NOW:53146:USA01489
http://widgets.journalinteractive.com/cache/JIResponseCacher.ashx?duration=5&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdata.wp.myweather.net%2FeWxII%2F%3Fdata%3D*USA01489
57°
H 57° L 50°
Partly Cloudy | 15MPH
  • Print

Slight tax increase in New Berlin

Owner of a $251,000 home would see $25 charge next year

Oct. 31, 2011 | 32 comments

New Berlin - A proposed budget to pay for municipal services in New Berlin in 2012 calls for an estimated increase of $25 in city taxes for the owner of a home assessed at $251,000, officials said.

The proposed $34.2 million budget for the general fund, basically the operating budget, and debt service is 0.71 percent higher than this year and is headed for a Nov. 8 public hearing. The Common Council will adopt a final budget sometime after that.

The proposed levy would increase 1.77 percent, all because of additional debt service, said Mayor Jack Chiovatero. Department heads have not increased operating expenses while preserving services, he said.

After only minor tweaks so far by the Common Council to the mayor's proposed budget, Chiovatero said, "We've done a good job controlling costs and maintaining our excellent services to the public."

$2 monthly increase

But the spending plan includes an increase that is $2.11 per month for the owner of a $251,000 home, and he said of the council, "I don't know if they'll allow the $2."

The elephant that the city is dealing with for next year is debt payments that will go up more than the property tax levy. The city will pay $692,000 next year to pay off its debt, but the proposed tax levy would rise only $419,578, The mayor noted in his budget message.

The city borrowed more than $20 million in the last three years, more than 75 percent for road projects and the rest for major purchases such as a fire engine and dump trucks, Chiovatero said.

While the borrowing was going on, the Common Council insisted on keeping the tax levy at zero, Chiovatero said. He has been able to find money elsewhere in the budget for the debt payments. And that includes next year, but he has not been able to come up with enough, hence the proposed property tax hike.

Chiovatero said he views adding to the tax levy for debt repayment like paying off a credit card. It's fine to cut back on household expenses to pay that debt, he said, but eventually you're going to need a raise or you won't be able to pay the electric bill.

All that is true, said Common Council President Ken Harenda, but there are efficiencies and cost savings to be had. He is against the proposed levy increase, he said.

Aggravating the debt problem is that it will only get worse through 2013, he said.

Impacts to road projects

The city is facing major road projects that clumped together for three years, starting this year and going through 2013, he said. Roads going very bad and projects being delayed too long are the main reasons why, he said. But whatever the reason, New Berlin needs to do more than $10 million a year in road repair this year, next year and in 2013, he said. But it can borrow only $6.5 million under its own policy, he said.

So, tough decisions will have to be made, he said. On one side are the roads that need work and on the other side is the city's financial adviser who counsels city officials to take on no more debt until the current debt goes down.

To help meet the 2012 debt payment, Chiovatero proposes three things - using more of the portion of the city's room tax hotels pay that can be used for the debt; using more of the impact fees developers pay that can be used to help pay off the library and safety building; and using more of the fund where savings realized from previous road projects go. All three funds can stand being tapped into, Chiovatero said.

Helping the budget situation are the collective bargaining rules changes the state Legislature passed this year.

Among other things, those changes mean that city employees except police and firefighers will pay 5.9 percent toward their pensions, said Tami Potkay, director of human resources. No one paid toward pensions until August when employees not represented by unions started paying.

Higher insurance premiums

Another significant change coming from Madison is that the city can now make everyone except police and firefighters pay 15 percent of health insurance premiums. Currently, those not in unions already pay 15 percent while those in unions pay 10 percent under their contracts, which expire at the end of the year, including police and firefighters, Potkay said.

The city is negotiating contracts for 2012 with police and firefigher unions.

However, the proposed budget assumes no raises for any city workers, she said.

No layoffs or furloughs are contained in the proposed budget, either. The 2011 budget originally had 7.5 furlough days, but in early summer other ways were found to balance the budget, said Ralph Chipman, treasurer.

As in previous budgets, the 2012 proposed spending plan is backed up by $1 million from fund balance. While not all of that would be needed, whatever is spent will reduce the fund balance and that can't go on forever, Chipman said.

"I've talked about that a lot," he said.

