Once again this year, on many towns’ ballots, we will find numerous warrant articles asking voters to place monies in “capital reserve funds” — much coming from what is often referred to as “surplus fund balances” or “unexpended fund balances.”
These reserve funds are very often large amounts of taxpayer money put in reserve for future expenditures. While sounding seemingly good on its face (who doesn’t save money to make some future large purchase, right?), this method of “saving” most often ends up lessening the normal debate and scrutiny that might otherwise come when contemplating large spending items.
Very often it is claimed that “we already have the money so it won’t impact taxes.” While this may sound good at first blush, think about taxpayers paying this today that might not be living in the town when the expenditures are actually made. Or the flip side: a newcomer to the town gets the “fruits” (money) of previous taxpayers while spending nothing.
The best alternative is bonding major capital expenditures, or, for lesser costly things, simply raising and appropriating it with a vote that year. People that will be using “the expense” will pay for it.
As for using “surplus fund balances”, again, while the budget writers claim this doesn’t affect taxes, it does. These are various monies that are obtained or otherwise unspent in the previous fiscal year, in some cases the result of over-taxation. This is our money and it should be returned to us in the form of tax reduction in the coming tax year. Don’t be fooled — they just don’t want to return the money to those of us that paid it. In some cases, the amounts of tax dollars held in the “capital reserve funds” are staggering. I recommend that when you encounter these questions on your ballot, simply vote no.