The point people have been trying to make is that the budget presented at Town Meeting enables a hidden accumulation of reserves. These reserves raised through years of overtaxing residents are then utilized to lower the sticker shock associated with bonding for projects like the Community Center.
Most residents probably don’t realize that by the end of fiscal year 2023, before the Community Center was put to a vote, our reserves <https://www.lincolntown.org/DocumentCenter/View/97800/Free-Cash-Estimate---Analysis-w-Budget-Flexibility-Ratios-2024> already stood at 31% of our budget. This is more than twice the level recommended by the credit agencies to maintain a AAA credit rating (per FinCom’s and the Finance Director’s own <https://www.lincolntown.org/DocumentCenter/View/85512/Fincom-Doc-for-FY25-potential-funding-2024-01-30> admission <https://www.lincolntown.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_01162024-5409> ). The situation would be entirely different if we were presented with a clear, transparent budget each year. That budget would explicitly show how much free cash is being set aside for future capital projects like the Community Center. It’s not FinCom’s role to pre-emptively decide, years in advance and without public input, whether the town wants to start saving for a Community Center. A transparent approach would have allowed the community to discuss whether advance saving for discretionary projects is appropriate. There are legitimate questions to consider. For example, should residents living in Lincoln six years before a project is even voted on be footing the bill? Even for those of us planning to stay, there may have been better uses for that money in the meantime. This type of budgeting also weakens oversight, making it harder to catch mistakes like the $500K yearly misallocation to Hanscom, which cost the town millions of dollars over the course of years. As others have mentioned, we are a definite outlier in our free cash and management and budgeting. It’s also not accurate to say that regardless of whether we save in advance or pay for it later, we end up in the same spot. The use of reserves accumulated without consultation can make a discretionary project like the CC more likely to happen, because: 1. Residents are less likely to challenge a constant 2.5% rate of growth justified as an “inflation adjustment” than a one year spike due to bonding. 2. Free cash (simple majority) is easier to approve at town meeting than borrowing (⅔ majority) 3. It enables more capital spending to go through before we hit debt limits. Since Lincoln already has the highest debt levels per capita in Massachusetts, FinCom should act more prudently than tilting the scales in favor of highly discretionary capital projects. Karla Gravis Weston Rd > > > ------- --------- > > From: Andrew Payne <[email protected]> > Date: Sat, Jun 7, 2025 at 9:36 AM > Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Lincoln’s burdensome taxation practices > To: ٍSarah Postlethwait <[email protected]> > Cc: LincolnTalk.org <[email protected]> > > > Sarah P wrote: > > >> there is growing concern among many residents about the Town’s practice >> of deliberately exceeding its actual budgeting needs by several million >> dollars each year. *Rather than addressing and correcting this >> overbudgeting—thereby reducing the tax burden in subsequent years* >> > > No, this would not "reduce the tax burden in subsequent years"; it > *shifts* the tax burden. Lower taxes this year would be offset by > correspondingly higher taxes in coming years, because Free Cash carried > forward would be lower. > > after public pressure, FinCom decided to reduce contributions to Free Cash >> and Debt Stabilization, >> > > To clarify: discussions about our reserves policy and Free Cash in > particular were already going on when I joined fincom, predating claimed > "public pressure" by many years. > > >> If they want to create a Capital projects stabilization fund (which is >> the normal practice in MA)- they can. >> > > We already have exactly that; our Stabilization Fund for capital projects > was created in 2011. > > It requires a 2/3rs super-majority at Town Meeting to appropriate funding, > which is why I advocated putting any "savings" there; any use of capital > would require strong resident support. > > >> *multimillion-dollar budgetary overages are coming from and to take >> meaningful steps to reduce unnecessary spending, and get our budgeted needs >> much closer to our actual expenses*— >> > > We don't (usually) have "budget overages", we have "*budget underages*" > from a (relatively) conservative approach to operations. We have an > operational culture where departments don't feel like they have to "use it > or lose it" if they don't spend their entire budget, so unspent funds are > returned to Free Cash. > > Also, "unnecessary" is in the eye of the beholder: one voter's spending > cut is another voter's essential service. Again: > > *If you want to cut our tax burden, what spending can we cut that will > have strong support at town meeting (e.g. hundreds of votes)?* > > > That's the $64,000 question. > > One under-budget resident's view, > > -andy > -- > The LincolnTalk mailing list. > To post, send mail to [email protected]. > Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/ > . > Change your subscription settings at > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. > >
-- The LincolnTalk mailing list. To post, send mail to [email protected]. Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
