I wonder how many residents took the time to actually read the 24 page report with the title “Financial Management Review” by
the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR). I did.
Click here, to see the report.
The DOR report states under the title “Overview” that, “officials have resorted to using one-time revenue sources, such as
the stabilization fund and free cash, and knowingly incurring year-end deficits in order to defer costs until the following year.”
There is mentioning of a “deteriorating financial position,” and the compounding impact by the town‘s failure “to
complete work necessary to get its tax rate set on time, [...]”.
While Earl Johnson seems to like the power a public office provides, he seems to neglect the responsibility that comes with it. By dragging his
feet, assessor Earl Johnson and the rest of the board of assessors cost the taxpayer an average of $ 32,203 over the last five years and
$ 54,464 over the last two years in interest for the funds the town had to borrow to meet short-term obligations. Not only could this
substantial expense be avoided if past tax bills would have been mailed in time, the town could have actually earned interest on the funds
already collected but not spent yet.
The report noted also that the town “has habitually failed to meet these deadlines.” The officials of the DOR recognized the
fact that Earl Johnson is the problem; on page 14 of the report the state officials recommend, “that the town separate the duties of the
board of assessors from those of selectmen, and make the assessors‘ position appointed.” Earl Johnson is a member of the selectboard
and a member of the board of assessors and was a member of the planning board until a short time ago. If the tax bills get mailed out in a timely
fashion in the future, it is JoAnne Higgins' achievement. Earl Johnson claimed in a news article published in the Southbridge Evening News
on 6-1-2007, “I was averaging 25 hours up there [in the assessor's office] a week at the town hall working on this.”
“There is nothing inherent in the town‘s make-up that should give rise to these financial problems,” the report states,
recognizing the town‘s fortunate make-up with up to sixty percent of second home properties. As second homes are prevalent on or near
Hamilton Reservoir and assessed at higher values, they are also only occupied on weekends. This is the reason why school-age children if present
in these homes do not burden the town‘s budget as they visit schools somewhere else.
These weekend-home owners carry a disproportional tax burden while they do not even have the right to vote as their primary residence is
somewhere else. This fortunate situation is all but secure in the future as the “leadership” of our town is promising the town an
even better financial future once the Flying J
truck stop will be built in town. I guarantee the residents of Holland that Wettlaufer and his associates
will no longer be around anymore once the unassuming residents will be confronted with the reality of the “travel center.” It is
telling that no one has published any numbers in terms of taxes the town expects to get from the proposed truck
stop.
Back to the DOR report which further notes, “it is clear that the budget process in Holland has not worked. [...] As an accepted
practice, officials have admitted to purposelly under-funding specific appropriations knowing that a year-end deficit will result. [...] In
effect, it puts off difficult decisions and creates a situation where the town is paying for current year services with future year dollars.
”
Publicly, Wettlaufer's “beliefs” are different. He was quoted in the February 15, 2008 issue of the Villager as having said:
"We have said all along since we began as a board together that we would always provide what we believe to be a balanced budget."
What Wettlaufer says and does are two different things, the practice of overspending is illegal!! The report states, “state law
prohibits a municipality from incurring liabilities in excess of appropriations.” The report notes further, “in this
period of tight budgets, when residents are asked to give more, the efforts of local leaders to seek out operational efficiencies, to make
informed, well-reasoned decisions and to enhance the credibility of government should be viewed as worthwhile pursuits. [...] Regular
financial management team meetings should be held, both to build a collaborative working environment and to foster a positive attitude in
town hall. [...] We recommend that the town amend the size and composition [I wonder why...] of the capital planning committee and otherwise
meet the requirements of its bylaw.”
At the beginning of the December 16 meeting which was attended by Joe Markarian, supervisor, and Zack Blake, project manager, both officials
of the Division of Local Services, Blake made the following statement: “We think that overall the town has good leadership in place,
and you should be proud of that.” As I noted before, I had read the entire report and wondered how the report would look like if
we would not be so “fortunate” and had bad leadership.
Selectboard chairman Wettlaufer seemed to be uncomfortable being accused of breaking the law by knowingly spending more of the tax payers
money than allowed by law. Wettlaufer asked if his selectboard was the only selectboard in the Commonwealth that practiced this unlawful
overspending. The DOR officials confirmed that some other towns would engage in the same practice too. Wettlaufer seemed to be satisfied with the answer.
However, Wettlaufer‘s attempt to justify the conduct of his selectboard defies any logic. It is as if he would drive around drunk like a sailor and once
pulled over by the police and questioned about his intoxicated condition, would ask, “Am I the only drunk on the road?”
If our town is functioning to the degree it does, we owe it to individuals like Linda Blodgett, town treasurer, and Kristin LaPlante, town clerk and also executive secretary. These two ladies impress with their professionalism and dedication.
December 17, 2008, Peter Frei