|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
From gas to groceries, everything’s getting more expensive. But one number caught the residents of New Bedford off guard.
$32 million.
That’s what Mayor Jon Mitchell said was the difference between the projected cost of city government next year and its revenue. In a budget address to city councilors May 13, Mitchell outlined that closing that gap would mean both higher taxes and service cutbacks, including layoffs. Notably, Mitchell proposed closing Fire Station 9 — though the closure could be temporarily delayed and Mitchell has said he prefers reducing the staffing on fire engines across the city instead.
Residents and officials were surprised by the size of New Bedford’s deficit. Mitchell himself projected a $13 million deficit in the weeks before his budget address. And last year New Bedford came in under budget. Even in the current fiscal year, recent auditor’s reports show that New Bedford had spent 49.8% of its funds through the first two quarters, keeping the city basically on track. (Projected overages in police and healthcare spending may lead to a 0.5% deficit by year’s end, the same report found.)
“The City Council received the [proposed] budget when the public did, and while I was aware there was a budget deficit, the figures presented by the Mayor have fluctuated significantly over the past few weeks,” said Councilor James Roy, in an online post.
But for residents and officials seeking to understand the budget, the $32 million deficit figure may be less informative than a deeper dive into what costs are actually going up.
In fact, the $32 million figure captures the scale of decisions that the administration made to balance the budget — including denying $8 million worth of spending increase requests and proposing position eliminations and layoffs worth close to $4 million — but the figure does not actually appear in the budget proposal itself.
Instead, understanding how New Bedford’s $535 million budget works can help people understand their taxes, their local government, and advocate to officials for their needs.
What does it mean to have a deficit?
The budget that Mayor Mitchell presented was balanced: total revenue exactly matched total spending (both were $535,185,600 and zero cents in the general fund).
When Mitchell talks about facing a $32 million deficit, he’s figuring in decisions that don’t appear in the budget book.
For example, the administration said that city departments requested $8 million in spending increases. These could be requests from the library, police, zoo, cemeteries, or health department to hire more staff or purchase new equipment. This year, those requests were denied wholesale.
So, $8 million of the total $32 million will not result in immediate staffing reductions or significant service reductions.
Instead of adding services, Mitchell proposes eliminating positions. That includes many empty positions in city government — 58 positions in total, including dozens of police officers the city hopes to hire. The city usually calculates its budget for fully-staffed departments, and eliminating empty positions can have big impacts on the budget without needing to lay off employees. However, these eliminations can affect the long-term growth and capacity of a department.
Other decisions could have immediate consequences. Thirty-four people would be laid off in the mayor’s proposal, and the Fire Department would bear the brunt, with 26 people slated to lose their jobs. Fire Station 9 could close.
In total, these eliminations and layoffs would amount to roughly $4 million of the $32 million figure.
Half of the $32 million figure — $16 million — would be offset by tax increases.
So, talking about a “$32 million deficit” is a way to capture the size and scope of decisions that went into creating the budget. While there’s some usefulness in understanding how Mitchell and his team arrived at the $32 million figure, city residents may benefit from an even simpler question.
What costs are actually increasing?
More important than the $32 million deficit figure is the actual cost of New Bedford’s general fund: $535 million. What’s inside this number and how does the city pay for it?
The education budget, at $290 million, is more than half of all city spending. But New Bedford residents overwhelmingly do not pay for this school budget with their property taxes. Only $13 million of the $290 million education budget — or about 4% — comes from property taxes.
State aid for education totals $277 million, and has increased $17 million since last year. So while the education budget is significantly bigger — and pushing up the whole city’s budget, too — it only adds $1.4 million to the local property taxes, and is not a significant cost driver. Aid for education is more than half of New Bedford’s revenue. And all state aid coming from Boston, at $311 million, accounts for nearly 60 percent of New Bedford’s revenue.
Meanwhile, all other departmental spending in New Bedford City Hall is projected to have its costs decrease next year, according to Mitchell’s proposal. The biggest chunk of the decrease in City Hall would come from two main sources: consolidating departments and eliminating positions.
