This government meeting is brought to you by Eastworks and our local cable subscribers. Welcome to the East Hampton Special City Council meeting for Monday, April 27th, 2026. The meeting tonight is being recorded and broadcast by E Media on
Charter Channel 193 and live streaming on their web page, east hampton media.org. Councilors and participants in this meeting are gathered hybrid on the order extended until June 30th, 2027, allowing us to do so. I remind both the members
of the city council and the public participating remotely to remain muted until recognized by the city council president. Also for the members of the public, please remove your camera for the duration of the meeting unless you are participating in the public speak time or the public hearing. Thank you.
This meeting is now called to order. Maryanne >> JPinski >> here. >> Tonnie Denham >> here. >> Tamara Smith >> here. >> Felicia Jadik >> here. Tom Peak >> here. >> Jonathan Schmidt >> here. >> Amanda Newton >> here. >> Kim J R McQuade >> here. >> Nathan Marque >> here.
>> Great. Thank you. Uh Vice President Jadzik. >> Um thank you President Denm. I'd like to make a motion to suspend public speak until after the mayor introduces his requests. >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to move public speak until after the mayor
presents uh his the information about the special election on June 9th. All those in favor? >> Any opposed? Extensions. Motion passes. Uh the first item on the agenda is the supplemental appropriation for $5,000
from free cash to fund new part-time position in the tax collector's office in FY 2026. Uh there was a mixup here. Um we moved this item to uh or we removed
this item from the um agenda uh without prejudice. Um and so what we need to do is there's uh uh there was a um
how do I explain uh the the individual was hired uh before we had actually appropriated the funds for that. Um, and so now we have to figure out whether or not to uh proceed with the uh funding of
that position. So what we need to do is uh we need to set a public hearing um and we're going to have to set that for Monday, May 11th, and we can provide we can offer some more information. Actually, if the mayor um would like to speak to this and provide a little bit
more information to the council, that would be helpful. and then if counselors have any questions, we can ask them at that time, but we will need to set a public hearing. >> So, thank you so much. Um, and I know I spoke about this at the last meeting a little bit and I just wanted to um
clarify a little bit. So, um, we are in desperate need of a part-time person in collections um because that is where it is the gateway to the funds of the city. Um and if collections go gets behind that means um that the auditor gets behind and the treasurer gets behind. So
it's pretty critical kind of point of of pressure. Um and so we had proposed um using $5,000 of free cash which then would have been backfilled by enterprise funds. The intention is for this position to be fully funded by enterprise because this person is going
to be basically taking over water and sewer. Um and so uh you know there was a mistake um that happened in personnel um where the position was offered before the funding was in place. And so we're managing that on our end. But if we can,
you know, um get this position back into the public hearing, it would be helpful in order to be able to secure this person who is really qualified and is going to be a really great addition to that department. um so we can keep them and take the pressure off of this pinch
point um that we've identified that allows us to bring funds into the city to help us um keep everything running smoothly. >> Great. Any questions? Uh Vice President Jabzik. >> Thank you. Um thank you, Mr. Mayor. I uh
I 100% am supportive of getting some support for our collection office. I think what I'm a little bit disturbed by and I'd love to have either you or I think director Russo is on the call as well help me and all of us understand how this person came to be hired before
we even have gone through this process. And I'm especially a little concerned because when we discussed this last week, Director Russo, neither director Russo nor yourself mentioned that this person had already been hired at that point. And we had already had a discussion at that point
around how this is not just a contract position. This is actually a position that will need to be benefited through providing unemployment benefits if this does not end up going beyond June 30th or if we don't have further funding for this. though. Is there further clarification to provide around that?
>> Well, so I'll take the last part first. Um, and so since this is going to be um a position that's funded by enterprise there, it would not be affected by any layoffs um because um water and sewer enterprise is funded through um the
water and sewer rates um and so it would not be subject to layoff which means it wouldn't be at risk for unemployment. Um, as to the other piece, um, and I can if if the our HR director is on the call, I can let her speak to
it. Um, >> yes, >> I can speak to that. So, >> hang on just a second. Hang on a second. Director Russo, Director Rouso, I just, uh, it's the city council president who recognizes individuals. So, I just want to acknowledge that. So, Director Russo, if you'd like to introduce yourself and
state your role for the city. >> Yes. Emily Russo, um, HR director. >> Okay. >> And it seemed it was a communication error and we came up with a path forward um, so this doesn't happen again where
we're going to implement requisition forms that require us to assure that there are funding sources, account numbers, everything in place before position even gets posted. So this will not happen again.
Okay, great. May I ask >> you, Vice President Jazz, a followup question? >> Um, yes. Thank you, Director Russo, for explaining. Um, I am just a little again, as I said, concerned because when you spoke to this council last week and we were debating this exact position and
this appropriation, you let me actually rephrase. Um, when was this person hired is what I'd like to know. Um, I want to say we were probably hired about two weeks ago.
>> So then my question is why did you not mention that this person had already been hired when we were discussing this last week? >> I didn't think of it and didn't know that the council didn't know. I apologize. I wasn't intending to speak on this issue last week. That's not what
I was here for. So I wasn't prepared for that. Um, I apologize. And so I I didn't think to mention that and that is an error on my part. >> Okay. >> Um so I think this is um
just a a note for the mayor since you're responsible for all the various departments in the city um moving forward. I think given the fact that we are in kind of financially challenging times, um I I believe just given the
engagement and the activity from council that they're going to be much more engaged in kind of the process of finances and asking questions and making sure that we have um funds available. So, just want to make sure that this particular incident or anything similar
to that, this doesn't happen again so we can make sure that we're holding everyone accountable, including ourselves. >> Absolutely. And I I will say that when we did realize that this had happened, we created internal controls to make sure that it didn't happen again.
>> Great. Great. Thank you. And you and I did communicate. Um, and so that was a a helpful process, but we just want to make sure that clearly we're we're much more engaged in this process and want to make sure we're using public funds as as most efficiently as we can. Thank you.
Great. >> Um, so what we need to do now is we Oh, Councelor Newton, >> um, next week when you come for that public hearing, will you be able to bring us that salary information? >> Microphones.
>> Okay. I'm just going to say, is it okay if I say something? Yes. >> Okay. So, I apologize that my voice is so weak. Um, I was born with a defect to my vocal cords. Uh, so I really don't have the capabilities of having a loud
voice. Um, I am sorry I just missed the microphone just now, but I I want people to know that this is not me not caring or me not having confidence in what I'm saying. It's it's truly my voice is is limited in the volume and the pitch that
I can put out. Thank you. Um but beyond that, what I wanted to say is will you be able to have the salary information and number of hours for us next week when you come back with this? >> Absolutely. And and the department head will be here. >> Okay. um to answer questions
specifically about the position and what the position will do and I will make sure that um the human resources and the department head are ready to answer your questions. >> And is there any type of documentation that you you think we should see to make
you know to assure us that it will be coming from enterprise from now on? Um I can I can ask director Nuttleman to be here which we've talked about this and it's something that he feels is important for enterprise to have someone dedicated to water and sewer billing so
they can learn the system. Um and in fact, you know, he's even looked to the future where this he feels that this position could be a full-time position um that's, you know, fully dedicated to water and sewer and learning Neptune and all the intricacies of of the water sewer billing because it's pretty it's
pretty in-depth. >> Um so I'd be I'm sure he would be happy to answer those questions too. >> Okay. Um just related to that, I'll get to you in a second, Council Kazinski. Uh, can you please provide any of that documentation to the council clerk so that we can have
that in the packet? >> Uh, yeah. And hopefully, um, director Russo will hear that. >> We'll hear that and get that email as well as communicating that to director Nettleman for that and any other Yeah. people. Yes. Uh, councelor Kazinski, did you have a question?
I have a comment based on what happened at the last meeting and what's happening now with this >> and my conversation with the mayor about the necessity for the position. >> Mhm. >> Had this not been an absolutely urgent
and important position to be filled, I would be absolutely out of my mind here tonight with being livid. This is not the process that we accept here in East Hampton. This is a process where you come to the council and all of the
staff in the city personnel need to know the council's responsibilities will be fulfilled when it comes to this budget, when it comes to hiring personnel, when it comes to any areas where we are involved.
This is important. It will be followed. >> Thank you, Councilman Kubzinski. Um, again, I think I also stated that to the mayor, so I appreciate that. Um, so what we need to do is we need to set a public hearing um for Monday, May 11th. So I
will entertain a motion uh to set a public hearing for Monday, May 11th to uh transfer $5,000 from free cash to fund new part-time position in the tax collector's office for FY 2026 on, as I said, May 11th at 6:15 in these
chambers. >> So move second. >> I have a motion and a second to uh set a public hearing for Monday, May 11th. uh in these chambers at 6:15. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor? >> Opposed?
>> Abstain. Motion passes. Great. So, the next item on the agenda is the mayor's request for the city council to set a special election for June 9th, 2026 for a vote on a proposed tax levy override of 6,900,000.
