Town-Owned Vehicles: What's their cost?

When I requested a list of Town Owned vehicles, it originated from the insurance agent, and not from the Town.

Does that mean the Town fails to generate the list FOR the agent?

There were a total of 212 items on that list, most with deductibles of $500, even a number of items with low values.

Those of us who are 'frugal,' quickly figured out that the first insured increment is the most expensive. Simply put, by increasing your insurance deductible, you quickly reduce your premiums. The first increment, let's say increasing from $500 to $1,000, might pay itself back in cost savings in 2 years. (The actuarial logic of the insurance industry appears to be the impact of trivial 'nuisance claims.')

Former Selectman Victor Sylvia reminded me that when he was Selectman, there were a number of vehicles that were no longer usable or owned by the Town that were being insured.

It has been many years since an audit was done of Town owned vehicles although the Selectmen are charged as 'Auditors' in the Town Charter, but the issues has additional ramifications.

As a taxpayer, do you think it should be audited annually?

There are a number of 'Enterprise' accounts that are not being charged for the vehicles' insurance, use or expenses.

The Water/Wastewater may come quickly to mind, but what of the matter of the Trash fees/Trash department whose costs and expenses remain ignored and unexplained?

It has been disclosed to taxpayers that the Water/Wastewater costs have been underestimated by the Selectmen acting as 'Water Commissioners' and non-users are subsidizing those costs.

While my critics are already groaning that this is yet another petty issue being raised, they fail to note that each of those blue municipal plates cost ~ $ 5,000 to insure.

Shouldn't the appropriate costs be attributed to each department?

Are we misleading ourselves with questionable accounting?

But the broader issue is that with rising fuel costs, those costs are not attributed to the appropriate departments, and no reasonable approach has been established for vehicle use.

Let's say that a department, hypothetically let's say that an employee working for the Health Department, uses her vehicle a great deal, but travels around town. Let's say 'she' travels 50,000 miles per year, so consequently requires a reasonably 'new' vehicle and fuel efficiency should be a consideration.

Hypothetically, let's say that the Assessors need a vehicle, but only travel 5,000 miles per year, but the cost of insurance is ~ $5,000.

Because of the lack of accurate information maintained in the Town, the Selectmen are unable to make an informed decision.

Surely, acting as 'Auditors' the Selectmen should have the information readily available on periodic reports to audit fuel consumption and costs. But shouldn't department heads also have the information recorded to track maintenance, costs, fuel consumption?

And since Selectman Perkins has experience within the insurance commission, shouldn't he be speaking out for periodic reviews of ALL insurance costs? And what of those deductibles?

212 INSURED ITEMS AT ~ $5,000 EACH ISN'T A PITTANCE, unless it's not your money.