Community services, health, licensing, parks & recreation, and veterans services all would consolidate into one department named, “Health and Human Services.” Through this consolidation the city would spend $1.2 million less, a roughly 20% decrease.
Across all departments, the city would eliminate 58 vacant positions and lay off 36 employees. Most layoffs and eliminations would come from the two largest departments: fire and police. All told, eliminations and layoffs could save the city close to $4 million, according to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer.
The main costs going up are healthcare, pensions, and a trash contract.
“I have explicitly warned that our ability to operate city government effectively and affordably was being suffocated by diminished state aid and growing non-discretionary costs such as pension and healthcare obligations,” said Mitchell in his May 13 budget address.
Healthcare alone is projected to increase more than $4 million next year, the largest increase in the budget. Meanwhile the cost of city pensions is now $47 million — that’s about $18 million more expensive than the entire Police Department ($29 million) and more than twice as expensive as the entire Fire Department ($21 million).
A new waste contract could be one of the largest percentage increases of any budget line, increasing close to 40 percent. “We’ll see cutbacks in things like yard waste,” Mitchell said, and said that further cost savings could come from eliminating other services, like mattress pickup, electronic waste services, and others.
“The cost of waste hauling has gone up significantly,” Mitchell said. The city’s current contract expires this year, but Mitchell said the city has not signed a new contract yet. The city is currently engaged in a bidding process, and these costs could come down if the city bids for fewer services in its new contract.
Because pensions and healthcare are increasing, and negotiations with employees and retirees to change these benefits have not happened, “the only way to save on those items otherwise is to reduce the number of employees slated to receive those benefits,” Mitchell said.
“The reality is that the budget has reached a boiling point. The tough decisions cannot be avoided any longer,” Mitchell said.
Email Colin Hogan at chogan@newbedfordlight.org
The New Bedford light was supposed to hold government to account. Account. How did the Light write about a rosy budget picture a few weeks or months ago and miss this? I doubt these numbers in the article are accurate .
I get being frustrated with the deficit but why do you doubt the Light’s accuracy? They’re just taking numbers from the city’s published budgets. You can verify for yourself if you want. It’s all online: https://www.newbedford-ma.gov/chief-financial-office/annual-budgets/
That’s what happens when the light goes with city hall and don’t post or listen to the residents that post comments.
The Light posts far more more negative comments about the city than positive.
How many comments have you had deleted?
1%?
Something has to be done!
Agree!
The biggest thing Mitchell is guilty of here is not making this argument more often and publicly. That’s why everyone on the council and in the city who has been paying attention feels like this was a sneaky move. I’m talking about getting beyond his weekly WBSM talks to the retired. He should have been publishing letters in the Light and the Standard Times and it should have been a central part of his state of the city earlier this year! It is a mess of his own making, not getting this story under control. And if he really had no idea it was going to be this bad, then he needs to own that, publicly, and reevaluate the staff that’s supposed to advise him on the budget.
Time to be real, our Governor is a disgrace, our State Legislators are not taking care of our city, and 100% Our City Government (the Mayor and the City Council) are a disaster and have failed us miserably. For not one elected politician to see this coming and speak out is a complete and total disgrace and every elected official should be ashamed.
This Mayor’s Vision of Expanding of our City Government, the Support of Non Profits, Spending money we don’t have, Poor City Management, No Financial Responsibility or Restraint, Relying on State Aid, and No Private Economic Growth has destroyed our city’s future.
To say this is a Balanced Budget Disaster is a Understatement, this will cause a lot of hardships for everyone, putting people’s safety at risk, services will be lost, rents will go up, taxes will go up, people will be forced to sell their homes, and many businesses will be shut down.
More than ever New Bedford needs new leadership, a new direction, and a better vision for the future.
well said!
I’ve said enough about this situation already ………………. Regards
The City of New Bedford secured tens of millions of investment for offshore wind. Offshore Wind was supposed to employ “thousands” of workers on full-time and part-time bases for 20 years. The New Bedford deficit can be blamed on the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC).
In 2015, a $650 million casino and hotel project was proposed for New Bedford’s waterfront. The city would have been better off with the hotel and casino…
Who knows if we would been better off with a casino. Maybe we would have better off if a bunch of oil and gas industry plants weren’t wasting everyone’s time by trying to keep Massachusetts and the US in the 20th century while Europe and China lap us repeatedly on renewables?