Um, I have asked that the mayor speak to this uh prior to uh public speak so that he can uh provide information and then that way individuals will have the opportunity to
uh public speak, address questions, etc. to etc to uh city council uh and then we can uh bring the mayor back up to answer any of those questions that are not able to uh be answered. So, uh, Mayor Derby, I will turn it over to you to provide an
overview of kind of the why the special election and any information that we need to know. >> Sure. Um, and I did uh at I think maybe the last couple meetings we've talked about this a little bit. Uh, I do want to just say that if I did not have to be
here, I would not be here. Um, this is not something that we're electing to do lightly. Um this is not something that we're doing because we think it's um convenient. This is something that we have kind of
come to with a very uh measured and strategic approach uh and with a lot of seriousness uh because if you look at historically at the city budgets which you know I'll take some responsibility as I was part of that process um over
the last few years basically since co um the budgets have been growing in relation to inflation which I think we can all appreciate that inflation has hit us all and happens to hit the city in a more concentrated way because we're
a large entity with, you know, a $65 million budget. Um, so proportionally it hits us pretty square. Um, we have been using over the last few years stabilization money to balance the
budget um in addition to some other one-time funds. Uh and you know really what that allowed us to do is it allowed us to kind of move the goalpost um down the field uh and be able to you know
keep things status quo without making cuts. Um and uh and then I know that as we approached last budget season it was kind of uh told to us that there was going to be kind of a new budgeting paradigm that was going to be cutting things a little bit closer um around
funding. And that's why we agreed to a $4 million plus dollar draw from stabilization to balance the budget. Um, as things became clear this year and other costs started to come into focus, um, again, you know, one of the things
that caused the delay in timing was not that we just weren't doing our job. It was the fact that, um, you know, the city was without a treasurer for a while. And in order to be able to catch up from that, we had a consultant come in. our treasurer started in August um
right around the time I think it was a week after I became interim mayor and that's really kind of when the hard work started to begin to get everything lined up um and so that didn't kind of come to fruition until uh free cash was
certified in March um as as an example most other communities that you know um didn't have a disruption um were free you know certifying free cash in late October early November, somewhere in that time frame. >> Um, so, you know, I think that that kind
of sets the stage for us not really knowing exactly what the true financial picture was um until a few weeks ago when all of the budget um all of the budgets from the departments came in. We saw what the increases were
contractually. We saw the impact of health insurance and other fixed costs on the budget. Um, and really the the final piece of that was when we got our debt and interest numbers from our financial planner, they came in significantly higher. The interest came
in significantly higher than we expected it to be, which, you know, I had been talking previously about a, you know, $5.5 million deficit, which if we use some stabilization could get us down to 3.5, and then that ended up being closer
to 6.9 6.8. Um, and then as the the numbers came into focus, we realized this was a bigger number than we were going to be able to bridge. My initial plan was even running for mayor knowing that we had
some structural issues with the budget that we were potentially going to have to go for an override at some point. Um, I was not expecting to have to go for an override this year. In fact, I was doing everything that I could to try to avoid having to do an override this year, especially in such a short time frame.
But when it became apparent there was no way we were going to be able to present a balanced budget without doing something proactive. Um that's when I came to the city council um and kind of announced that uh we created a budget task force and the budget task force you
know did the work of looking at the numbers and making sure that the numbers were in line with something that would really help the city bridge this gap but also understanding the fact that times are tough and people are struggling and
we have to be um cognizant of that like there's a context for this. This context is not great but you know I think we can all empathize with the fact that times are tough and times are tough for the city. Uh and you know one of the things that kind of keeps me moving through
this process is understanding like what does that mean? We have a lot of people that work for the city, a lot of really good people that work for this city. And I feel really responsible and I take a lot of um ownership around the fact that
I don't want to be someone who has to lay off really good people and set our city back. Um and so, you know, I've been working really hard. The budget task force has been working really hard. I feel like the city council has been working really hard to try to understand
this and be part of the solution. Um, you know, so I'll just I'll just say that the budget task force basically recommended that we do go for um a Proposition 2 and a half override. Um, understanding that the need actually in
order to get us to a place where we're whole would be a number closer to, you know, 8.5 to 8 million in that range, which would get us probably 3 to four years of fiscal stability using conservative budgeting. And I think that that's one of the things that I just
want to say. You know, all of the estimations that we're doing right now are you we're starting to take a more conservative approach to the way that we budget. So looking at new growth and not anticipating uh wild new growth numbers but taking uh you know flat new growth
numbers in order to do our budget. Um looking at state aid you know I I was expecting earlier in the year in the governor's budget there was a 4.4% increase in state aid to the communities and on the the latest cherry sheet estimates which cherry sheet is what the state aid is. Um we're down 85,000 from
where we were just like a month and a half ago. Um and so we actually state a did go up but the assessments that they charged the city went up too and more than what we had expected. Um so knowing that that number is higher you know we
had a discussion at the budget task force saying hey what can we do as a city to mitigate costs to get creative around funding and to find efficiencies beyond you know um asking for this bigger number. And we realized that if
we asked for a more modest number, then we would be about $2.1 million less than South Hadley's lowest ask, which I think is important. Um, and really, it's something that can get us through the near term without devastating cuts. It's
something that can get us through where we will have to make cuts. We will have to tighten our belts. We will have to get creative. We will have to be proactive as it relates to the budget. we will stay on a conservative budgeting
kind of tact. Um, so I think it's important to recognize that we are willing to participate in shared sacrifice. We're not just going to sit back and ask to be bailed out. We're going to make difficult decisions.
We're going to make hard cuts. I was meeting with department heads all day today looking at two different budgets and really creating what is a bare bones budget and what is a catastrophic budget. Um and it's not easy to be in
those meetings. Uh it's emotionally draining. It's it's intellectually draining because none of us want to be in this situation. Um and really what we want to do is what's best for East Hampton. So, when we're coming to you
asking for this money, I just want to be clear about what this means for taxpayers. 6.9 million is not a small ask. I mean, it's $2.1 million less than South's lowest ask, but it's not a small ask. And so, let me talk about what this means. So, it would add $287
per,000 of assessed property value to the annual tax bill. Um, a $200,000 home would pay about $573 a year more. $47 a month and about $157 a day. So for a $250,000 house, that's
about $717 a year, $59 a month, and $1.97 a day. For a $300,000 house, that's $860 a year, $71 a month, and $2.36 a day. And then the median house in East Hampton, which is worth
$418,000, would pay $1,199.64 64 a year, $99.97 a month, and $3.29 a day. Um, so it's not a small ask, but I think one of the
things to acknowledge is that East Hampton does currently have one of the lowest residential tax tax rates in Western Massachusetts. Hadley being the one that's below us at $11 per thousand, but we're one of the lowest. So, um, you
know, I just want to be clear about like what we're committed to do because I think that this again, like I said, this is a shared sacrifice. We are going to be cutting positions. We're going to be cutting, as we went through the budget
today, we're going to be cutting everything that's extra from people having to like get their own office supplies to not going to um conferences. Um, and really kind of changing the way that we do things. Um, and there are
going to be some and I do want to be just clear because you know there are going to be some things that we're not cutting from the budget um because they don't come from the general fund, right? So things that are related to enterprise, we don't cut from the budget. Um there's a couple of capital
expenses that we need to fund for like supplies for our fire department that are critical for the for the firefighters to be able to do their job, especially if they're going to be short staffed. But th those funds when those things happen come out of capital stabilization which can't be used to
support the general fund. So I just want to make sure like someone say oh there's a new there's a new something here. Well that you know capital stabilization has a different has a different set of rules and and you know it's important for cities to have a strong intelligent capital plan so you don't just let
things fall apart and you replace them when they need to be replaced. Right? So, you know, this doesn't mean that we're never spending money again, but it means that we're going to do it really with a lot of thought and we're going to try to be as responsible as we can as we do that. And we're going to make sure
that we are living within our means, which I think is a really important thing. So, you know, if if we don't do this, which I think is important to state, um, you know, really the biggest
impact is going to be to our schools. Uh, and that is, you know, it's a significant part of the budget. The way that we asked people to cut their budget was we took a proportion of the budget and we, you know, asked them to cut a percentage out of their budget based on the size of their department. Um, and
the schools schools is the biggest department. Um, and you know that is going to mean teachers and paraprofessionals and you know people that are interacting with our most vulnerable population, our children are are not going to be able to be
supported. Um, and that is too bad to have, you know, schools that are really beautiful and and very appropriate for educating our young people and not to have them um fully staffed. Uh, so that's going to be one of the biggest. You know, there's going to be other
things, too. Uh, police and fire are going to be impacted. Um, DPW, you know, I don't like I don't know if many of you do know this, but you know, just for snow and ice this winter, just for plowing, $635,000 of cost. You know, that's we have these
big expenses that are kind of you don't necessarily anticipate all the time. Um, and everything does get more expensive. So it becomes harder to run a giant operation like this within the two and a half% margin of increase that we get.
