"By any measure, Connecticut has one of the worst property tax burdens in the nation, routinely much higher than national average. With a state income tax that hits lower- and middle-income wage earners the hardest, over-reliance on property taxes adds immensely to the overall unfairness of tax burdens in our state. Property taxes perversely undercut "smart growth," drive expensive sprawl and foment no-win competition for development among cities and towns." - Kevin Sullivan
Kevin Sullivan, Former CT Lt. Governor and current vociferous critic of the West Hartford Taxpayers Association, wrote an editorial this past January which, certainly applies to our own town government. He apparently should re-read it in earnest.
It's easier to argue for sacrifice when it's not just everyone else's pain. Cut from the top. Reduce administrative costs, cut layers of political appointees, roll back top salaries, cut perks and consolidate agencies and services. We don't need nearly 200 agencies, boards and commissions along with all the commissioners, deputy commissioners, assistants and directors. Local governments and school districts also need incentives or even mandates to consolidate services.
Next, cut from the bottom. Eliminate or suspend programs, services and tax breaks that do not have a general public benefit or show no substantial return on investment. Millions of dollars are buried deep in the budget and state tax code. ...
Raise taxes last, if at all. Taxes take money from consumers and investors, who prime economic recovery. Higher taxes and fees or higher local taxes (for costs passed along by the state) always fall unfairly on middle- and lower-income families.
If any tax increase is needed, be sure it's fair in terms of ability to pay. And for every dollar raised in taxes there should be a dollar cut in state spending.
Then, make sure the savings and revenues are real. Don't count on some other level of government to fix it (hoped-for bailouts) or eat it (more burdens on local property taxpayers). Don't pay for today's problems with tomorrow's dollars through gimmicks like early retirement that cost more over time. Tap the rainy day fund and, with interest rates low, some deficit financing makes sense.
Connecticut's structural budget crisis is not going away soon. Even when revenues recover, the deficit will remain and the gap will have grown.
... And we, the people, should demand results and then support those who step up to make hard choices.
Perhaps we should take his sage advice.
The again, the Former Lt. Governor should really listen to his own words before going off and saying another increase in our Town taxes is now justified because Kiplinger "hearts" West Hartford.
Cut from the top, cut from the bottom and raise taxes LAST, if at all.
For every dollar raised in taxes there should be a dollar cut in spending, etc. etc. etc.
Hey Kevin.. those were your words.. but maybe you really didn't mean them after all.
So where exactly ARE the Board of Education's spending cuts?
(Silly taxpayers ... they are the Board of Education, they don't have to make any real reductions)
Post Script: Based on some of the more recent web reviews (from 2009) of his Children's Museum which he has headed since 2007 - maybe Mr. Sullivan ought to keep his focus there instead of weighing in on other issues. Just a thought.
10 WH Responses:
Given Mr. Sullivan's history in the Legilature I think the only answer is that he went off his meds in January.
Clearly, Sullivan is talking about cuts to the STATE budget (not town budgets like West Hartford's).
Clearly, what Sullivan said doesn't JUST apply to the State budget.
He outlined his feelings quite clearly about property tax and spending in general.
WHTalk -- I have struggled, without success, to find a clear connection between the property tax burden in West Hartford and your snarky postscript about the Children's Museum. I recognize, of course, that I may not be fully comprehending your point -- if so, and the postscript was included for some purpose other than a gratuitous dig at Mr. Sullivan, I would be grateful if you would indulge me, and spell it out.
In any event, assuming for the sake of discussion that Trip Advisor reviews are a worthwhile evaluative resource, it strikes me as disingenuous -- and beneath this forum -- to create a link that shows only the negative reviews that are more remote in time, while skipping past the most recent, clearly positive review.
For what it's worth, I am surprised and disappointed.