Agree
What needs to be understood is the fact the Jon Mitchell and Robert Eckstrom had no idea that between December of 2025 and May of 2026 the City of New Bedford would “spend down” the $4.8 million surplus they announced in December 2025 and the $32 million deficit they would announce in May 2026. Not a clue had they, if they did, they concealed this pending shortfall.
Not appearing in the “Budget Book” does not exonerate their lack of fiscal responsibility. It is means for them to attempt deflection from their failed responsibilities to the taxpayers and citizens of the City of New Bedford. They willfully excluded this explanation, initially, and are offering this now as their “mea maxima culpa”.
Saying, “Oh my, this is a structural budgetary problem, beyond our control”, is another ruse. Jon Mitchell fostered dependence upon Chapter 70 and maneuvered to include and expand programs to increase this aid.
All the while Jon Mitchell was contributing the absolute minimum from the City of New Bedford toward education removing any possibility of cutting expenses here when necessary (now).
The non-existence of private sector growth in New Bedford has doomed this City to fiscal dependence upon both the Commonwealth and Federal Governments to remain a municipality.
Direct Commonwealth Aid : $311 million (60% of budget)
Indirect Aid: Section 8 vouchers and Home Away Program (60% of New Bedford residents are renters, unknown how many are subsidized).
MBTA service to New Bedford for residents to use getting to better and higher paying jobs elsewhere.
Other benefits unknown to me.
Federal Government:
SNAP benefits to 2,900 New Bedford households
Medicaid benefits to New Bedford residents
Other benefits unknown to me.
Utilizing the Stabilization Fund to stabilize public safety is quite appropriate. An immediate 2 million draw down, dedicated to Station 9 and accounted for separately, will relieve this concern and give time to re-evaluate and negotiate with the Fire Department of New Bedford. I did not take into account the $500,000 that Senator Mark Montigny is trying to secure as it has not been finalized. If secured, the Stabilization Fund can be reimbursed.
This proposed closure was a very political move, by Jon Mitchell, calculated to pressure the Fire Department to precipitously reduce staffing city-wide to avoid the closure of Station 9. Jon Mitchell has wanted this for some time.
As with any fiscally failing entity, the City of New Bedford needs to have an assessment of assets and liabilities, preferably by an outside agency (Commonwealth or Federal) or a private vendor, to get an honest statement of its current and ongoing financial situation.
As I see this financial mismanagement playing out, Commonwealth receivership may be the best viable option for attempted stabilization.
That chart states no new hiring, have you seen the positions posted on the school dept site. Removing 5 top administrators would give us 10-20 employees necessary. Do the math!
I’m all done leaving you people comment’s that you don’t post.
Michael, I agree…… There is so much information that needs to be out there! NBL wants to comment and are misled by the city and school. Residents like you and I know things and need to have those things brought to light. Why is it they print they are nonpartisan yet you, I and many others know they are being nonpartisan by not posting our comments! Whilt crazy comments from Albert get posted! Go figure!
New Bedford’s Budget Mess Responsibility List:
You will never see or hear one of our elected leaders stand up and take any responsibility for this mess, (they all think they’re above this).
OUR STATE ELECTED OFFICIALS HAVE FAILED US 100%:
The Governor is a total Disaster and not good for the city of New Bedford.
Our State Legislators have not done enough to help our city especially pushing for and addressing the restructuring of State Aid.
OUR CITY LEADERSHIP HAS FAILED US 110%:
Mayor Mitchell over a decade in office, doubled our budget, spend, spend, spend, expand city government, no private economic development and for our city to now have a 32 Million Dollar Deficit, he should not run for re-election.
The City Council once known as the checks and balances for the city, over Mayor Mitchell’s tenure they have approved every budget, not one councilor has spoken up or waved a red flag to try and prevent this from happening. The City Council as a whole should be consider as a budget cut for the poor job that they have done (start watching the meetings it’s a complete joke).