And so I think you know that that's what I want to really focus on is this is you know not outrageous. This is something that's happening across the state. Um and it's something that's happening to a lot of our neighbors. Um, so it's not like we're unique or we did something,
you know, bad, but you know, this is this is a pretty this is a pretty common thing right now in the Commonwealth. And so I'm hoping that there's going to be some structural changes that can allow for this to to give us tools to better manage this as opposed to coming to the
taxpayers and asking for more because this is a tough ask. I will say, you know, one of the things that we are also doing in the background, um, you know, a few weeks ago I approached Williston. Um, it was in the paper. Um, I I proposed a strategic partnership. Um,
and really what I was looking for was to help us understand that we need to be symbiotic. We need to like the city's success is going to influence is Wilston's success. Um, and so, you know, I did ask them to materially support the
city, which is the first, I think, you know, um, formal ask from a mayor to Willis. Uh, and I'm really hoping they respond to that. Um, not just by responding to what I think was a pretty modest ask, but I'm really hoping that they maybe go above and beyond. Um, you
know, we're also looking at different ways where we can protect our most vulnerable taxpayers, the elderly, um, and people that are on fixed incomes that are in danger of losing their house. You I'm going to be submitting to the city council in the coming days, um,
a request to adopt, um, a chap a state law that allows us to put a checkbox on tax bills where people, if they would like to contribute to their neighbors, are able to do that. So, I know a lot of people have come to me and said, "If I could contribute more, I would to help
people that can't." And this would allow that on our tax bills for people to be able to contribute to people that maybe are going to struggle or be at risk because of this override um of of losing their house or having a lean put on their house or having to make the decision whether they pay their property
tax or or their, you know, their food bills or their medicine. Like, that's not what we want. So, we're going to try to be as proactive as we can to find ways to mitigate the impacts of this for as many people as we can. Um, and so, as I bring this to you today, um, I, you
know, I I would be happy to try to answer questions. Um, and I hope that I'm prepared to answer whatever questions you have. >> Great. Uh, do counselors have questions? Uh, councelor Peak. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, if you don't
have or if this is too technical of a question, I can maybe hopefully just get an answer from uh Haydel over time, but um I would like to better understand with the debt and interest section of
the budget because we didn't bond for a whole lot of stuff uh in the last couple of fiscal years or you know, but most of that has to go through the council. Is it that existing debts had to be refinanced and the interest rates came in higher than we expected or
>> so it was um something happened there? >> Yeah, I don't I don't have a great answer to this other than when it got brought to me like this was when we figured out that we had a bigger chasm. But I do know what happened was when the Honeywell um bond was taken, it was
taken at a very inopportune time as far as like when you borrow and then there was another one taken directly after that. was only like a a month or two after and for some reason those two had an impact and I think Haydel would have to answer how those how those two things
kind of being taken at the wrong time and and having at this a strange time frame impacted um because I didn't get the technical details of that. That was basically the gist of what I got. >> Okay, I'll I'll email and if I get valuable information I'll try and share it with
>> Thank you. Other question. Uh, councelor Newton. >> Um, President Denim, am I allowed to ask about specific numbers at this time? >> Sure. If you want to ask a question. >> Okay. I just >> I don't know that he'll be able to answer specific. >> So,
I'm looking at a spreadsheet and it's showing that 2027 proposed we would need 65,600,000 to run the city. Um, and if I think it's saying that if we were to do
catastrophic cuts, as you said, it would be 61,984. To me, I think that's a difference of less than 4 million. Why are you saying that we need 8.5 million? >> So, um, that number includes 2 million
of stabilization. Um, >> still doesn't add up to 8.5. Uh well, I'm not exactly sure what number you're looking at. Let me see if I can um because I have 65 67446
for 27 as our projected. >> Yeah. >> And with the the budgets that we got, the the gap was 6.4 million. >> Do you have it, Evan? >> Oh, um Brooke. Yeah. So, I think Brooke,
our treasurer, is online, so she might be able to answer that. >> Uh, Treasurer Johnson, are you on the line? I see your hand up. Please, uh, state your name and your position for the city. >> Yeah, absolutely. Um, so my name is Brooke Johnson. I'm the treasurer for
the city. As stated, I have been here since August, so please be patient with me. Um, I'd like to just talk about um the budget gap for just a moment. So that 8.5 million to balance the budget would be for years to come. Um this year
we saw about a $3 million increase in our budget from last year. So if we were to continue on to this trend, that is where that $8 million gap comes from. >> So I guess my question is what?
>> Sorry. My question is why do we need 8.5 this year if and this is what I'm trying to understand if like 4 point or it's really less than 3.8 plus the two right that we're taking from potentially stabilization correct
>> if that's 5.8 8 then why is that not good enough? Why do we need 8.5? >> Contractual increases, inflation, um any other expenses that are on the horizon. >> But if our budget, >> go ahead. Finish. Treasurer Johnson.
>> Yeah, of course. So, if our budget increased $3 million from FY um 25 26 to 27, we're looking at a trend of that increase continuing. Um and unfortunately, we won't have the
stabilization funds um to bridge that gap in the future. >> Council D, do you have a follow-up? >> Yeah, I do. So if we were to pass an override for, let's just say it was more like 5 million,
our new base would then be much higher than it currently is and we would still be getting 2 and a.5% the following year. So you don't think that with that new base also increasing, you don't think that's enough for the following year? >> No. In fact, I can tell you um
>> Derby. Go ahead. >> Yep. Sorry. Um so if we didn't so let's just say we didn't do an override this year and we just cut um the gap next year will be um 7.9 in 2028 9.5 and in 2029 15.1 so it
compounds every year because of the increased cost and the flat funding source >> I do understand that I'm asking oh sorry >> I'm sorry guys >> that's okay >> I'm asking what would happen if we went
with just what we need for this year as the increase rather than doing a large override that's 6.9 to cover multiple years. >> Yeah. So, we we did talk about that and um and that this was part of the budget task force that was discussed with the
chair of finance, the chair of the school committee, um a a CPA from the community, the chair of the board of assessors, um our treasurer, uh and others. Um, and really if we did that, what would happen is P taxes would go
up, there would still be cuts, and we'd find ourselves in the exact same position next year. Um >> which which is um because we would because this this gap is going to grow every year because of the increase of costs and the fact that a lot of those
costs are fixed and those fixed costs are dictating an upward slope of spending where our ability to raise revenue is very minimally capped. Um and so you know this is something that
compounds every year. So if we just did a small increase this year, we'd find ourselves in the same position next year. What 6.9 allows us to do is it allows us to have like a little bit of a cushion so we can make some cuts. We can
make some contraction but not have to come back next year. And I think that's one of the most important pieces is we don't want to get ourselves in a position where we ask people to pay more but don't really give them a lot for
that investment. We're going to end up back here. >> Are you good, >> Councelor Peak? >> Yeah. Just to um piggyback off of what you just said, um since I was on the the budget task force and since I was
involved in some of the meetings with um the department of revenue, the general guidance we received because this this isn't something that East Hampton has done a lot as override. So, we did have some experts from the Department of Revenue come in and advise us on it. The
general advice that they gave is if you ask for the exact amount that you need to plug this year's gap, then next year you're likely to end up in a similar situation, you're going to go to the voters and they're going to say, "Well, we just voted for an override last year. What happened to that?" And so they said
that the idea is that the the sort of best practice when when municipalities are going uh for these overrides is to try and figure out what you're going to need to be solvent for 3 to 5 years with the anticipated cost increases that
you're looking at. So that's sort of the the thing here. We we could go for a smaller number and we could figure it out for this year, but if we do that, we going to have to do that with the knowledge that next year we either going back for a second override, which my
general thought is would not be wellreceived was my my general thought. and and and or or the other ideas that you or or that you're you're back to sort of where we were. You know, it helps a bit, but
it's you're back to the same sort of fiscal cliff next year. So, that was our um logic and that logic was largely informed by advice we received from the Commonwealth's Department of Revenue. >> What uh councelor Marquee?
>> Um everyone will have to forgive me. I'm new to council so I'm not exactly >> Move the microphone closer to your >> Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. I amum I am not wellversed in finances compared to a lot of the city councilors on here. I um trust a
lot of the folks around me and stuff. I'm aware that inflation's outpacing the 2 and a half%. Um my question is more about health insurance costs because I know they're a major driver of um costs everywhere. everybody's insurance is
going up and has this um number factored in any of the potential future rate hikes by the insurance companies and I have a second part of that question. Um,
is has have there been um any opportunities explored to renegotiate health insurance perhaps in the future um or something along that lines? Where does it stand with municipal employees?
>> Um, Mayor Mayor Derby. >> Yes, thank you. Um, yes. Uh we have factored in um what our anticipated costs for health insurance going forward would be into our 5-year projection. Um we're basing those off of basically what
we know that is going to happen in the next fiscal year. It's 12.48% increase and kind of extrapolating that across with you know modest increases to that. Uh which is again that you know you're forecasting out to the future. You're it's not a it's not an exact science. Um
and we know that healthcare costs are volatile. Um which is again why one of the reasons why we want to make sure we have we don't ask for the exact number of the deficit because that doesn't give us any sort of ability to adjust to
unknowns. Um and really when there and what I found since I sat at that desk and moved to this podium is there are a lot of unknowns. Um and so I will say this to the second part of your question, I have directed our human
resources director to um work with our IA, our insurance advisory committee to start preparing and looking at options that are different from the option that we are in right now. Like we are every everything is on the table as far as
finding ways to reduce costs. Um and we're not going to leave any stone unturned. So, um, and I believe it's appropriate for the IA, um, to do that research because it's going to, you know, it's going to affect them. Um, and I know, you know, the city historically has has, um, enjoyed Blue Cross Blue
Shield. And, um, if we're going to make a change from that, I want it to be coming from the employees that are going to be impacted by it. >> Councelor Marquee, >> I have a um, followup. Do you know approximately how much of um the ask and
the override is health insurance? >> Um so >> wait, let him finish. >> Sorry. >> That's it. >> Is that it? Mayor Derby. >> Um so this this year, this fiscal year, we've been looking at a little bit under a million dollar increase.
Uh, Councelor Newton, >> I'm going back to the same thing. Is it possible for us to ask for a lower amount and make cuts? Because what I've been hearing from a lot of people is that they actually want lots of cuts.
