Boardman makes history, but no one is applauding

For the first time ever, Boardman Township government is having to borrow money to get through the first quarter of its fiscal year. It doesn’t matter whether it’s a cash-flow issue, as Trustee Larry Moliterno contends, or a failure to get the operating budget under control, as Trustee Kathy Miller argues. Just the notion of Boardman having to borrow money is in and of itself an eyebrow-raising story.

For years, one of the largest townships in Ohio reveled in its financial stability, and even wealth — built on inheritance taxes. While other communities struggled to make ends meet, Boardman seemed immuned. But then reality dawned when residents began balking at paying more in taxes and the effects of the nation’s financial crisis hit home.

Last year’s layoff of 30 full-time and 12 part-time employees because of dwindling revenue was the exclamation point. In November 2007, voters said no to a 4-mill levy that would have generated $4 million a year for five years.

Two months ago, in the midst of a reduction in the safety forces, residents passed a 2.2-mill police and fire levy that will generate $2.07 million annually for five years.

Police officers and firefighters are being called back, but Boardman’s financial troubles are far from over.

Indeed, the 2-1 vote on the $3 million loan at last week’s emergency meeting of the board of trustees shows there isn’t consensus on how to deal with the challenges.

Trustees Moliterno and Robyn Gallitto voted to borrow the money from National City Bank, which is charging a 3.6 percent interest rate. Trustee Miller voted against the measure.

Different wave length

She seemed to be on a different wave length, questioning the need for $3 million and also wondering why an emergency meeting was necessary.

“For me, why can’t we borrow less and get the budget under control,” she said.

Given that Miller and Gallitto are seeking re-election this year, the issue has taken on a political tint. The two incumbents aren’t allies and have publicly clashed over various issues.

Against that backdrop, the 11-member business advisory committee, which was formed last year after the layoffs and has closely reviewed and analyzed the township’s operation and budget, should be asked to provide an independent review of the decision to borrow the money.

Beyond that, the township’s need for money to tide it over for at least three months raises the question of how far the trustees have progressed in implementing the recommendations contained in a report from the business advisory panel.

Among the more significant recommendations are the development of a capital improvement budget, an end to the reliance on inheritance tax receipts for operating expenses and a freeze of employee wages.

The committee did endorse the safety services levy, which provided credibility to the trustees’ argument that without the money the safety of the township was at risk.

Now, James Rosa, a certified public accountant who works at Hill, Barth & King, and his colleagues should delve into the township’s borrowing of $3 million and respond to the objections raised by Miller.

To hear Wiliam Leicht, township fiscal officer, tell it, such first-quarter borrowing will likely be an annual occurrence.

Can that be avoided? It’s a question for the business advisory committee to answer.