OUR CITY RESIDENTS HAVE FAILED US 100%:
A big problem is our residents not getting out to vote (12% – 30% vote in most elections) and those who do, are voting for these same elected officials (the Mayor, the City Council, and State Legislators) that have let this city fall into this financial decline. It has to be time for change.
THE FUTURE:
It’s real clear this budget mess will be here for years to come, just getting more money will not fix this, we need better leadership (with eyes on the past, eyes on the present, and eyes on the future) better financial management, no more spending money we don;t have (live within our means), and lastly focus on creating new private economic growth to change the direction of this city and bring in new revenue to lower taxes.
Nothing will change unless we vote for New Leadership, a New Direction, and a Better Vision for the Future of Our City.
The core of New Bedford’s budget problem is not that the city suddenly “lost” $32 million. The article itself shows something more structural and long-developing:
1. Fixed costs are rising much faster than ordinary revenue
2. The city is heavily dependent on state aid
3. Labor and benefit obligations are crowding out services
4. Officials delayed major structural reforms until the gap became politically unavoidable
The term “$32 million deficit” serves as a political and administrative construct that characterizes the extent of adjustments necessary to achieve a balanced budget. These adjustments encompass denied spending requests, layoffs, eliminations of vacant positions, and reductions in services.
Where the financial problems actually originated
1. Pension and healthcare obligations are the clearest long-term drivers.
The article identifies healthcare and pensions as the highest growing costs:
• Healthcare up more than $4 million in one year
• Pension costs now $47 million annually
• Pension spending exceeds the entire police budget and is more than double the fire budget
That indicates a classic municipal structural problem: Past employment promises are consuming increasing portions of current operating revenue.
This did not originate in one budget cycle. It accumulated over decades through:
• union contracts,
• retiree healthcare commitments,
• pension formulas,
• longer life expectancy,
• investment return assumptions,
• and rising medical inflation.
New Bedford is not unique here; many older Northeastern cities face the same pressure.
The important point:
These are largely non-discretionary costs. You can postpone hiring or close a station more easily than you can legally stop paying pension obligations.
2. Heavy dependence on state aid; the article reveals something striking:
• Nearly 60% of city revenue comes from state aid
• Education is mostly funded by Boston, not local taxes
That creates vulnerability.
If state aid growth slows while labor and healthcare costs rise faster than inflation, the city gets squeezed even if local government spending appears disciplined.
This is important because it means:
• New Bedford does not fully control its own fiscal destiny,
• but it still bears responsibility for local payroll and benefit structures.
The city effectively built a service model assuming continued state support growth.
3. Property tax limitations
Massachusetts municipalities operate under Proposition 2½ limits, which restrict annual property tax levy growth unless overrides occur.
That means:
• costs may rise 6–10%,
• while recurring local revenue may only rise ~2.5% plus new growth.
Over time, the math breaks.
Municipal budgets then become dependent on:
• aid increases,
• fees,
• borrowing,
• deferred maintenance,
• vacancies,
• or service reductions.
New Bedford’s situation looks like a delayed collision between fixed spending growth and legally constrained revenue growth.
4. The city likely relied on vacancy management for years. The article mentions eliminating 58 vacant positions.
That is often a sign that:
• departments were budgeted for staffing levels they could not actually sustain,
• or vacancies were quietly used as a balancing mechanism.
Many cities do this. They leave positions unfilled to avoid layoffs while preserving the appearance of service capacity. Eventually, however, those “temporary” gaps become a permanent structural imbalance.
5. Inflation finally exposed the imbalance. The article opens with inflation for a reason. The recent inflationary period likely accelerated:
• healthcare costs,
• waste hauling contracts,
• wage pressure,
• equipment costs,
• insurance,
• and debt servicing.
The trash contract increase alone, nearly 40%, suggests the city had contracts priced in a lower-inflation environment that are now resetting sharply upward. So, the problem may have existed quietly for years, but inflation made it impossible to hide.
A reasonable solution is probably not one dramatic cut or one tax increase. The city likely needs a multi-year restructuring strategy.
The realistic options include:
Option 1: Moderate tax increases
This is probably unavoidable.
If the city tries to solve everything through cuts:
• fire closures,
• police understaffing,
• deteriorating services,
• and deferred infrastructure maintenance becomes likely.