So the usual WHTA contortions and distortions continue. Flattered as I am to be quoted on my op ed about the STATE BUDGET, being bastardized here just doesn't cut it. If the state was run like the West Hartford -- fiscal responsibility (what AAA credit-rated means), real cuts on both the town and school side, huge value added for public expenditures, dramatic growth in the commercial tax base, solid property values, good schools, strong residential neighborhoods, safe streets, a uniquely dynamic large older suburb (that's what being one of the 10 best in America means in Kiplinger's) and bipartisan leadership -- then Connecticut would be the envy of the nation just as West Hartford is the envy of Connecticut. The average tax increase this year is $143. That's a amazing accomplishment in hard times. Time to put away the self-serving anti-education, anti-government ideology and support the reality of a local government that has worked hard to control taxes and spending while not destroying what makes West Hartford the great town it is. And you can quote me accurately on that!
WHT,
Well, I suppose you would know.
To Kevin Walsh ... where are these "most recent" online reviews? and just because YOU don't go by Trip Advisor (which many people do) that does not mean it is not a credible source. Reread the post and certainly you will find the connection between the property tax burden and the Children's Museum. WHTALK is surprised and disappointed that you need someone to spell it out for you.
To Kevin Sullivan: No one claimed West Hartford wasn't a great place to live etc. etc. This forum has NEVER said that West Hartford lacked any of the qualities you mentioned. Your words were not at all "bastardized", they were taken completely as you wrote them. Looks like you are once again talking out of both sides of your mouth.
WHTALK just doesn't understand how you set such a double standard though, as if what you said about the State does not in fact apply to our fair City. In fact it does.
As for the "average tax increase this year of $143" : So now you think it is ok to raise taxes by even a small amount "in hard times"? When people are out of work and trying to pay their mortgage? And what about our seniors on fixed incomes? Shall they just buy less groceries? What compassion!
But, certainly you must know that it isn't just about this year. How about the cumulative effect of what has already been our increases over the past 10 years? or 5 years? and what about what is coming next year? You don't seem to give a rot about that, do you? Typical political myopia.
It is obvious that you cannot even stomach your own advice when it comes to spending and taxation in City government. What's the matter? What is good enough advice for the State is not good enough advice for the City? Bastardization indeed.
Finally, town government wouldn't work so hard to control taxes if a watchdog organization wasn't around to make sure they did! Perhaps it is organizations like that which have helped West Hartford to be chosen by Kiplingers to begin with!
WHTalk, the most recent Trip Advisor review of the Children's Museum (that you were apparently twice unable to find) is the first review listed -- contributed by ncarr20 and dated 12/28/09. Your posted link inexplicably does not show this more recent positive review of the Children's Museum, and instead shows only two older negative reviews.
Turning to the alleged connection between the property tax burden and the Children's Museum that you insist can be found in your initial post (without specifying where): I have at your suggestion re-read your post. I now suggest that you do the same, and challenge you (or any other member of this community) to show us all where and how your post alluded to ANY connection between the Children's Museum and the property tax burden.
WHTalk, you certainly have a right to take snarky gratuitous digs at public figures. But I suggest that you would be a far more persuasive commentator if you were at least big enough to own it when you exercise that right.
Mr. Walsh - you only found ONE good "recent" review? Bravo. Sorry but no prizes will be awarded.
WHTALK doesn't aim to be a "persuasive commentator". WHTALK thinks you have enough brains to think for yourself based on information or facts or opinions presented. You may not like or agree with what is presented and that is entirely a different story. You may think something is snarky and gratuitous, and really that's your opinion as well. At the end of the day, it matters little.
WHTALK is not in the business of spoon feeding its readers in content, "connections", or opinions, nor does WHTALK seek approval or the need to "own" anything.
By the way, "snarky" is a term that is just way too overused; perhaps a good thesaurus would help.
Honesty can also be construed as being rude or sarcastic or even disrespectful, and yet it is a virtue. Go figure.
WHTalk, I am relieved to learn that you do not aim to be a persuasive commentator, and I applaud your unqualified success in that regard.
(See? THAT was snarky, AND gratuitous. And I AM owning it.)
Thanks, also, for the tip about the thesaurus. I confess that I have rarely felt the need over the years to use one, but I do aspire -- at the end of the day -- to avoid those hackneyed expressions, and to command as rich and vibrant a vocabulary as yours.
Post a Comment