Join Your TownHomepage 
Cut reversal bodes well for water rates: streetlight money also restored
By Daniel DeMaina/Melrose@cnc.com
Thu Jan 04, 2007, 12:45 PM EST
Melrose -Patrick’s reversal means $25 million in debt relief for the 61 municipalities that get water from the MWRA, including Melrose, and $200,000 earmarked for downtown’s Victorian streetlights.
“The big one is MWRA. That’s significant because we would have had to substantially raise our rates midyear — not only raise our rates to cover the second half of the year, but raise the rates almost double to cover the first half of the year,” Mayor Rob Dolan said.
According to Dolan, the debt relief helps prevent cities like Melrose from paying for MWRA projects like the Deer Island sewage treatment plant.
The 2006 residential rates were $3.66 per unit for water and $6.25 for sewer. Each unit equals approximately 748 gallons.
“Based on an assessment I did, which is really just an estimate … I assume that the water rate would have gone up about 30 cents a unit and the sewer rates a little over a $1.05,” said Robert Beshara, superintendent of the Melrose Water Department, who echoed Dolan in noting that the estimates were for a one-year period. “If we only had six months to collect that money, it’s possible those rates could double.”
Rep. Mike Festa said having Rep. Robert DeLeo as chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means helped the push for restoring the debt relief. DeLeo previously served as the head of the MWRA legislative caucus and has been a strong advocate for having the state provide more funding for cleanup of Boston Harbor and other water and sewer operations, according to Festa.
“It was very clear to both the Patrick administration as well as Chairman DeLeo that if we did not restore these cuts, there was going to be a major blow to Melrose and Wakefield for the ratepayers,” Festa said. “I’m very excited that the message was received loud and clear and the incoming administration has agreed to restore 100 percent.”
Sen. Richard Tisei said there were several items slashed, such as the MWRA debt relief and monies for human services programs, that he would not have included in the initial cuts.
“Having said that, there were a number of non-essential items,” he said. “I think rather than restoring all of the money, what the governor-elect should have done is waited a few days until he took office and then reviewed item by item, and prioritized which of the items were the most important. Funding for a gazebo in western Mass. isn’t as important as making sure mental health providers have enough money to run their programs.”
The $200,000 earmarked for maintenance of the downtown streetlights, while introduced by Tisei with support from Sen. Thomas McGee and Festa, is one of the budget items where the senator would have taken a wait-and-see approach.
“It is important that the business district in the city be as presentable as possible. I do think that it’s a good use of funding and it will certainly help Melrose,” he said. “It’s just that if it comes to reducing people’s water and sewer rates or funding local projects, I want to make sure we have our priorities straight, as far as how you deal with limited amounts of money.”
Festa said the restoration of the streetlight money was a surprise, and although he believes it to be an important and reasonable expenditure, he was prepared to accept not getting the money.
“I agree that had the governor-elect said, ‘We don’t have enough to restore all of the cuts, what would you choose?,’ I certainly agree that it was less a priority,” he said. “I absolutely agree with the governor-elect that that $200,000 is something that he should have restored and gratefully has. The fact is we always have to prioritize what we spend and the governor-elect’s team believes these are necessary expenditures.”
Dolan said the streetlight money should not be considered pork barrel spending when other communities look to Melrose’s downtown as a successful local business model.
“We should be investing more in downtowns, as much as in malls or mass developments,” he said. “Small business needs to be supported. The primary way government can support is through infrastructure improvements.”
Asked whether the state could afford the restoration of all the cuts, Tisei said “my answer would probably be ‘no’ right now.”
Tax revenues in December were $40 to $50 million over projections, according to Tisei, “so clearly more money could have been restored, but to restore all of the money right now, you’re clearly taking a big risk that, at the end of the year, you’re not going to have enough revenue coming in that’s going to pay for all of the spending.”
Festa said he respectfully disagrees with Tisei and that Romney’s original cuts were “completely inappropriate and were done for political reasons.”
“Governor-elect Patrick is very astute economically, (as is) the administration and finance team he’s put into the place,” he said “They’ve looked at the revenue projections, they’ve consulted with people and they know while the budget is going to be tight — it always is — every one of these expenditures was appropriate and necessary.”
The Legislature originally approved the $25 million in debt relief, but Gov. Romney vetoed the measure. The Legislature then overrode the governor’s veto only to have Romney cut the measure, along with others totaling $425 million, in November using so-called “9C cuts.” After November tax collection figures came in, Romney restored $41 million of the cuts at the beginning of the December.
The “9C cuts” name refers to Chapter 29, Section 9C of the Massachusetts General Laws, which states that if the projected revenue is less than projected spending, the governor must either cut the budget or introduce proposals to make up the deficit.
The Legislature balanced the $25.7 billion budget by borrowing $450 million from the state’s rainy day fund. Romney vetoed that transfer in October, creating the deficit that led to the cuts.