Tax increases, in isolation, are inadequate, as the escalating costs associated with healthcare and pension systems can rapidly deplete any additional revenue generated.
So, taxes are part of the answer, not the whole answer.
Option 2: Renegotiate long-term benefit costs. This is the most important structural issue.
Possible measures:
• higher employee healthcare contributions,
• wellness incentives,
• retiree healthcare restructuring,
• slower growth in future pension accruals,
• later retirement ages for new hires,
• hybrid retirement plans for future employees.
The key political reality. You usually cannot drastically cut benefits already earned by current retirees. Most reforms apply prospectively. That means savings arrive slowly. Still, without benefit reform, every future budget crisis repeats.
Option 3: Regionalization and consolidation
The proposed consolidation into “Health and Human Services” is a mild version of this.
Further possibilities:
• shared regional dispatch,
• regional purchasing,
• shared waste management systems,
• joint public health services,
• school transportation collaboration,
• shared IT and procurement.
These are usually less politically explosive than layoffs.
Option 4: Economic growth and tax base expansion
Long-term, the healthiest solution is growing the tax base faster than obligations grow.
That means:
• housing development,
• commercial redevelopment,
• port expansion,
• industrial investment,
• biotech/marine economy growth,
• downtown occupancy improvements.
New Bedford has assets:
• fishing industry,
• port infrastructure,
• offshore wind proximity,
• historic downtown,
• coastal location.
If property values and commercial activity rise sustainably, the city gains revenue without sharply increasing tax rates. But this is a slow solution, not a next-year solution.
Option 5: Service prioritization
The city may need to decide what level of service it can realistically afford. That means explicitly answering:
• How many fire stations are essential?
• What staffing model is sustainable?
• Which sanitation services are core?
• Which programs are desirable but nonessential?
That is politically painful but fiscally necessary. What probably should NOT happen
1. One-time fixes only
Using reserves, vacancies, or temporary federal money postpones the issue. The article already suggests the city has been managing around the edges.
2. Excessive layoffs
Heavy cuts can create:
• slower emergency response,
• declining public confidence,
• reduced economic attractiveness,
• and eventually population decline.
That worsens the tax base.
3. Pretending education is the main problem
The article makes clear that schools are mostly state-funded. Education enlarges the gross budget number, but it is not the main driver of local fiscal pressure. The real pressure points are:
• pensions,
• healthcare,
• labor obligations,
• and inflation-sensitive contracts.
Bottom line
The financial problems originated from a long-term structural mismatch:
New Bedford’s fixed obligations, especially pensions and healthcare, have grown faster than its controllable revenue sources. Inflation and contract resets exposed the imbalance dramatically this year. A reasonable solution is likely a combination of:
• moderate tax increases,
• gradual benefit reform,
• targeted service consolidation,
• selective cuts,
• and long-term economic growth.
No single action closes the gap safely. The city probably needs a 3–5 year stabilization plan rather than an annual crisis response.
Eileen your welcome to your opinion, but the simple truth is to much damage has been done to the city and John Mitchell’s vision clearly has not worked. After over a decade of poor financial and economic management and taking our city budget from $247.3 Million Dollars to where it is presently (over doubled) is a firing offense. John Mitchell should not run for re-election. This city needs new leadership, a new direction, and a brighter future for our city.
P.s. retirees are not the problem. 3% on a limit of 14,000.00 is 8.75 a week. So all of you that have something to say, talk to the Mayor about his wasteful ways and the schools wasteful ways. We did not create the budget shortfall, the incompetent administrators did!
Guess where that’s going. Health care increase, water rate increase, tax increase, homeowners increase, car insurance increase. Groceries, gas, telephone, tv………and 8.75 a week increase is needed but is disgusting how much more will be going out, not even close as to being cost of living! Yet, city and school dept retired, served the residents and this is how they are thanked. Company have the never to say, we should have given it up, “Go pound tar”.
Jon Mitchell’s 14 years of progressive fiscal, municipal mismanagement, including no fiscal planning and actively increasing dependency upon Commonwealth and Federal aid, has brought the City of New Bedford into this fiscal and public safety crisis.
