City Council OKs $111,000 fund move

Mayor: using ‘rainy day’ money necessary evil considering deficit

By Owen Boss

GARDNER — The City Council voted Monday to approve Mayor Mark Hawke’s request to remove $111,000 from the city’s stabilization fund. Although the removal of the funds has been a strongly debated issue among council members, Mr. Hawke was able to obtain the required two-thirds majority vote. The money taken from the stabilization fund will be used primarily to cover the deficit in the city’s budget caused by rising energy prices. The recipients of the additional funds are the Council on Aging’s utilities account, the municipal garage’s vehicle supplies account, the highway department’s street lighting account, the Greenwood pool’s energy account and the continued maintenance of City Hall. Among the reasons councilors offered not to remove the funds was the negative effect it would have on the bond rating for the city. However, according to Councilor Scott Graves, the same problem would be consistent across the entire state. With rising energy prices and a struggling national economy, Mr. Graves said, “We are not alone on this.” A lower bond rating may make it more difficult for the city to receive important funds in the future. Although there were several disagreements regarding the removal of the funds, all members of the council agreed that it was only appropriate to use the money in a case of financial emergency. Therefore, the debate was whether or not the current situation facing the city constituted such appropriations, and as the meeting progressed, it was evident that the majority of council members felt it was. “I haven’t seen any other options for the funding,” said Councilor David Boudreau, “I just don’t see any other solution to pay the bills.” Mr. Hawke spoke at the meeting regarding his intentions for the money, “I do not advocate spending a dime more than the requested $111,000.” The mayor then also emphasized that using the funds was immediately necessary. “It is a rainy day fund,” said Mr. Hawke. “How hard does it have to start raining before you can use it?” One of the most adamantly opposed members of the council was Councilor Kim Dembrosky. She spoke of her reluctance to use money from the stabilization fund to pay for problems consistently facing the city, “I think it is unwise to use stabilization funds to pay for recurrent problems,” said Ms. Dembrosky. Although she said that the large deficit caused by the exorbitant amount spent on snow and ice removal this past winter was something that could not be predicted, she emphasized the importance of not making permanent withdrawals for recurrent expenses “The policy needs to be used for extraordinary expenses only, not as a checking account,” said Ms. Dembrosky. Also opposed to the withdrawal was Councilor Alice Anderson. “The stabilization fund is the line of last resort,” said Ms. Anderson. One of her primary concerns was that the release of stabilization funds would only lead to more appropriations. “I’ll bet you doughnuts to dollars,” said Ms. Anderson, “that the next meeting we have, and the weeks thereafter we will see appropriation after appropriation after appropriation that is going to come from somewhere else.” oboss@thegardnernews.com

Appeared on Page 1 on 4/8/2008 (Vol. 206 No. 84)