So, what if we were to take the middle ground and do some cuts and some override? So it's not catastrophic, but we are making cuts so that we don't have to ask for so much, >> right? >> Mayor Derby. >> Yes. Um yeah, I mean that was basically
the sentiment of the insurance uh I'm sorry, the budget task force uh which was okay, here's what we need to be financially stable for 3 years. We can't ask for that. Um, so we're going to ask
for 6.9 because that is the number where we're still going to need to make cuts. You know, like I said, the the number in order to make us um what the recommended number would be if say the do guys were figuring out with our budget and the
situation we're now would have been closer to 8.5 million in order to be fiscally prudent and to give us enough space to not have to come back within one or two years. What we said was we need to go lower and make cuts. Um, and
if we go lower again, you know, we'll be asking taxpayers to pay more money and we're still going to be laying off a significant number of people. So, people will see a significant interruption to their services. This number allows us to maintain
many of the most important services that people rely on. Um, public safety, schools, roads being cleared, those types of things. um and gives us a little bit of padding so we don't have to come back next year. So really this number is kind of that
middle ground because if we asked for significantly less like I said people would just have to pay more taxes and they still wouldn't get the services they want. >> Council Newton, >> I hear what you're saying.
I'm also looking at a spreadsheet that says the original proposed budget before all this happened was 65,679 and the reduced if it were catastrophic, not the reduced if we get 6.9 instead of
8.5 is 619. So I'm still having a hard time understanding why from 8.5 to 6.9 it's only 1.6. 6 million of a reduction yet
we really only like need for this year about 4 million and so I'm having a hard time understanding that piece >> Mayor Derby. >> Yeah. So like I like I said before, you know, that number is supported um and
first and those numbers are out of date as of now um since we've met with departments and we've cuz at that point we did not have their catastrophic budgets. That was a kind of an estimation. Um but really like I can't emphasize enough, we're not trying to
ask for more than we need. Like it's very clear that that comes through. We're not trying to pad the budget for 10 years to come. We're trying to get through this fiscal year without catastrophically cutting positions in
our schools and in public safety and trying to not have to come back to the taxpayers next year. Um, and really that wasn't again this is not my these these numbers are not my numbers.
This is this is not me presenting this. This the budget task force was the the governing body that decided what number to ask for and how to kind of approach this. I just happened to be the one answering questions. >> Vice President Janzik.
>> Thank you. President Denim, um you may have referenced this already and so uh but just for clarification purposes with the 6.9 million number, how many years will that get us? So honestly, >> derby, >> I'm hoping that that will get us at
least three to four years of, you know, if we change the way we do things. Um, if we, again, like I'm not saying that we want to be bailed out. We're ready and we have I talked about it all day. We're ready to make we're ready to make
cuts. We're ready to to kind of change the way we do things. We have to change the way we do things. We can't go on status quo. Um, and and I think that if we can get creative, if we can find ways like the liquor licenses, if we can find ways to bring new growth to the city, if
we can, you know, continue this kind of upward trajectory that the city has where we can keep bringing more people here and spending more money, you know, that will help us capture new growth. And combined with cuts and combined with the small cushion that um we can
potentially get through and and maintain without having to use our stabilization funds, it will not only give us a better um credit rating. So we when we do have to borrow, we can borrow at a much better rate. Um but it will also, you know, and that's our bond rating, which
we have a bond call coming up and they pay attention to these things. They're very clued into this. So, you know, I I'm really hoping that we can do this in a way where we can look at this as a path to sustainability, you know, and I'm really hoping I think
truly that path to sustainability and is going to uh include the state kind of changing the way that it does things. Um because 2 and a half% is um is very limiting compared to what we're seeing
as inflation um goes up. Other qu councelor Smith, >> listening to the proposals that have come forth so far, the one that um I have the least faith in I guess is
kind of the fund the resident um put the check box there. Can you give me a little more detail about how that would be decided as to which residents would receive that fund? Would it be all residents under a certain um you know
within the poverty level that it would be split among all residents? Would it go to residents within your precinct? Would you be able to name the resident that's going to go towards? So that's that's my first question. >> Yeah. And so and so that I I haven't presented that yet. Um and when I do all
those details will be laid out. Um I can say that the um the chapter and section of state law I think 30 no chapter 60 section 3D I believe.
>> Yeah. Um it basically it's called um it's uh volunteer tax relief for the elderly and disabled. Um so as it's specific within the state statute for those two populations. Um it does lay out specific
criteria. 80% of um AMI um you know a significant uh uh reduced ability to uh pay taxes uh and and if there was more applicants that met the criteria than there was funds then it would be put
into a lottery system. um where it would be, you know, let's just say we raised $18,000, then probably what that would equate to is 18 um allocations of $1,000 to help
people offset the cost of any override that might take place. Councelor Smith, >> my next question. Um, that's a 18,000 having it only go to 18 people. Has
there been any discussion of using the CPA funds as a possible revenue stream to create affordable housing for people who already live here that would be priced out with this? >> I may I believe that um I talked to the
council president today. I think that that is the kind that is something that would need to originate from um the city council. >> Um and I believe that there's uh movement towards working on that right now if I'm not mistaken. >> Okay. >> Council Smith,
>> um in the press conference the other day, one of the things that you brought brought up was the breaker funds from the state not coming through and school costs going up. And so
in precinct 5, we have two distinct groups. We have the largest population of seniors and we have a sizable school population. So this is two flips of a coin. If we say yes to this, I'm very
concerned about our seniors within the precinct that wouldn't be able to meet this. And if you look at a life, this would be towards the end of somebody's life course. So 1 year versus 3 years is going to be very difficult. So having it
be the full 6.9 million versus a smaller amount. On the one hand, you're talking about the long-term sustainability of the city, but on the flip side of that is the real concern that people won't be
able to afford to live if we go too high with this override. So, I'm wondering from the perspective of children, if this did not get passed and this was to
our schools, can you remind us of the per the cost that the city needs to pay for each student that goes out of district and the cost of per student that the city will have to pay for each student that
goes out of our district to um uh >> charter school or choice. Yeah. So, gen generally um out of district placements are anywhere from $5 to $10,000 per pupil. >> Um I think that if we did look at this, you know, one of the things that's
important to recognize, there's a couple things. One is if you know this is a catastrophic cut to our schools, there are probably are going to be some people that either decide not to choice in or decide to choice out. um and that there is a cost to the city there. I think
more importantly though is one of the hidden costs that we don't really talk about when we talk about layoffs and you know if we're going to be laying off a significant number of people it it's not like we cut them free and are not financially responsible for that. Um with unemployment costs we're
responsible for about 30% of that person's um salary. So, if we lay off, you know, dozens of people or more, um, it's not like we're saving money. We're actually not having employees and we're
paying 30% of that salary in unemployment. So, we're still losing money. It's so that's why this we're in kind of a catch 22, right? If we lay people off to save money, we have to pay more people to unemployment insurance and we don't
have anybody working. Um so it becomes a a very difficult and situation and with the schools I think it becomes a bit of a snowball effect you know and that's why I think a lot of people are really passionate about protecting our schools because those vulnerable children you
know having teachers there that are you know have um the stability that they need and are not concerned about whether they're going to be laid off in the next you know months or so I think is important. Um and and I but I also want
to acknowledge the fact that there are people who this financial impact is real and you know and I think that we should do whatever we can to look at ways to mitigate that and to help those people. So you know that's one of the commitments I'm going to make is to try to find every lever we can pull to help
people that can't afford this that truly can't afford it. Not that just don't want to pay but actually just can't afford it. >> Smith. >> Okay. So along those same lines, um can you just repeat for just for the
record why we chose not to go a split rate for our taxes? I mean, I remember all these discussions and I understand it, but there's been a lot of residents who are saying, why aren't we taxing our businesses a lot more? >> Um so
>> and actually I would say you can ask yourselves. Um, you can ask me, but the city council is the body that sets the tax rate. Uh, and for the 22 years I was on the city council, we kept a single rate. Um, you know, that was generally
what was in line with what our board of assessors and our assessor recommended. Um, which, you know, I feel like we always take those recommendations to heart. Um, and I know that when we set the tax rate just recently, um, there was discussion about that and it was
decided to have a single tax rate for next year as well. >> Uh, councelor Peak. Yeah, just on that point since we were in the finance hearing about it. Um the trick with a split tax rate is that
we have such a small commercial tax base and such a large um residential tax base that to raise to let's just say I'm using these numbers uh off the top of my head, but like to
lower your taxes by at you know for a average residential house by $1, you'd have to increase the commercial tax rate by something like I think $6 or $7 if I remember correctly. Don't quote me on those numbers, but it's somewhere in
that range just because the the the the size of those populations are so much different. You know, there are cities that uh and towns that have really really big commercial tax bases because they have a big downtown or like a big industrial area and things like that.