To address the current proposed public safety issue, using the Stabilization Fund to fund keeping. Station 9 operational is quite appropriate. Planning on utilizing the Stabilization Fund for a few years is reasonable, given the limits of real estate taxation and the absolute lack of private commercial growth in the City of New Bedford.
Every boat floats on its own bottom and New Bedford is currently grounded in the mud flats.
Assets, for accounting purposes, are things that you own or control.
The only real asset, listed by another contributor, is the New Bedford Port Authority and the properties, owned by New Bedford, that it manages.
The rest are attributes at best and not true assets. This includes the fishing industry, offshore wind proximity, historic downtown and coastal location. None of these attributes has generated any appreciable private revenue growth in the past 14 years for the City of New Bedford. The pharmaceutical trade, in the port, is the only thriving and growing business.
Jon Mitchell, et al, have wasted invaluable time and time has run out for the fiscal stability of New Bedford.
As a fiscal dependency of the Commonwealth and Federal Government, the City of New Bedford will need to verify the values of all accounts, assets and liabilities before approaching the Commonwealth for specific aid, loans or governance.
Well said!
Jeff, I’ve heard this speech before. It is largely a list of grievances and blame assignments rather than a substantive analysis of the city’s finances, and identifies villains but not solutions. If the answer is “elect new people,” then what specifically should those new people do differently? What programs should be cut? What revenues should be increased? What reforms should be implemented? Without those answers, this isn’t a budget plan; it’s a complaint.
If every problem is always the fault of “the governor, the legislature, the mayor, the council, and the voters,” then there’s no serious examination of the actual causes or tradeoffs involved.
Criticism is easy; budgeting is hard. Anyone can say “stop spending” or “live within our means.” The real question is what specific services should be reduced. Police? Fire? Schools? Roads? Libraries? Parks? Public health? If someone is serious about fiscal reform, they should be willing to identify exactly where cuts should occur and what the consequences would be.
Repeating the same narrative regardless of circumstances becomes a pattern.
Every budget debate can’t be reduced to the same recycled talking points. If we’re going to discuss New Bedford’s finances seriously, let’s talk about facts, numbers, and solutions, not just another round of assigning blame. Shift the discussion from rhetoric to evidence.
Again just more nothing, it’s 100% clear that this mayor thinks he knows everything, will not listen to anyone, and definitely will not make any changes (YOURS OR ANYONE ELSES).
This mayor and city council failed city residents by taking the city budget from $247.3 Million Dollars to where it will be this year $535 Million Dollars (more than doubled and never showing any financial restraint).
Our city government’s vision of spending of money we don’t have, expansion of government, prioritizing development of nonprofits, state agencies, no private economic growth, and relying on State Aid, HAS BEEN THE DOWNFALL OF THIS CITY.
The city needs the recall petition approved, the city council needs change, and this mayor should never run for re-election again.
Nowell Francis
The financial budget shortfall within New Bedford is being repeated throughout the Commonwealth. I was on the financial committee of my small rural Central Massachusetts town for three years. The problems are exactly the same as New Bedford’s except on a much smaller scale. Eileen Marum’s comments are spot on.
Most cities and towns within the Commonwealth rely on state aid. In 2025 the non-partisan Massachusetts Municipal Association published a study that found that between 2010 and 2024 that Unrestricted Local Aid from the Commonwealth to the cities and towns when stripped of inflation amounted to an increase of six tenths of one percent per year during this period. The Massachusetts Municipal Association study calculated that the shortfall in local aid between 2010 and 2024 amounted to 25%.
You can go back further in time to 2008 when the Commonwealth cut Unrestricted Local Aid by 15% and then subsequently increased local aid by 1.5% a year from 2008 to 2019. This meant that local aid in 2019 finally was what it was in 2008. In other words no increase at all or in real dollar terms fewer dollars in 2019 than in 2008 when accounting for inflation.
Going back further in time to 2008 the shortfall in Unrestricted Local Government Aid is not just the 25% calculated by the Massachusetts Municipal Association as the shortfall since 2010 but a number that is perhaps at least 40%.
