I know people on FinCom. They are not deceitful people. I also believe that collectively, they try as hard as they can to be transparent.
Of course, you are free to style your public advocacy however you want. But for me, your extreme assumptions & statements about bad motives of people who I know personally hurts your credibility on the rest of your arguments. - Paul Shorb On Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 3:16 PM Scott Clary <[email protected]> wrote: > This is incredibly eye-opening but not surprising. Our volunteering Town > leadership and paid Administration clearly are in cahoots and are very > aware of these facts. This is egregious and deceitful and just incredible. > Non transparent with our tax money. What could be worse? Thank you so much > for revealing these indisputable facts. Look forward to seeing someone from > fincom spinning this one. > > Like so many have responded to why people are leaving town - taxes. This > town needs a revamp of town leadership from the top down. I'll exempt the > town clerk and assistant Town Administrator and the straightforward people > on our committees from this list. > > Fellow citizens - we should all be outraged. > > As inconvenient a midweek 6:30 town meeting is as kids are getting out of > school and everyone's leaving for 4th of July week and summer vacation, > please show up and vote. Hopefully no on the first two articles and > absolutely a yes vote on how fincom members are selected. Clearly, that > needs to change. It's all done from the inside with no public process or > transparency. > > Respectfully, > > Scott Clary > 617-968-5769 > Oak Knoll > > Sent from a mobile device - please excuse typos and errors > > On Thu, Jun 5, 2025, 9:21 AM David Cuetos <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Rather than ask you to take my word for it, I’d like to present direct >> evidence. What I’m about to show proves—beyond any reasonable doubt—that we >> could reduce property taxes by 16% without cutting a single dollar from >> operating expenses. And notably, this evidence >> <https://www.lincolntown.org/DocumentCenter/View/85512/Fincom-Doc-for-FY25-potential-funding-2024-01-30> >> comes from the Finance Committee itself. >> >> Let’s go back to January 2024, when the town was deliberating how to fund >> the community center. At that time, FinCom was weighing how much of the >> project should be covered through bonding versus using free cash or >> stabilization reserves. >> >> The table below may be a bit dense, but I’ll highlight the key takeaway: >> by January 30, 2024—almost two months before Town Meeting voted on the FY25 >> budget, and a full five months before the fiscal year even began—FinCom and >> the Administration were already projecting $5.7 million in discretionary >> funds for FY25. To that number, we should add the $0.6 million contribution >> to the reserve fund, which wasn’t technically part of the budget but was >> included in the planning. That brings the total expected discretionary >> surplus to $6.3 million. >> >> Now here’s the striking part: the budget >> <https://www.lincolntown.org/DocumentCenter/View/85754/Fincom-Report-FY25-Final> >> presented to voters didn’t reflect this surplus. Instead, it claimed that >> $5.5 million in free cash would be needed to balance the budget (see the >> FY25 budget in the second image below). In other words, while FinCom knew >> in December—if not earlier—that the town would be over-budgeting by $11.8 >> million, or roughly 24%, the public was shown something very different. >> >> Let’s put that $6.3 million of annual overtaxation into context. The >> total FY25 property tax burden—including both the tax levy ($33.7 million) >> and excluded debt ($4.8 million)—adds up to $38.5 million. That means the >> town is collecting roughly 16.4% more in taxes than it needs to fund >> operations, which aligns precisely with the 16% figure I referenced >> earlier. >> >> A few additional points worth underscoring: >> >> 1. >> >> Our reserves are already well beyond recommended levels. >> According to the latest estimates >> >> <https://www.lincolntown.org/DocumentCenter/View/97800/Free-Cash-Estimate---Analysis-w-Budget-Flexibility-Ratios-2024>, >> Lincoln’s reserves now stand at 40% of the annual budget—compared to the >> ~15% guidance commonly cited as necessary to maintain a AAA bond rating. >> >> 2. >> >> FY25 is not an anomaly. >> This year’s $6.3 million in surplus matches the average “turnback” >> over the past three fiscal years ($6.34 million). This isn’t a one-time >> windfall; it’s a consistent pattern. >> >> 3. >> >> Our budgeting approach is an outlier. >> Peer towns do not operate this way. Most communities use free cash to >> cover only modest capital expenses—typically just a few percentage points >> of their budgets. Nowhere else have I seen surpluses of this magnitude >> being quietly repurposed without voter oversight. >> >> >> To be clear, I fully support putting capital questions to a vote. But we >> cannot have a meaningful democratic process if the numbers used to inform >> those votes are so deeply misleading. What we have instead is a >> budgeting approach that conceals structural overtaxation and creates a >> slush fund—one that can be used to “sweeten” capital proposals or quietly >> fund new expenses without transparency or accountability. >> >> [image: image.png] >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 8:15 AM Andrew Payne <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> David Cuetos wrote: >>> >>>> Those residents deserve to know that property taxes could be reduced by >>>> >$6 million per year without impacting the operations of our local >>>> government. >>>> >>> *This is objectively false. * We can't cut the town's spending by >>> ~$6m/year without deep & significant cuts in services (*unless we >>> add liabilities). >>> >>> When we budget conservatively & there's unspent money at year end, that >>> money is not "lost." It is rolled over as "free cash" into the next year* >>> to offset (lower) the tax levy. In other words, residents are getting >>> taxed for *approximately* what the town spent because the tax levy is >>> being reduced by the difference between budget vs actual. >>> >>> Let's say we budget $10 and spend $8: $2 leftover. Next year, we >>> budget $10 *but only levy $8*, because the $10 budget is lowered by $2 >>> of free cash. If you roll this forward and add in inflation factors, you >>> will see that the tax burden tracks the town's spending. >>> >>> Even simpler: * every dollar that a resident pays in tax corresponds >>> precisely to a dollar the town eventually spends somewhere. * There >>> may be a year or three lag* between taxation and spending, *but money >>> isn't created or destroyed.* >>> >>> So, if you want to cut $6m from the town's budget, *you've got to find >>> $6 million of things that we are going to stop spending money on.* >>> AND, you've got to find ~400ish fellow residents who will vote to support >>> it at Annual Town Meeting. >>> >>> One isn't-democracy-fun? resident's view, >>> >>> -andy >>> >>> **PLEASE NOTE: I've simplified a few things: Free Cash may actually >>> have a two-year "lag" because of the way certification works in MA law. >>> Also, pension & OPEB contributions may have a much longer "lag" - $1 put >>> into those funds might not be spent for 20-30 years. * >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >> 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. > >
-- 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.