And so they're able to sort of push those on. But when your residential tax base is so much bigger than your commercial tax base, like every bit of incre like of relief that you'd be giving the commercial taxpayers would be
associated with a much larger uh burden placed on the commercial taxpayers and and you know, when you're talking about East Hampton, it's not like we've got a bunch of Fortune 500 companies here. It tends to be a lot of small businesses that are, you know, just trying to make do on their own. So, and it's not to pit
one per one group against each other, but it's just to say that like that never really seemed to us like some like what we could realistically get out of that without just crippling our whole commercial tax base probably wouldn't be a super significant savings for the
residential tax base was the that's the way that it's been presented to me by the multiple principal assessors over the years. Mhm. Mhm. >> And >> uh >> I would just add like um West Springfield has a split tax rate. So like that's the level of kind of
commercial activity generally that would warrant a split tax rate. >> Vice President Jadzik. >> Thank you. I I'm not sure if you'll have these numbers off the top of your head. So um but I'll just ask a question anyway. Um, I'm wondering if you would be able to share with us the approximate
total number of employees the city currently employs and then given the fact that you have created this catastrophic budget, how many employees would be needing to be laid off should we have to go that route? >> Um, so a little over 350 employees. Um
and as far as uh we have a full day tomorrow of budget meetings with department heads. So I don't have that full picture yet. I can say that you know there are definitely going to be you know personnel
that are going to be left out of a job. Um and as we get to the bigger departments um more so uh the the larger the department the bigger the impact is going to be es especially you know
schools which um are are personnelheavy and a a large percentage of the budget. Uh, councelor Newton, >> when you're doing your calculations about layoffs, are people who are opting
for early retirement in your mind considered layoffs? So, there is a potential to lower the number of workers without actually laying anybody off if people opt for a retirement. >> I think in some departments that would
be true. Um but in others that is not going to be accurate just because of the the number of uh that they're going to have to reach as far as um reducing their budget. Um you know one of the things that we've been exploring is potentially a you know an early buyout
for retirement. Um and so we're crunching those numbers right now to try to again you know leave no stone unturned. Um, I just really quickly I just want to acknowledge um earlier this week I reached out and this is just context for
folks in the room and then I I have a a follow-up question but I reached out to um uh department heads earlier uh last week actually just to say hey can you help me understand kind of how inflation has
impacted your offices right and a few of them were able to reach out to me and they gave me some real concrete examples. Uh the planning department talked about uh within within the context of block grant construction cost uh gravel, right? Uh was $35 a yard in
2022. Uh and in 2025 it's $60, right? That's a that's an increase, right? Um and they didn't do anything differently, right? That's just an inflationary cost that they had to take on. Uh temporary pavement in 2022 was $180 a ton. uh in
2025 it's $275 a ton right so that's doing nothing right they had to incur that um so I think that those are just really important numbers to understand uh the health department you know they've taken on some personnel
increases right because there has just been an increase in the number of inspections that have had to take place and in part some of the uh support that they've been given to the uh tenants within the city right so there's training costs that go along with that. There's operational demands that go into
those costs, right? So that is an increase. Uh parks uh their electricity costs have gone up 90%. Right? So those are costs, right? That our department heads, our department employees are working incredibly hard for the city and
they are taking on these additional costs that they just had to pay, right? And so I just want to acknowledge that. But I also want to come back to this notion of vulnerable children um for just a second. Mayor Darby, help me understand
because I think there there is a there's a there's a there's a human cost to this, right? Um and if we are expecting or we are being asked to raise $6.9 million, right? And I think a lot
of what we've been talking about is children in schools, etc. And if 51% of the kids in East Hampton are um lowincome, right, and we raise
$6.9 million, some of those kids, families aren't going to be able to afford to live in East Hampton anymore. So, help me help me understand for myself on this side. How do I reconcile those two things where it's like I
really want kids to have the teachers that they need and now I just made it unaffordable for them to be here. Like where's where's the line? Can you help me can you help me understand that? >> Um >> not to put you on the spot. I was on the spot but >> you know I mean I think that that is
something that you are going to have to reckon with when you decide what to do. um you know really at the end of the day this is going to be a personal decision for the people that are going to go to the polls and and decide how to vote on
this. You know, I mean, for me and, you know, my experience in East Hampton, as someone who's lived here for 30 years, um, and spent significantly more time than that here, uh, someone who coached
>> sports for, you know, close to two decades in East Hampton and took kids under my wing and made them part of my family. that was the that was a decision I made um to to kind of help my
community. >> Um and I think that as we look at this, we have to understand that if we have an educational system that's strained, you know, kids are going to be spending during the school year, they spend more time at school than they do at home. Um,
and we need to make sure that that experience is not only robust, not only safe, not only welcoming, but we need to make sure that it's at the edge of giving these children the skills that they need to be the adults of the
future. And so, I don't know how we reconcile that. I don't know how we say we're not going to give you the teachers and the support that you need in order to be a successful, happy citizen of East Hampton, you know, without having some sort of an
impact on the family's financial well-being. I would say that, you know, as I have had experience with many, many children in East Hampton as a coach and as a teacher, um, you know, $3.29 29
cents a day. And I and I'm I don't want to be glib here, you know, is something that many families, not all families, many families can find a way to um absorb.
>> And you know, for example, like going out to dinner one one day a month right now. I and I acknowledge that some people don't have the ability to go out to dinner one day a month, but that's what the cost of this would be for the average, you know,
median taxpayer, you know, so there there's going to be at the end of the day there's going to be sacrifices and there's going to be there's going to be casualties on both sides. And so the question you asked there isn't a good answer to. >> And I have uh another question. Could
you help me understand the kind of thinking behind uh the finance work group that put this together? Why why one question and not a pyramid? Why not two questions? Like help help us understand like because if we're if
we're looking at what happened has happened in other communities, right? Uh they lost and and some of them got I mean they got spanked, right? Like it was not pretty. Um, and so if that's kind of the trajectory or that's the trend of things not passing, why would
we not think consider, right? Why would the work group not consider two numbers? So one, if the higher number didn't pass, we'd still might have something because I think I think people I think people do want to be supportive, right? But I think there's a line where someone
says, "I can do this. I I can't do that." Right? like I believe in the kids of East Hampton, but I also believe in my family. And if I can't if I can't take on this burden, I'm willing to take on this burden, but it's fiscally I
can't. And so, yes, I support East Hampton communities or kids. I want to live here, but now I just price myself out of that. So, what what's help me understand and help all of us understand? >> Sure. and and I I just want to you know the decision of this body actually is going to be the decision that that part
of that could be. Um >> so what we did was set a recommendation um basically looking at other overrides that have um passed or failed. Um recognizing sometimes it's better to keep it simple >> um and that you know having more than
one number confused a lot of people and taking that into account we decided to try to keep it simple. >> Yep. >> Great. Thank you. >> Uh councelor Peak I assume you might want to respond to that. >> Sure. Just my perspective on there. I I
I actually initially really liked the pyramid idea be for that exact reason of saying, >> "Well, if we can't get ex everything we need, wouldn't it be better to make sure that we could at least get half of what we need or something like that?" So then that's something that like look, if the council wants to debate that, we can obviously it's ultimately our call. Um
my the thing that made me kind of nervous about it was monitoring some of the discourse around South Hadley and the sheer number of people. So, just to there, South Hadley had a $9 million number and then an $11 million number.
There was a lot of people in South Hadley who were saying the city's asking us for $20 million. >> Mhm. or they're saying like the idea about it was that um if you v voted for
both then the and and and say the if you voted for both the nine and the 11 and then the 11 did get enough votes then just the 11 would go through and not the nine. Our concern was that there was pretty widespread misunderstanding about
that in South Hadley who had a much longer time to spread information about that than what we have because of how late this our budget picture came in into focus for us. So it's not something that I I think that anyone on the budget
task force was squarely and categorically against. But that was a concern that if we're going to discuss this as a body, I just want to share that was something that we did observe and it was something that I
worry maybe put them in a worse situation. >> So that's just >> that's helpful context, right? I think that's important information for people to see kind of what's the thinking, right? But I I think you're you're right and I think it's important for the council to understand that uh what the
has been put forward can be amended, right? So it doesn't have to be a single question. It could be a pyramid, etc. So I just want to acknowledge that. I saw some other hands going this way and then I will come back this way. Uh uh councelor Kisinski, we haven't heard from you yet. Um,
just reviewing some of the numbers that have come up because numbers are spinning in my head now and I'm sure it's they're spinning in everyone else's head and we want to do the right thing. Gravel costs stuck in my head.
Councelor Denim had said $35 I believe a ton >> uh in 2025. 2022 is >> 2022 turning into $60 a yard, >> which was according to my calculations a 71% increase.
The pavement $180 a ton in 2022, $275 a ton in 2025, a 53% increase. Electricity costs for the parks department up 90%.
How do you raise 2 and a.5% a year and begin to cover some of those costs? You don't. You fall behind. That gives me great pause because we have to turn around and deal with this
and not lose our entire city. So, I really like the idea of looking at this and saying maybe we need to come up with another figure, a figure that will get us through over the next horizon because I look at the figure that was
your median figure for the 6.9 million and that was at a $418,000 assessment which isn't that far off the park these days with values.