When you add the permited increase in local property tax revenue without overrides of two and a half percent per year to the six tenths of one percent growth in local aid calculated by the Massachusetts Municipal Association you get real increases year after year since 2010 of just 3.1 percent.
New Bedford, like many of the other cities and towns of the Commonwealth was able to balance the city budget without drastic cuts between 2008 and 2024 because the cost drivers of health and pensions on average rose less than 5% a year. For FY2027 insurance costs are rising 20% a year and other fixed costs are also rising similar amounts. Now New Bedford and a hundred other cities and towns in the Commonwealth cannot cut their way out of this shortfall without gutting vital municipal services.
Your city like all other cities and towns in the Commonwealth cannot raise revenue through a sharing of the gas tax with the Commonwealth, and cannot impose a local sales or income tax. New Bedford can only impose a meals tax in addition to the state meals tax and a motor vehicle excise tax. Neither come anywhere close to closing the budget gap.
New Bedford like all cities and towns within the Commonwealth is now increasingly dependent on the State Legislature. The State Legislature is not the bad person here. They have over the past thirty or more years have simply made policy choices that do not fully favor the cities and towns when they should make fully funding the cities and towns their top priority.
It is simple math. Look at your own household budget. Could you survive on a 3.1% increase since 2010 without cutting your household expenses or raiding your savings accounts? And if you did decide to cut your household budget what would you cut first? Eating? Heat? Utility bills? Not paying your credit card? That by analogy is just what New Bedford is facing.
Unable to raise revenue more than 3.1 percent a year and without regular overrides New Bedford must do what it has been and is proposing to do which is to level fund and then drastically cut local services. It is the same difficult choices faced by the nearly 100 cities and towns within the Commonwealth that have proposed overrides in the past two fiscal years with mixed results.
The solution I am in the process of pursuing is to demand (not request– requests go to die in “study”) of the State Legislature that local unrestricted government aid be increased over a short period of time (2 to 3 fiscal years) by 25% which is exactly the shortfall since 2010 determined by the Massachusetts Municipal Association in their 2025 study. If implemented, this would raise the amount of local aid to an amount that accounts for much but not all of the increases posed by inflation and the health insurance and pension cost drivers. A 25% increase would go a long ways to getting not just New Bedford, but also the hundred other poorer cities and towns of the Commonwealth, into a position where they do not have to drastically cut local services.
Eileen Marum has done a real service to the residents of New Bedford by telling you exactly what is going on. You should listen to her and work with your city and state officials toward meaningful long term solutions.
Why didn’t you write more, the facts are none of this will ever happen without the removal of Maura Healey and John Mitchell from office (both are problem and without them being kicked to the curb none of yours, Eileen’s, or anyone’s else’s changes will ever see the light of day).
It’s real clear now that this mayor’s vision has been a complete failure and our city is in desperate times, some say the financial damage will take years to resolve, and than there are others that say we are on the brink of receivership.
All are strong comments and all have some merit .
There is no relief for this budget deficit disaster on the horizon and it is sad to see that not one of our state or city leaders has stepped up and taken any responsibility (the Governor, the State Legislators, the Mayor, and the City Council).
After weeks of reading and listening to all the comments, it’s clear there is no knight in shining armor coming to save our city, and residents are left with major changes to services, new major taxes, and the knowledge that many residents and businesses will be hurt.
It’s so true that elections have consequences
Moving forward all voters have to be much smarter. Our city needs the recall petition approved, and moving forward we need to elect new leadership that will listen and care for the residents of our city.
Jeff, I understand the frustration about the city’s financial situation, but many of the points you’re making are assertions rather than documented facts.
Can you point to specific financial reports, audits, or official statements that support the claim that the city is on the brink of receivership? Likewise, what evidence shows that the mayor’s policies are solely responsible for the current deficit, as opposed to broader economic factors, state decisions, or actions taken by previous administrations?
If we’re going to discuss accountability, it helps to identify which decisions caused which outcomes and what alternative actions should have been taken. Otherwise, we’re left with conclusions that may reflect opinions more than evidence.
Residents deserve a fact-based discussion of the city’s finances, not just predictions of disaster or calls for new leadership without a clear explanation of how different leaders would solve the problem.
