RUTLAND CENTER — The tax rate in the town of Rutland likely will rise at least 29.3 percent, from $2.32 to $3 per $1,000 of assessed property value, according to the tentative budget.
The tentative budget is $1,274,623, a 13.7 percent increase from this year's $1,121,150. The tax levy would be hiked 39.2 percent, from $203,350 this year to $283,145.
The board was undecided about whether to budget for a fund balance so money would roll over into 2010 or to try to budget for no surplus. If it chooses to leave a fund balance, the tax rate likely will increase.
Councilman Michael C. Gillette said he thinks if the tax rate doesn't increase now, it will be hiked even more in 2010. This year, the council expects to have a fund balance of $312,078, all of which would be applied to the 2009 budget, unless the council decides to leave money to roll over at the end of the year.
Mr. Gillette and Councilwoman Colleen J. Woolley supported leaving $125,000 to $150,000 of this year's surplus unspent and applying about $162,000 to $187,000 to the levy instead. Mr. Gillette and Ms. Woolley argued that it is customary in the town to roll over funds and it would leave a cushion in case unexpected costs arise as they did this year. Supervisor's clerk James E. Yuhas advised the board to budget realistically and try to break even.
More decisions will arise when budget requests for raises are reviewed at the next workshop at 7 p.m. Oct. 27. In light of the tight budget, Mr. Gillette opposed considering raises for all non-union town employees this year. "If we're going to raise taxes, I just think it's an inappropriate time to be taking raises," he said at Thursday's Town Council meeting.
The board also focused budget discussions on the highway department, where the contract with the state for snow and ice removal was a matter of debate.
Terms of the contract promise that the state will pay the town $106,000 to keep Route 126 clear next winter. Ms. Woolley said she thinks that with employee pay, fuel and wear and tear on vehicles factored into the cost, the town would lose money because salt alone would cost about $92,000 based on the number of tons used last year on Route 126 and the current salt price. Highway Superintendent Claude F. Phelps pointed out that crews have to drive on the state route to get to all town roads since the municipal garage is situated on that roadway, but agreed with Ms. Woolley that the contract's wording is ambiguous.
Despite the rise in taxes, snow removal services likely will be below average in the coming year if the budget stays as it is written.
The tentative highway budget for snow removal would be $5,000 less than this year even though the cost of salt has tripled. Mr. Phelps argued that if his crews cannot use as much salt this year, the department will need more sand and more fuel will be consumed to keep the roads plowed.
"If you do it like that, with $80,000 for fuel, we're not even going to come close to average level service," Mr. Phelps told the board, adding that he would need $120,000 for fuel to provide average service without using as much salt as in past years.
"I think we're all under the assumption that we'll have to provide a lower level of service," Mr. Gillette said.
Town Supervisor Gary D. Eddy was uncomfortable with lowering service while raising taxes, especially if the town maintains the fund balance.
"Now we're going back to trying to hide another $140,000 in this budget," he said. "We're going to turn around and look our taxpayers and constituents in the eye and say for a $1.70 increase in taxes, we're lowering your service."
Councilman Douglas A. Main said critical comments from the public during the September council meeting saying the board was "harassing" Mr. Phelps about going over budget on road projects indicate that people wouldn't mind an increase in taxes to maintain the same level of service.
"I'm the last guy in this room that wants to raise taxes, but that's what the people have asked for and I'm going to vote for it," Mr. Main said.