That's almost $100 a month. $100 a month. And that's a hard pill to swallow for many, many, many folks in our city. Yet they know we have to deal with those
75% increases, 90% increase in costs, 53% and deal with that there. I'm hoping that there's a figure somewhere between that $100 for the average taxpayer,
something less that carries us through. Is it possible to carry us through for a year or twoyear horizon? I know the do gave us some other figures, but I don't think there's the will and
the time to set this sale correctly so that it can be really understood by the citizens who are going to we're asking to vote. They're going to have to vote when we're talking about June 9, it's me, a month and a half.
uh they'll be barely able to get out and and make it to the polls and say, "Okay, I have a I have to vote and there there's there's an election coming." Not to be able to understand the depths of what is being asked. Not that we're not facing the situation. So, my question to
the mayor is, is there some way to see a one or twoyear horizon? And yes, I understand that that one or twoyear horizon doesn't put us in goodstead for the future. but it might carry us through our
current needs with some significant cuts and a small override. >> Mayor Derby. So, you know, as the budget task force looked at this, that was a question we asked and we looked, you know, pretty low down on the spectrum of
override amounts. And you know, the reason why we settled at 6.9 was because that one was um and I hesitate to call it the Goldilocks number, but it was really the number that got us to a place of stability
and was less of an impact on the citizens than again remember this is $2.1 million less than South Havley's lowest ask. So I just want to acknowledge that one more time. $2.1 million less than South Hadley's lowest
ask. And so the reason why we decided to, you know, scale it back was because we knew that it is an ask. It's it's not easy. This again, this is going to be with 6.9 is there's going to be shared
sacrifice. With no override, we're in a a pretty dire spot as it relates to services in this city. Councelor Marque. >> Um I have more of a comment to make than um a question. Um,
>> President Denham touched upon uh it's hard to reconcile kids that are lower income or in poverty versus um the implications of a big tax bill
versus a good education, etc. I'm sure again President Denim will identify with this, but I I don't come from means. I I'm a workingclass guy. I live barely above the poverty level. I
don't own any property, so I won't really be paying any more taxes, but we all know everything kind of flows downhill. And my rent might go up. Everybody will be paying more. And
I'm not going to tell anybody if this is put forward how to vote. But I will say that though I don't will not be paying any property taxes, I will I would gladly fork over 11 $1,200
in order to make sure the kids of this town got the free lunch, got the afterchool programs. And I know that some people that own property can afford more than other people. Um, and I and I've spoken to both types of
folks in this town like $1,200. It's like I'm really cutting it then. And I've heard other folks say I'm I'm all for it. Sign me up for more. And you know, at the end of the day, I mean, if we're not going to do it, people in East
Hampton, I love this town. people in East Hampton, the who's of Hill Whoville aren't going to pull together and save this town. Who's going to? And yeah, we've seen a lot of folks, a lot of towns around the area not passing the
thing, not passing the um overrides and um dire financial straits. A lot of a lot of it out of our control. I don't know what the federal government's doing at this point. I really don't. Um, but yeah, it's it's a tough it's a bitter
pill to swallow and um I hope that at the end of the day the people of East Hampton they help their neighbors and we figure it out together. >> Councelor Jam McQuade. >> Yes. Thank you, Madam President. Um, so
I I have a couple comments and then I have um a question that maybe you'll be able to answer. Um, Mcder Derby. So, I just want to acknowledge the the stress that we're all under. Um I I'm hearing everyone heavy breathing over on this side of the table and I'm sure many
people in the audience too. I'm sure I I see the stress on your face as well. Um this is not a fun situation to be in. Um I think it's also important to acknowledge why I think in a broader
scale why we're here and why are costs increasing. I think that this is something that's beyond our control and a lot of it comes down to like corporate greed. Um the increase in health insurance, like I I know I'm preaching to the choir in a lot of in a lot of
ways on that front, but um I just I think that when we're looking at what this means for our community, it's important to understand that this is being done to us. This is an external storm that we're weathering and we need
to be really intentional about how we're shifting the burden of that storm and whether or not we're going to let the most vulnerable people of our community suffer for that. Um that being said um you've mentioned a couple times or you've used the word a couple times um
catastrophic cuts and as someone who um benefits from city services, I'm a homeowner in town. Um, I have a niece that's in tiny tots at the high school. Um, >> can you just Oh, I'll also add like I'm
been cheering on we the people in and all the amazing work that they've been doing. Um, so I guess and not to fearmonger, but I just I want to hear more if um you could explain what that catastrophe looks like um and and what the human face of that would be in the city.
>> Mayor Derby. >> Um, sure. and and I would um since I haven't met with the school department um I hesitate to give any like hard numbers I I will just say that because the school department is the biggest
percentage-wise the biggest you know um department in the city they would be hit the hardest. So when I say, you know, catastrophic, that is coming from an educator who, you know, received a pink slip every year for the first 5 years of
teaching. Um, and knowing that sometimes that's part of the the, you know, the sacrifice you make to educate young people. Um, but it would mean that we would lose a lot of educators. Um and then beyond that it means that um you
know in public safety we would there would be positions for sure eliminated um you know across police, fire and EMS. Um and that would have a significant impact on our costs for overtime. Um because when you have when you minimize
staffing levels and someone is out or someone is injured or someone is out on FMLA um then you have to bring in people at overtime. Um, so, you know, while we there's a lot of ways that we can be shortsighted when we look to the future
of the budget, you know, and and one of the most short-sighted ways that we think that we're saving money is by just making these huge cuts. But generally what that's going to do is it's going to reduce services significantly, but it's not going to reduce costs in the way
where if we could just cleanly, you know, sever employee, like I said, unemployment costs are 30% of that employees salary. Um overtime costs are going to come back on police, fire, and EMS. Um and response times are going to suffer. um the ability to be able to
plow our roads in an effective like I mean we all know when we go to different towns from East Hampton our roads are the best. It's not it's not going to be you know like and if we don't have the people to do that work it's it's not going to be like that. Um, and and I
don't want to fear-monger um, which is I'm I'm trying to be general because this is not my override, right? This is, you know, um, an override that is happening because we, the city has found ourselves in a place where we need to
figure out the the can has been kicked down the road. It's time for us to pick it up, examine it closely, and figure out what we can do to repair that can. Councelor Newton. Oh, actually thought did you have a followup question? Councelor Newton.
>> Okay, >> you're good. Councelor Peak. >> Um, sort of to that point. Uh, actually I've got a question before I have the question. I just want to just make one quick comment. Um, which is uh just
uh for the helpfulness of of this discourse because there's going to be a lot of these conversations to come. I ju I just want to remind uh my colleagues and and the public who's about to get an opportunity to speak uh that what's really before us tonight is whether we want to place
a ballot question for an override on the ballot and if we do the number the structure and these are the questions before us. Whether or not an individual person should vote on the oversight right is a question that's going to dominate public discourse. Should we
vote yes for a solid month and a half? and we're going to get a lot of good opportunities to talk about the pros and cons, but I just uh there's a lot of great questions, but I think that there there's some of this that I just want to um uh ju just remind folks of what is actually before us as a question
tonight. Um, with that being said, um, I a lot we've we've gotten a lot of questions and I'm sure we're going to continue to get a lot of questions from the public about what is the actual impact of this. And I just want to share my understanding of how that process is going to work as it relates to this
body. And then Mayor Derby, if you if I this kind of been drinking from a fire hose, so if there's things that I misunderstood, I'd love for you to explain to me what I got wrong. >> Sure. So we are going to be presented at the
next city council meeting with two budgets. We normally get one budget and we discuss that budget in a series of budget hearings. Instead we are going to get two budgets. One for if the override um passes and one for if it fails.
Um the mayor generally has a lot of power to set uh the the budget at a certain thing and then we really can make cuts, but that's really all that we can do given these highly unusual circumstances and the limited situation. I hope that
the department heads and the mayor will be flexible in listening to suggestions that the council or the public might have about well what if we do this what if we do this because I really think that you that is an important part of these things is that pe you know that people with different perspectives have
the ability to weigh in and say you're proposing cutting this position but did you think about maybe consolidating these and things like that but those are going to be conversations that are going to be uh exhausting probably and not particularly But that are going to be um
public, right? Like if people think that they, you know, if people think that they have a suggestion on how to do this uh better, how we can save costs, how we can do things better, uh they are going to be able to speak uh in those
meetings. Uh if if they if the meeting concludes, they are welcome to ask me uh via email uh any questions that they might have and I'll do my best to get answers. But the idea here is that we're going to come out of this process going into June
with two budgets. One assuming that an override passes and the other assuming that the override fails. And the exact detail of what's different in each of those positions is going to be explained in painstaking detail because whatever the department heads are thinking it's
going to be ultimately that decision, those two budgets will have to be approved by this council. And so I I bring this up just to say that uh there's information that we don't have now because we can't have it now because
we haven't completed the budget process that's necessary before we come to any final number on those things. Um, but that process is about to kick off and I really, really, really want everybody I
really urge people to pay attention and to weigh in because I just I want everyone to understand exactly what we're talking about here. And even those of us who are on the budget task force, you know, we have an idea, but I it's going to get more clear as we go through those meetings and ask some hard
questions and new information comes to light. Did I get anything wrong? >> No. Mayor Derby, >> you got I I would say that that's really correct. And I would, you know, for those um department meetings, I think it's going to be really important to have people participate um and to be
involved with that to see, you know, what the the difference is between the two budgets um and and to ask those questions like um especially counselors, I know, you know, as we enter into quorum issues, you know, but you know, having questions that are if you um you
know, you can speak as a member of the public if there's quorum issues. um and ask questions. Um and I and I would also say uh like writing questions down and submitting them would be also acceptable, but you know those that like the committee level is where those questions need to be asked. Um and so I
think that that part is really important. >> Mayor Peak. >> Oh, >> you just got an upgrade, Tom. I'll see. Thank you. I was looking I was looking at Mayor Derby and so yeah, if you want it. >> Hey, I'm called I'm called Mr. President
all the time. >> Yeah. All right. Uh no, thank you. Um so yeah, uh just a couple follow just um >> Did you want to go up to the mic and ask? >> No, I don't. I do not want to do that one little bit. Um, okay. So, uh, yeah,
just a couple, uh, so, um, the first thing that I I just want to say, uh, I I just want to, um, >> and you know what, the second thing I forgot because of that distracting funny moment. I apologize. It's fine. We're all human. Um the the but the the first
thing I just wanted to say is like uh I I I had alluded to this but I just kind of want to ask it again a little bit like just given the highly unusual circumstances here and given the ask that we're putting before people uh just can I ask for a certain level of
flexibility in those hearings that might go beyond like there's been a lot of budget things in the past where it's like oh I don't think I think that you should do this instead of this. It's this the feedback's sort of been like okay that's your opinion. um which is what our charter absolutely allows. But