The policy of keeping a minimum of 15 percent of the operating budget in the fund balance means the fund balance needs to stay at $5.1 million, he said. At the end of this year, it probably will be about $7.2 million, he said. If it goes down $1 million next year, it will stand at $6.2 million, so it could be tapped only one more time in 2013 for another $1 million before it falls to the minimum $5.1 million, he said.

Part of the reason for the need for extra cash next year will be a state aid cut of nearly $250,000, Chipman said. But the collective bargaining rules changes enabled the city to fill that budget gap, he said.

New Berlin was in a better position to take the hit because it gets so little state aid anyway, he said.

AT A GLANCE

Proposed 2012 budget (operating and debt): $34,237,591

2011 budget: $33,996,903

Difference: $240,688 or 0.7 percent higher

2012 Proposed Levy: $24,183,531

2011 Levy: $23,763,953

Difference: $419,578 or 1.77 percent higher

Proposed 2012 Tax Rate: $5.05 per $1,000 of assessed value

2011 Tax Rate: $4.98 per $1,000

Difference: 7 cents per $1,000 or 1.4 percent higher

NEXT STEP

WHAT: public hearing on the proposed 2012 New Berlin city budget

WHEN: 6 p.m. Nov. 8

WHERE: New Berlin City Hall, 3805 S. Casper Drive

Welcome to our new commenting system.
  • You can now reply to comments. Replies will be threaded to make conversations easier to follow.
  • You can continue to sort comments according to oldest first, newest first, and most thumbs up.
  • Your comments are archived on your own page.
  • Please notify us if you see personal insults or other irresponsible comments. We reserve the right to eliminate any comments and block any commenter who is not civil and respectful of others.

Discussion guidelines | Privacy policy | Terms of use

Limit of 2000 characters, 2000 characters remaining

Sort by
Comment threads per page: 10 | 20 | 50
  1. Chiovatero sold out his own city.

    All he ever talks about is tax increases even though the residents have spoken loud and clear that we expect no tax increases.

    His quotes are always classic...

    "Chiovatero said he views adding to the tax levy for debt repayment like paying off a credit card. It's fine to cut back on household expenses to pay that debt, he said, but eventually you're going to need a raise or you won't be able to pay the electric bill."

    What?

    What a warped view.

    Chiovatero is taking from the "electric bill" to pay the "credit card bill" and he "expects" a raise.

    What a sell out. Burn the residents on purpose and then expect them to willingly turn the other cheek?

    Slap!

    When I paid off my credit card bill. I took a hard look at the finances and made some tough sacrifices while meeting my obligations. It wasn't easy but in the end, I'm way ahead than if I would have relied on future pay increases to get out of today's hole.

    Where is the effort to leave no stone unturned to make sure the residents are being delivered a budget that he has worked on relentlessly to trim waste? There is not a single mention of such effort in this article - not one single mention of where any waste was trimmed, considered or even investigated? What else is he doing then? Too hard? Too much work? probably just doesn't care - sold the city out before, why would he care now.

    "Helping the budget situation are the collective bargaining rules changes the state Legislature passed this year."
  2. It's $2.00...you probably just spent $2.00 in electric, internet, and time to type that busby. You just wasted $2.00 crying about $2.00. I'm all for savings, but you sound ridiculous.
  3. No, it's more of the same.

    Feel free to send in as much extra as you'd like.

    It's a slap in the face to say zero increase and hear yet again... it's only $2, it's just a cost of a latte right?

    If it's such a minor amount, it should be extremely easy to find the efficiency gains required to get it to zero. It's not worth the effort or what?

    It's not acceptable to nickel and dime and fee up at every turn. You pay the extra, I want zero.
  4. You have now wasted $4.00! And your drinking latte's? You obviously have time and money to burn, that I do not. You will dump far more time and money into this campaign to save $2.00 than I would. I wonder how much you will spend? Good luck in your pursuit of saving all that $2.00.
  5. If it's such a pittance amount, our mayor should have enough smarts to find the efficiency gains to save it, unless he doesn't care or it's just too much hard work.

    Why is it a problem to challenge our elected officials to do some hard work?

    The rich folks on observatory rd can pay all the extra they'd like, link up with your spokesperson above who apparently has the extra cash.

