrative costs! This COULD work!

Again, thanks for the quick reply back!

An Oxford Constituent 

---

From: Senator Moore
To: Oxford Constituent

Oxford Constituent:

I think that for the state to assume full costs of public education would be a MAJOR shift in the state's policies. This would have to be more of a groundswell from the voters than a mandate from the state since there are many people who believe in "local control" despite that being limited in many respects because the state sets curriculum standards, teacher certification, etc.

As it is now, the state assumes the cost of teachers' pensions, and more than fifty percent of the education costs. It could not assume full costs without an increase in income or sales taxes and an off-setting reduction of property taxes for both affordability and political reasons.

There would need to be some kind of protection for taxpayers that would FORCE a reduction in property taxes commensurate with the assumption of education costs. There are many communities that would want to keep property taxes at or near their current rate and there would be pressures from public employees--police would want the Quinn bill back, fire fighters have long wanted a version of the Quinn bill, all remaining local employees would want higher salaries, etc.

I believe that it would be appropriate to pay for services tied closely to property values - police, fire, public works, parks & recreation, historic preservation, affordable housing to be supported with the property tax; and for services tied to education - schools and libraries - to be paid through the income tax. However, to achieve such a shift, the plan would need to be "revenue neutral" or even find ways to demonstrate savings. This might be possible by seeking regional solutions on providing police, fire, etc. and schools for expenditures supported by both property and income revenue. There might also be some economies of scale by running the education system as a state system rather than local. It could help businesses if their property taxes were reduced and their corporate income tax increased since it would be tied more to their profitability than t their property holdings.

Before any effort as massive as this could be undertaken, there is need for a thoughtful study be a credible consultant or organization. Maybe Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation would consider such a review.

Senator Dick Moore