just given the situation, if there's somebody from the public who has like a great idea that's something that we missed cuz we're all just humans with our own perspective, like I'd love to be able to have that that conversation without that sort of being like, well, the hay is in the barn and you know, like it is what it is, you know? I
>> I mean, yeah, the hay might be in the barn. Um but and I think hopefully for the counselors that have been my colleagues for many years, you know that um my level of rigidity um is more a level of flexibility. Um because rigid
things break and I'm not trying to break this budget. So you know for me that is a perfectly reasonable ask um because I want to make sure that we're doing everything that we can do within our power to make this right. So, I would
never take a good idea because it's not mine and discount that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Great. Um, I am going to let councelor Schmidt have a word. >> I'll just weigh in real quick. Um,
comment which is first just thank you to all of you for asking such great questions has been um really, you know, useful and for the information to to take this all in. Um before we hand it over, I did want to ask uh just related to the finances, you know, you shared
some numbers for varying degrees uh or for varying sort of property values. Um and I just wanted to ensure and sort of make it known to the public if there are any any plans in place to kind of make that information accessible on sort of a personal level. I understand that there
are formulas uh that other cities use to help inform their public and can you speak for a moment just about what might be in the works and and made available to people to kind of put in their own numbers and see what the impact would be on this. >> Um >> there are um tax rate calculators that
are online really if you just Google tax rate calculator um there are ways to find so you can see what the impact would be for different varying amounts. Um, you know, I've put together some information, um, as I was working with the budget task force around, you know,
kind of more not infographics, but more graphical information to help kind of understand the different amounts and and what they do and how they help us. It's the teacher and me putting together a presentation, right? Um, and so I do have that information. I'm happy to
share it. Um, you know, I I do have to be a little careful um because I can't really use uh my resources to advocate for, but I can use my resources to give information. Um, and so and I'm happy to put as much information out there as I
can to help people get a better understanding of what the impact of this would be, what the um what the costs look like depending on your property values, etc. Um, and I do have access. We've, you know, we've done a 5-year projection um that the budget task force was kind of using as our baseline. Um,
so we do have, you know, plenty of information and I'm happy to share that with anybody that would like to have it. So, if you have constituents that are asking questions, then you can be more, um, you know, point them to the appropriate information. >> Sure. just to >> uh council >> if I can just clarify just to make sure
that we're on the same page here. I'm speaking specifically about the amount of uh like what their specific increase would be following a potential >> success. So I mean I have like like I said I have um some good infographics specifically around different property values,
>> you know. So I did um a range from 200 to 750,000. I figured that was um um so and I do have that I can email it. >> Great. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Can you share that actually with the um
council clerk and then she can share that out to the rest of his group? >> Sure. >> Um you have a councelor peak. >> Um just one thought um if it just related to to uh councelor Smith's idea.
Um my understanding is that the assessed values of every property in East Hampton are public record. They're available all on the GIS. So, if I could if you could I mean I I think I'm sure that the assessor has this and I've just never it's never been shared with me, but if we could just get a that spreadsheet,
I'm sure that myself or counselor gem qu have use in this could could create some sort of easy like Google based lookup tool where someone could put in their address and it would explain the whole thing to them very very quickly. Um so that's just something that we could quickly do. It just uh I would I just it would be a pain to pull those each
manually from the GIS. So I just need access to the spreadsheet. I'm I'm sure we could ask someone from the assessor's office to help with that. >> Okay, thank you. >> Great. Councelor Schmidt, >> um I do have one last question. It's more like systems, how the election
would work as opposed to the finances side of things. Would it be appropriate to ask that now or would you prefer to hold on to that? >> Let's Well, essentially what's going to happen, uh we have a proposal. Um and what we will do as a council is we will
make a motion to approve or not approve and at that time people will have counselors will have the opportunity to make amendments to that as well. And then at that point we will uh vote to move forward with uh an override uh set
for um June 9th or we will not essentially. and councelor Schmidt, >> if my question goes further than that, would you prefer I hold on to it or would now be an okay time to ask? >> Uh, sure. We're already down that road. >> Okay. So, I guess just what I'm curious about is, you know, if we do uh vote to
to schedule an election, um I was curious if essentially what can be done to make that accessible for folks um in terms of uh ways of voting. Uh, I just wanted to confirm if if there were such options for for a local election like this or if
it's basically like this is election day, people have to go to the polls and that is kind of the only option available. >> Um, I'm going to let our clerk answer that question. >> Answer that. Um, so uh in Massachusetts we always have uh absentee voting, which is an excuse voting. You will not be
physically able to go to the polls um out of town on election day or religious reasons. You can't make it. um absentee voting. They can vote in the office or by mail. We will also have early voting by mail, which is no excuse voting. Anyone can early vote by mail. We have
not had early voting in person in the past for local elections. There is an extra, you know, cost associated with that. So, I I think that will will cover everything uh fairly well. Of course, we'll have election day voting. We will be open 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Um and I did check with the company that prints
the ballots. They said after I get the proof to them, we should get um the ballot within about a week. So I if we go forward with this schedule, I think we would have the ballots around the second week of May and start mailing them out right away. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. So what we're going to
do is we're going to open this up for public comment. Um and the way we're going to do this is we're going to start with folks who are in the room and then we will move to the folks who are online. You're going to have one three
minute opportunity to speak, right? So, please have your thoughts concise, orderly, etc. If you have questions in that, please ask the question. We will write it down. You can
continue within your three minutes. Um, and then we will invite the mayor up to answer questions after we get a series of them. Uh, so that we can kind of move things along. But but what I don't want and the reason why I'm asking you to ask your questions and continue with your three minutes is I don't want you to use
up your three minutes, right? Going back and forth in a conversation. So I want you to be able to say everything that you want to be able to say in those three minutes, right? So um I think in the past there's been some back and forth and that sadly that just eats up your three minutes of time. So I I want you to be able to say everything that
you want to say. Also, I'm going to ask that you not applaud or holler or yell or it's a that just eats up your time, right? So, I just want to make sure that we uh do this in a in a
really orderly fashion. Um we are going to have uh a clock going right when you have 30 seconds left remaining of your three minutes, you will hear an alert, right? That's that first alert is just to let you know you have 30 seconds
left. When your time is up, you will hear a second alert. At that time, it is important that you wrap up your thought, right? Um, and then I I don't want to have to gvel you close. Just please wrap up your thought.
Finish that. I I I really don't like using this thing. Um, because I want to be respectful. I know that Well, we've got a train going. We've got a whole lot going. So, I'm sure it will be a loud enough car. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, we just we don't want
you to we want you to hear it but not be startled by it or feel that it's over, right? Does Can we Can we all agree to that? Can Can we be respectful of that? Great. So, what I'm going to do is just go ahead. People are going to stand up. You're going to come to the microphone,
right? You're going to state your name and your address for the record. Okay. All right. Uh so, it looks like Dan Wrist is ready to go. So, we're going to have uh Chairman Wrist come to the podium and state your name. And
>> at least you didn't call me mayor. >> I didn't I didn't I didn't I didn't call you ma'am either. >> Dan Wrist uh 26 Line Street East Hampton. I was a 27-year member of the city council and in for probably 20
years I was on the finance committee and a chair of the committee for many of those years. So, I know our city's finances. I know them really well. And I want to give my comments today is
to lend credibility to what this budget situation is. If people don't think that it's real, they don't understand inflation. They don't understand what happened with COVID. 20% increase in inflation over
those years. Health care costs 52% in just two fiscal years. That's including next 27. The 27 ask labor contracts. They deserve to have increases and they only ask for 3% or 4%. But we have a
prop 2 and a half. You do the math. That doesn't work. Um, so this budget situation is real and I wanted to let my experience give you that credibility.
An override is absolutely necessary in my mind. What that number is is going to be up to you. And I want to make an aside here because Tom just gave me a a lot of information about South Hadley being confused. I'm going to recommend
to you that if you choose a number, just do one number because if our people are confused, they're going to vote no to both because they'll think it's double. So, please, I think he brings up a fantastic point, choose the number, but only put one number on the on the
ballot. That's just my feeling. Um, if this override fails, it is real. You're going to lose a lot of teachers. The school department is half the budget. $30 million. That's and if if it's 10% of the budget, that's $3 million. Ask
the school department what that means. It means and it's real. No sports, no theater, no art. That's a real thing. Um, police officers and fire personnel, that reduces
response time. And if there's a response time loss and you have a crime, that's dangerous. Um maybe if we vote no, if everybody wants to vote no, the senior center will close. That means 30 seconds. Is that
what that means? Okay. >> Um or maybe the park will close. This I am going to say in my own view, I I can pay $1,200. I will be pay $1,200 next year if it's a full 6.9. That's a lot. That's $100. I'm willing to pay
that. But if you go with a smaller one, maybe that's more appealing to people. $600 for half of that is is what I would be paying personally because of my assessment and that's only $50 a month. So just take that in consideration and
but a no vote is extremely dangerous. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Please state your name and your address for the record. >> Right. William Joss JS60
Division Street. The first I would like to suggest we stop buying gravel. Now seriously, the other point I want to make though is that this is not a one-year deal. If this override passes, that amount is going to get paid extra
from now on every year, unless you somehow reduce the taxes, which you probably can't. So I think it's you should emphasize that this is an ongoing expense. It's every year. And the second thing is one of the people on a fixed
income. Uh I know you can't do it, but you should consider what the social security increase is per year >> and it's nowhere like this. And that's what that's what we're living with. And finally, you did explain that we
didn't have a treasurer. Can someone explain how we could have gotten to the point of not having a treasurer and getting ourselves into this hole? >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Jos. >> Please state your name and address for
the record. >> Kathisinski, Overlook Drive. So, I want to point out a couple of um pieces of information that citizens should know that if we're looking at a property tax increase, we are also looking at a dollar amount increase to
our CPA because our CPA funds, the money we pay for CPA is based on the amount of our property tax. It's a percentage of that. So, it's not just the property tax going up, it's your CPA contribution that's going up. The Board of Public Works has already voted on an increase
to your water and sewer bills, and those increases are likely going to continue for the next three years. So, we're not just looking at an increase in our property taxes, but we're looking at an increase in multiple things. I commend the city councilors for their
sternness in discussing this. It's unfortunate that you spent so many years pandering to the last mayor and not pushing for the appropriate discipline in the budget that should have occurred.