Your welcome to support the mayor, but go back, open your eyes, and read all the comments. It has been said by others many times, that the city is in desperate times, some say the financial damage and it will take years to recover, and than there are others that say we are on the brink of receivership.
All these comments have merit and I will stay steadfast by my comments that after a decade there’s no way this mayor should run for re-election.
What mayor would take a city budget from $247.3 Million Dollars to where it will be this year at $535 Million Dollars, more than doubling the budget during their tenure (this information is available online). This is a clear example of poor leadership.
What mayor’s vision would include expanding city government, spending money like a drunken sailor, supporting non profits, with no private economic growth, all the while relying on state aid, and raising taxes? Once again this is a clear example of poor leadership.
What mayor with their only attempt at private economic growth bring in a company like Parallel Products and risk creating another hazardous waste site? Once again this is a clear example of poor leadership.
What mayor wants to start down a fire station and put the safety of residents and businesses at risk? Once again this is a clear example of poor leadership.
What mayor spends money on the building of a new police station when he knows his city has budget deficit? He announced police station and than a couple of weeks walk it back, announcing the city had a $32 Million Dollar Deficit. Once again this is a clear example of poor leadership.
What mayor lets the police department work without a contract for two years? Once again this is a clear example of poor leadership.
Time to stop the nonsense, our city needs the recall petition voted on and approved, and moving forward 100% New Bedford needs new leadership, a new direction, and a brighter future for our city.
Mayor Mitchell won the 2011 mayoral election and took office as the 38th Mayor of New Bedford in January 2012.
The City of New Bedford’s approved budget for Fiscal Year 2012 (FY12) totaled $247.3 million. This budget served as the baseline financial plan for municipal operations, paving the way for a decade of significant growth in city spending and services.
Mayor Mitchell’s proposed General Fund budget for the City of New Bedford for Fiscal Year 2027 is $535.2 million. To bridge a projected $32 million funding gap, the proposal includes significant service cuts, closing a fire station, 94 eliminated positions, and a $16 million property tax increase
Present Budget of $535.2 Million Dollars – 2012 Budget of $247.3 Million Dollars = An increase to the city budget of $287.9 Million Dollars,
2012 Budget Information link:
https://www.google.com/search?q=approved+city+of+new+bedford+2012+budget&sca_esv=21d8d808889fd7db&ei=0IofarHtN9OlptQP1IOmOQ&biw=1366&bih=639&ved=0ahUKEwixlanf_OmUAxXTkokEHdSBKQcQ4dUDCBA&oq=approved+city+of+new+bedford+2012+budget&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiKGFwcHJvdmVkIGNpdHkgb2YgbmV3IGJlZGZvcmQgMjAxMiBidWRnZXQyBRAhGKABMgUQIRigATIFECEYoAEyBRAhGKABMgUQIRigATIFECEYnwVIwj1QjBFYliNwAngBkAEAmAFcoAGUBKoBATe4AQzIAQD4AQGYAgmgAswEwgIKEAAYRxjWBBiwA8ICBRAhGKsCmAMAiAYBkAYIkgcBOaAH-x6yBwE3uAfABMIHBTAuNS40yAcegAgB&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
Current Budget information link:
https://www.google.com/search?q=approved+city+of+new+bedford+2027+budget&sca_esv=21d8d808889fd7db&biw=1366&bih=639&ei=VIwfatGIC6S8ptQP4tzW0AQ&ved=0ahUKEwjRgv6X_umUAxUknokEHWKuFUoQ4dUDCBA&oq=approved+city+of+new+bedford+2027+budget&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiKGFwcHJvdmVkIGNpdHkgb2YgbmV3IGJlZGZvcmQgMjAyNyBidWRnZXQyCBAAGIAEGKIEMggQABiJBRiiBDIFEAAY7wUyCBAAGIAEGKIESK8aUKQKWKQKcAF4AZABAJgBbKABbKoBAzAuMbgBDMgBAPgBAZgCAqACeMICChAAGEcY1gQYsAOYAwCIBgGQBgiSBwMxLjGgB-sBsgcDMC4xuAdzwgcDMi0yyAcHgAgB&sclient=gws-wiz-serp