By:
The Washington Township Committee last week approved the municipality’s $7.2 million budget. The discussion often was heated, and occasionally personal.
At the heart of the matter was a 43 percent increase in municipal taxes. However, that hike is somewhat inflated because a 3-2 majority of the committee voted to use $660,000 in surplus funds to reduce the tax impact of the 1999 budget. If the surplus funds had not been used, this year’s municipal tax increase would have been 5 percent.
The committee had every right to use money from surplus last year, but should have told residents it would be a one-year respite. It can be argued that the surplus belongs to the people because it is money left over when revenues — often taxes — surpass expenditures. That was not the case in 1999, when the surplus grew because of the sale of some farmland.
Nancy Tindall and Vince Calcagno, the only members of the 1999 committee who still are part of the governing body, both voted against the use of surplus, recognizing it would be a one-shot deal and put future committees in the unenviable position of defending a large tax hike.
During the budget debate, there were arguments regarding the hiring of new municipal personnel and the elimination of some existing positions. The most unusual suggestion was made by Committeeman Douglas Tindall, who said the township should rid itself of the administrator’s position.
It is unlikely that Washington could manage itself sufficiently without a full-time administrator. Given the continuing growth of the township, attempting to do so at this time would seem foolish. And there is no indication that current Township Administrator Michael Dill is not performing in the best interest of the municipality.
Mr. Tindall and Committeeman Richard Folsom were more justified in condemning a lack of communication from the administrator’s office to the committee and township residents.
Municipal employees, for example, are not permitted to speak to the media without consent from Mr. Dill — even if such a conversation regards a subject as innocuous as programs for senior citizens.
Mr. Dill is helpful and professional, but he is not available at all times to address issues. It perhaps would be more helpful if the lines of communication were opened somewhat so that others could step in and answer questions in the administrator’s absence.
Eliminating the administrator’s position is not the answer to improving communication, and if anything probably would have the opposite effect.
