Proposed spending-cap change is rooted in salary concerns

I did not realize that The Telegraph moved the comics. In his argument for changing the spending cap (“Should city change spending cap calculation?” Oct. 12), Nashua teacher Gary Hoffman uses as one of his arguments that the city of Nashua doesn’t buy such consumer goods as “clothing, food, electronics, and housing costs.” While the city as an entity may not buy those items, its residents (read taxpayers) certainly do.

Mr. Hoffman, I suggest, is not as interested in the price of “firemen’s protective gear or the cost of your child’s textbook” as he is in seeing the spending cap increased as much as he can get away with to assure that teachers’ step increases and other salary increases can be maximized.

To suggest that the Consumer Price Index – Urban is not a true measure of inflation is nothing but self-interest. I would prefer not to adjust the spending cap based, in effect, on what a city spends. Politicians at all levels will spend just a bit more than every penny they can get their hands on. Using Mr. Hoffman’s idea, we would effectively have no spending cap at all.

Let me offer another alternative that would be a much better gauge of what the taxpayers can afford. For this formula, ignore all public employees; ignore all company owners and top executives. Take the wage increases gained by all working people and determine the average percentage of increase in the working populace. Use that number as the spending cap. It would surely be a more honest representation of what the citizens can afford. Perhaps Mr. Hoffman should live within that increase or decrease.

Joseph Ross

Nashua

Newsletter