The six month financial report showed another $150,000 shortfall, making a total of about $535,000. for this year. Expenses are about 3% below what was forecast, so being fiscally responsible and looking at every single item is important. Just saying "I want this" or "I want that" won't fly. The Board is doing what it can to keep costs down, but some of them seem to still live in la-la land.
Riverside Info » About Riverside
Riverside and Revenue...
(58 posts)-
Posted Monday Jul 20, 2009 23:06 #
-
Yes, I think the entire public sector is in lala land. Tom Jacobs' point about District 96 schools was also very well taken in this regard. Did I understand him to say they have a $9million surplus, while the town goes begging? When is their next board meeting suitable for comment on this?
If one watches the pennies, the pounds take care of themselves.
Posted Tuesday Jul 21, 2009 09:04 # -
$9million is the cumulative surplus over the last 4 years, school years ending 2006 - 2009.
The next school board meeting is August 18 at Hauser.
Posted Tuesday Jul 21, 2009 09:13 # -
The taxing bodies need to understand that almost ALL the money comes from the residents - either in real estate taxes or in sales taxes, etc. Of course they will never share it with each other, and each will make its case for needing more - using issues like child safety, etc. We need people who understand that this year is very tough for a lot of people who may be unable to digest all they have taken on their plate, and that next year is likely to be worse. Whether it's handing mega buck salaries to administrators on the excuse that there are only a few qualified people (to run an elementary school system???) or the need for $1000. a piece soccer goals (which are, after all, just some tubing and a net) for grade 3-5 players, the people that are spending like this have to stop this nonsense. Getting a superintendent for $100K less and soccer goals for $500 a pair or less ought to be able to be accomplished - or else. One new member of the Dist. 96 Board came to my house yesterday to ask me why I called about overflowing garbage cans that are not emptied for weeks at a time and told me that "they had to give this contract because it is so hard to get anyone else" or some such, and last night we heard that the backstop at the Big Ball Park and a swing need to be replaced - not repaired. One Trustee railed against "using duct tape to fix something." How about you pay me half as much and I'll fix all of them in about one day. This crap has got to stop. In these difficult times the people we elect or employ have got to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.
Posted Tuesday Jul 21, 2009 09:52 # -
As Lonnie pointed out at the Board meeting last light - Village expenses are down by 3%. This reduction is a result of the work of the prior board and has little to do with this new board.
It is becoming clear that there was no "runaway spending;" the budget is simply not adequate to run our Village. Many have been trying to get this point across, but our voices were ignored, drowned out by flashy ads.
I agree, spending at Dist 96 is excessive. The problem is, Dist 96 has the money to spend, money literally burning a hole in their pocket.
Short of a referendum to lower the schools levy and raise the Village levy, I'm not sure what we can ask the schools to do. Riverside has top notch schools which (along with the natural beauty, safety, and proximity to downtown) is the reason people chose to live here in the first place. No one wants to jeopardize the schools, but what are we to do when one seems to have too much and the other too little?
Posted Tuesday Jul 21, 2009 09:57 # -
Common - you're all wet. The last board put all kinds of expenditures in place that have had to be whittled down. Stop being a cheerleader for your failed slate - it won't help you. Be objective and try and help the people that are working for all the residents.
Posted Tuesday Jul 21, 2009 15:07 # -
Yes, honestly, give it a rest. I find it odd when politicians say that people are so stupid they don't know reality but are swayed by 'flashy advertising.' Hundreds of thousands were spent on lawyers and consultants around redevelopment schemes and I think that was obvious to everyone.
It is not going to benefit the schools if property values are compromised by insufficient funds to run the village: its safety, natural beauty and so on. I wonder if there is a legal process to get them to disgorge funds.
Posted Wednesday Jul 22, 2009 11:39 # -
Catherine,
To whom would the schools disgorge the $$$?
Posted Wednesday Jul 22, 2009 11:56 # -
Either to the taxpayers in rebate or at least partially to the village. What's good for the village is good for the schools, and vice versa. I realize this is likely impossible, failing some obscure legal device.
Not alone:
School surplus incites protest:
http://www.wnypapers.com/news/2009/03/t26_nwsurplus.html
School district property tax rebate to seniors:
http://www.pennmanor.net/business/tax/rebate/rebateres.pdf
What do you think the Plum Borough School District should do with the est. YE $6 million surplus?
Build a capital improvement fund to renovate the district's elementary schools.
20% (35 votes)Relieve the taxpayers in next years budget.
46% (82 votes)Stash the cash in a district rainy day fund and lower school taxes so this doesn't happen again.
31% (55 votes)I have a better idea of what to do with the surplus and will share my thoughts in the blog.
4% (7 votesPosted Wednesday Jul 22, 2009 12:34 # -
I think you meant "Villages"--some North Riverside and Brookfield taxpayers and businesses fund D96 as well.
I'm surprised there is not a limitation on the size of the surplus a taxing body can have. I agree that a rebate--either to the taxpayers or to the municipalities--would be nice, but unlikely to happen.
Posted Wednesday Jul 22, 2009 13:49 #
Reply »
You must log in to post.