Just got back from the Oak Creek Council adoption (6-0) of the budget. They think they’re soooo good for “limiting” the levy increase to 3.97% (or $692,742 on a budget that was just shy of $17.5 million last year) and the rate increase to $0.05/$1,000 of assessed value (0.70%). Before I get to just how unprepared Mayor Dick Bolender and company were for the public hearing held just before the adoption of the project, there are a few items from the memo from the preparers of the budget (Finance Manager RoseAnn Underberg, City Clerk/Comptroller Beverly Buretta and Administrator Patrick DeGrave) to the mayor, common council and the taxpayers (yes, they were listed in that order):
- They whine, whine, whine again about the soon-to-expire revenue limits, then proceed to bust them. According to the memo, because of new construction, the levy could go up 3.956%, or $684,631 instead of the 2% base limit. They’re all older than me, and I came out of the Oak Creek/Franklin system, so I don’t know if I can blame public education for the failure of math here. Then again, I taught myself math before I made it to kindergarten, so I’m not the best judge of that.
- That
$12 million$15+ million after interest Taj Mahal police station pushed by my former alderman, Al Foeckler, continues to bite the taxpayers. Because the residual funds from the construction project and the funds from the sale of the old police station ran out this year, $190,000 of that levy increase is going to the mortgage (it would have been $390,000, but they found an extra $200,000 from this year’s ending fund balance from the closing of a pair of TIF Districts). It just gets worse; next year’s increase to cover the Taj Mahal mortgage will need to be $310,000 because the mortgage is just over $1 million annually, and we’re stuck with that bill until 2017. And Hizzoner and company are wondering why we’re wary about their call to replace city hall, one of the fire stations, the library, and a pair of city garages. - Despite an increase of total revenues, including state shared revenue, of only $286,800 (or 1.6%) to $18,182,674, spending is going up 5.7% to $21,441,360. Here’s the funny thing; that 5.7% expenditure increase still qualifies for the state’s “Expenditure Restraint Program”. Well, it would be funny if I didn’t have to pay the bill.
- Reassessments will be coming in either 2007 or 2008; the assessed value is down to 86% of the equalized value.
Now, onto the public hearing (for which I was a wee bit tardy):
– The person at the podium when I got there was Arlen Degner, the old guard in the anti-tax movement here in Oak Creek. He kept hammering home that the taxes are going up faster than our ability to pay them and lambasted the mayor and company for not trying to make the hard choices we who pay their salaries have to make. Like clueless dolts, they didn’t understand.
They also don’t understand that it’s a combination of the tax rate and the assessed value that determines the bottom line; the city administrator (I think; there wasn’t a placard in front of him saying who he was) tried to spin the very-visible increase by saying if Oak Creek had reassessed this year, the rate would “only” have been $6.22/$1,000 of assessed value. Only one problem; the average assessment would have gone up the equal amount to keep the bottom line at the same increase.
– Next up, Mark Verhalen, the new guard in said anti-tax movement. He pointed out that Oak Creek’s government is so much less efficient than Franklin’s. Hizzoner appeared to never have heard of the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, Foeckler trotted out some meaningless bit about taxes being higher in Franklin (attributable to less industry/commerce, a situation that is changing rapidly), and my new alderwoman Ann Lampe huffed and puffed that because Franklin doesn’t have a freeway running through it, they don’t have the safety needs of Oak Creek (funny, last time I checked, the OCPD didn’t patrol I-94, and Franklin had more land area and people).
– Last up, one of my old neighbors, who got confused by a part that was added to the memo referenced above, namely the levy increase for the Taj Mahal police station mortgage and the add-on part about the levy increase being a bit less than expected because of the closing of a pair of TIF Districts. Hizzoner and company didn’t offer any sort of explanation.
Say Doyle, can I get my $5 directly from you because I sure as hell am not getting it from the city of Oak Creek, the Oak Creek/Franklin School District, MMSD or MATC? The only hope left is the county. Scott Walker is going to try to deliver a levy freeze (be there at KEI tomorrow at noon for the veto party), but we need 2 supervisors (neither of them mine) to remember who pays their salaries and not who pays their campaign bills; Lynne DeBruin and Ryan McCue.
