[R]UTLAND — The Board of Aldermen has started its review of Mayor David Allaire’s proposed city budget with some big-tickets items drawing debate but remaining in the spending plan.
At least for now.
There was an unsuccessful bid to remove a little more than half the $692,000 budgeted to fund the city’s pension liabilities. Also, after debate, a board committee agreed to keep a proposed 3 percent pay raise for nonunion employees in the budget.
The board’s Public Works Committee put off any action on that pay increase until reviewing a breakdown of the costs associated with pay raises for those employees at 1 percent as well as increments of 0.5 percent up to 3 percent. The 3 percent increase was proposed to keep the nonunion increase on par with those of union members.
The mayor last month presented the board with a proposed municipal budget for fiscal year 2019 with a 4.5 percent increase in spending.
The board can only cut from the budget, not make additions, according to the city charter.
The board under the city charter has until Dec. 31 to adopt a spending plan. Residents then vote on the municipal budget on Town Meeting Day, which will be March 6.
The budget was referred to board committees to review relevant portions of it.
Allaire’s proposal for the Department of Public Works included the purchase of a 5-ton dump truck with plow to replace a 2000 truck, budgeted at $142,000.
The department has eight of those trucks and seeks to replace one each year to ensure the winter maintenance fleet remains in “reasonable” condition, DPW Commissioner Jeffrey Wennberg wrote in a memo to the board concerning the department’s budget.
Alderman Christopher Ettori asked whether, given the proposed increase in the overall city budget, it was time to try to get by with seven trucks rather than eight.
“There’s nothing obvious in the budget to cut, right? It’s just going up and up and up,” he said. “I think we have to start having these hard conversations.”
“We oftentimes run with seven or six or five because we don’t have the vehicles available,” Wennberg responded. “This is all about what the residents of the city reasonably expect in terms of how long they have to wait to get their streets plowed, cleared and de-iced. … It all affects the level of service we can provide.”
The commissioner added that at one point the department was down three trucks during a couple of the storms last winter.
“It was awful. It was just awful,” Wennberg said.
Alderman William Notte supported keeping the plow in the budget.
“I think diligently plowed roads are one of the most important things to people living in Rutland,” he said. “I think when you talk about what people expect from Rutland City government, maintaining good roads during storm situations is right toward the top.”
Ultimately, the Public Works Committee agreed to keep the funding for the truck in the budget.
“The full board has the right to override whatever decision this committee makes because we’re just recommending to them any changes,” said Ed Larson, the committee chair.
At a meeting of the Finance Committee last week, Ettori, a committee member, proposed reducing the $692,000 set aside to cover the city’s pension unfunded liabilities to $350,000.
“I’m basically trying to cut it in half,” Ettori said, adding that it is the largest chunk of the overall budget increase. “I think that it is unfair for the city taxpayers to bear this burden now.”
The board approved a resolution in 2016 to start setting aside money to pay down costs associated with its now-closed pension fund that several years ago had been underfunded. New employees are now signed up with the Vermont Municipal Retirement System to receive their pensions.
Notte, another committee member, disagreed with reducing the $692,000, calling it a “bitter pill to swallow” but the “smart fiscal” move for the board.
“I think that it would be very tough for the city taxpayers to pay this amount this year, but it’s going to be a hell of a lot tougher for them to make up the difference in 10 years,” he said. “It’s not something that sits well with anyone, but it’s necessary, it’s necessary to avoid severe financial hardship for the taxpayers 10 years down the road.”
The committee decided to keep the full $692,000 in the budget.
“I understand where Chris is coming from,” said Melinda Humphrey, a member of the Board of Aldermen and Finance Committee chair, “but if we take it out now it’s going to be impossible to get folks to increase it later.”
Ettori argued that the city is undertaking marketing efforts to expand its tax base.
“If we can grow that grand list, this doesn’t become as big a pill to swallow,” he said. “I’m not suggesting we kick the can down 10 years. I’m suggesting that we kick a little bit of it down the road so we can get our feet under us.”
Allaire, who attended the meeting, welcomed the move to keep the full funding in the spending plan.
“I took no pleasure in putting that number in the budget, but it is the fiscally responsible thing to do,” Allaire told the Finance Committee. “It was what the actuaries and the professionals have recommended.”
The proposed budget the mayor presented to the aldermen last month totaled just over $22.02 million, up about 4.5 percent, or $946,058, from this year’s spending plan of a little more than $21 million.
But the budget the mayor presented didn’t account for special ballot items for social service agencies.
Those line items this year totaled about $300,000. If the same ballot items are approved for the same amounts as the current year, that would bring the proposed municipal spending increase closer to 6 percent.
Other board committees have yet to meet to review the municipal budget, including the Recreation, Public Safety and General committees.