    Is it ok in your job to come close but not actually complete a task successfully?
  6. Chiovatero even said publicly he doesn't have the time "I'm too busy to do my mayoral duties" in between running up to Appleton to check on his wife and running businesses with his secret partners
  7. [quote=Im_Taxed_Too_Much]and running businesses with his secret partners[/quote]

    So what are your sources on this? Be specific. What partners and where is this information coming from?
  8. Rich people on Observatory Rd? Extra cash? It's $2.00!!!!!!!! You're clearly willing to spend far more than $2.00 to save $2.00. It's ludicrous.

    Instead of wasting your life away online get out there and make yourself $2.00.

    "Don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks. If you don't have a job and you are not rich, blame yourself!"
    -Herman Cain
    If you cannot afford the $2.00, blame yourself. Don't blame the Mayor or alderman.

    I also have no problem questioning or challenging your elected officials, but that is not what you're doing. You are personally attacking the Mayor. Calling him a sell out, misquoting the Mayor, and misrepresenting the facts. Have you actually contacted him with constructive criticism, or ideas on where to cut costs? Or is your agenda just to attack the Mayor?

    If you actually read the article they did use the collective bargaining changes to help the gap of State Aid that was eliminated. It wasn't enough for everything. As far as your statement "All he ever talks about is tax increases even though the residents have spoken loud and clear that we expect no tax increases." When was that? You can speak for yourself, but you do NOT speak for ALL residents. If you would like to get a feel for what residents are actually saying I would look at the 2010 Summer Survey where 57% of residents reported that they would increase taxes 2% or more(which is the $2.00 were arguing about) they just could not agree how much. So if anything the residents have spoken loud and clear...they agree with me.

    I also want to point out that if you're going to give financial advice, use words like efficiency gains, and question others abilities to balance the budget...you probably should not discuss your credit card debt and admit you cannot afford even $2.00 in the same communication. "When I paid off my credit card bill. I took a hard look at the finances and made some tough sacrifices while meeting my obligations"
  9. Observatory, you are the one that indicated the $2 was peanuts to you. To be clear, it's $2 PER MONTH PER $250,000. Like I said, kick in all the extra you want, nothing stops you from paying more.

    Where I have misquoted? Any quotes are pasted from the article.

    Where have I misrepresented? I've referenced the facts in the article.

    Yes, I am very willing to put my time into challenging our elected officials to do more than the minimum, to make tougher choices - not just continue with more of the same. You find that bad and you're ok with them giving up when it get's too hard?

    "When was that? You can speak for yourself, but you do NOT speak for ALL residents"

    The residents spoke clearly when we re-elected or elected our alderman that supported fighting for no tax increase.

    You obviously feel our city government is running at the peak of efficiency. In your eyes there is no waste and no place to look for savings. That's what you're saying right? Or are you saying its just too hard to do? Too much work to consider?

    Yes, the credit card example would be something to be proud of. Rather than sticking your head in the sand, it takes tough choices. Most people don't have the option of taking money from their neighbor to pay their bills but that's exactly what the mayor is suggesting. Most people don't have other funds to raid.

    I expect my elected officials to be able to make tough choices, not raid other funds, not hide the issue, seek out the the savings, eliminate the waste and not just stop when it's close enough or it's too much work.

    Yes, I do think it's worth fighting for - if your opinion is reflective of the mayor, then I believe he just gave up when it got too hard and felt it was close enough. After all, that's what your proposing is acceptable.
  10. [quote=Busby]There is not a single mention of such effort in this article - not one single mention of where any waste was trimmed, considered or even investigated? What else is he doing then? Too hard? Too much work? probably just doesn't care - sold the city out before, why would he care now.[/quote]

    The mayor didn't write the article, for one thing. So you're assuming, with the typical NBCRG venom toward anyone not in your little club, that he put no effort into this.

    More to the point, because something is not mentioned, you have no logical reason to conclude it didn't happen. You have not mentioned plenty of things in your posts, and we could list them all day. Some you've done, some you haven't. All you can say conclusively is that those things are not mentioned in your posts.

    But you want to assume the worst, just like Taxed wants to throw out allegations of "secret partners" and other nasty slander he never seems to get around to backing up with facts and sources.
Suburban News Roundup

E-mail Newsletter

Your link to the biggest stories in the suburbs delivered Thursday mornings.


Enter your e-mail address above and click "Sign Up Now!" to begin receiving your e-mail newsletter
Get the Newsletter!

Login or Register to manage all your newsletter preferences.

advertisement

Local Crime Map

CONNECT    

advertisement

Latest Photo Galleries