It is my feeling that every city councelor, every school committee member and the former mayor are personally liable for the situation that we're in currently. >> Right. This body seems very interested in spending more time on resolutions. I
suggest we look at a resolution to our state to complete the audit so that we can figure out where the freight fraud, waste, and abuse is try to get the money that should be coming to the local communities back to the local
communities where it belongs. because we shouldn't be spending this much money when there's so much being wasted at the state level. And I don't see any advocacy from any of you pushing our governor to suck it up and not waste so
much of our funds. One of the things that we're considering in East Hampton Active Citizens, we'll begin an initiative petition to remove the CPA program to reduce that percentage on our bills. and anybody interested in that uh
initiative petition can message us at Eastampton act of citizens. I think it's really disingenuous to include this meeting as outside of the regular um meeting schedule um to not having any information at the last
meeting about this special city council meeting. It looked like it was an attempt to avoid um citizen input. Thankfully, we pay more attention than you think we do. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Kathy. Please state your name
and address for the record. Darlene Orviet, 37 Mutter Street. We do pay more attention than you think we do. And um yes, this you're wrong. This is not out of our control. uh Kathy and the last
two people who spoke as they clearly stated there's a solution to this problem and it was pandering to the last mayor who is um very disingenuous in almost all her dealings and I think we know that
what we're having to deal with now it comes from the governors it comes from the mistakes of the governor So, I think um no override until every citizen can
see the budget. No secrecy. We need to know exactly what we're dealing with. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Please state your name and address for the record. Uh >> hi, I'm Matawis Marsenowski. Uh 7 West
Lake Street. I'm here uh because of my son who is a recipient of uh special education in East Hampton. Uh good evening and thank you uh to the city council and the mayor for your
willingness to engage in this important issue. I truly appreciate the effort to come together as you are doing tonight to work through a very difficult situation for our city. I want to acknowledge what I think many
of us are feeling. East Hampton is in a very serious financial position. I understand how important this override is and I don't take that lightly. My hope is that both the city and its residents will ultimately make the right
decision. In my opinion, that means supporting the override. At the same time, I also recognize that there are no real winners here. There's not an this is not an easy choice for anyone.
That said, my concern lies in what feels like an increasing reliance on raising property taxes as a long-term solution. I fully admit that I don't have a complete understanding of every detail driving the current budget
situation that we are in, but it seems clear that rising health care costs and inflation are major factors, issues that are largely outside the city's control. So, it raises an important question. Does this mean we continue increasing
the tax levy year after year? And if so, where is the limit? At what point does that approach stop being sustainable? At what point do we risk reaching a breaking point where residents, especially those who are
already stretched thin, simply can't afford to live in East Hampton. I don't bring up this criticism, but as a genuine concern about the long-term path forward, I understand
that this is a very difficult decision and I respect the responsibility you all carry in making it. Um, last, I wanted to just encourage the citizens of East Hampton to talk about this and dialogue
and come together as one, even if we have different opinions. This is a body and we have to come together even when we don't agree on something. We have to look past our differences and work through this together through discussion and
dialogue. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Please state your name and address for the record. >> Okay. Name is James Ramsey. I live at Campbell Drive
and I've been here in East Stamped my whole life. So, I've seen I've heard a lot of this. I've seen a lot of this. The um the cushion. The cushion. I'm not I'd
like a cushion. Um, and the um, these are just I have question marks after these, but you don't have I'm not asking for an answer right here. But like the state money, where is the state
money? Where's the pot money that we were all promised? Um, you know, they say East Hampton's in good shape, but if you've driven down Main Street, it's bad. That's the showcase. So, um,
I'd like a backyard pool and a full arcade, but I don't have one. It's not in my budget. I live within my means. And um, I don't drink coffee. So, that
cup of coffee thing, that was a classic line for the children. Classic line. Um, there's a box that you can check when you do your taxes. I don't, you know, with your income taxes. There is a box that you can check to pay more taxes.
I'm just wondering, you know, I'm just I'd be real curious to know who checks that. Who wants to pay higher taxes? That's a box you can check on your taxes. Um and um there's a I don't want to go too
but I'm just saying this is this is I am one of the senior citizens now. So um in East Hampton and um I paid for my kids to do the sports when that came up for an you know you have to pay to have your
kids bust. I paid for that. This uh the public safety building we overrode for that. We overrode for the school. We did I did for two schools actually. This this third one um
enough. And u I'd like to close with uh where can I get me one of those imaginary $200,000 houses because uh I don't know uh where they are. That's all. Thank you.
>> Thank you so much, Mr. Ramsey. >> It is a difficult decision. I know that for Please state your name and address for the record. And also, I'm going to ask again, please don't shout out or comment or anything like that. It's It really is distracting and it takes away from their
time. >> Hi, my name is Norie Coleman. I live 52 East Street, East Hampton. Um, I want to know if you guys have ever heard the saying, charity begins at home, because that's something that I've always taught my children. And East
Hampton is our home. And as a citizen of East Hampton, we say that we're a welcoming city, but are we welcoming the our citizens or our our citizens first?
Because our state has put out $8 million in the fiscal year of 2025 for emergency shelters of illegal immigrants. And everybody's so surprised at inflation. Wow. Oh, we've we're everything's
inflating. I wonder why. I wonder why our taxes are going up. And I am a first or second my father was an immigrant from Yemen. He was a legal immigrant. I have siblings that have legally and paid
money to come into this country legally. We are paying the cost of illegal immigrants and that is why we have inflation. We are welcoming city, but we're not welcoming our own residents, citizens of East Hampton, because we're
going to raise our taxes to pay $30,000 a year rental assistance for each illegal family. My my two daughters are still living at home. One's going to school for nursing. She's working full-time as an assist as a CNA. The
other one is working full-time as a behavioral analyst. They can't afford their own homes. They're still living at home because we don't put our own citizens first. Bad politics make bad politics. And that's what's happening in America and
it trickles down to each city in East Hampton. We're seeing that. Thank you. >> Thank you. Please state your name and address for the record. Um, Patty Cavali, Maxine
Circle. I first want to commend you and thank you for allowing us to speak and I'm really impressed with this council. I'm I'm loving the fact that you are considering considering our elderly, our low-inccome. In my line of work, I get calls for the people that are losing
their homes because of your decisions. I have to try to help them or make them understand that they're losing everything they worked their whole life for. And I cry at my job because of it. So I am so happy to hear you consider
them because they don't have anybody to go to bat for them. Elderly people have worked their entire life. People can't retire because they can't afford to. I know Mr. Wrist and Mayor Derby think that this is just a little bit of money.
But for a lot of people out there, and I know that for a fact, it is more than just a little bit of money, it's it's means they're going to lose their homes. And it's happening. Believe me, it's happening. You ever want to talk to me outside this meeting, I'll tell you. No
facts, no personal information, but it's a fact. And it breaks my heart. And I am so happy to hear you take them into consideration. And I thank you for that. Trust me. Mayor Derby, I heard you talk about >> You're talking to the
>> I'm sorry. Yeah. >> One of his comments was um how concerned he is about the employees. Well, yes, we're all concerned about the employees, but do they all live in East Hampton? Are they all residents of this town? Is
he putting the employees above us residents? That disturbs me. I thought he was our mayor, not the employees mayors. We're all in the private sectors. We all can lose our job any time, any day. Our insurance costs have
gone up and we compensate. I think you have to sit back and compensate within our budgets. You can do it. I'm in the financial arena. You can go line by line. You can make adjustments. You can make cut. And yes, they hurt. But you've
got to do that first. The first thing you're going for is the expense of a special election. adding more cost to an already distressed situation. I'm sorry, that doesn't make sense to me as a resident in the financial arena. Spend
more money. What are you telling us? I don't understand it. So, please please consider this. There are other ways to solve this. you have to use your your your ingenuity and the the the residents in this town do have a
lot of knowledge and thank you for acknowledging that also. So I do commend this council and thank you. >> Thank you very much. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Jess Atkins Barber, 22 Vod Street, East Hampton. Hello city council. I'm a 10th
grader at East Hampton High School and the amazing East Hampton school system has raised me my entire life. As the budget override looms over everyone, it's important that we work together and stay connected as a community to push through this time. I think that everyone understands this override will be hard
on many. But we live in a country that is based on a social contract. An agreement between the government and the people that if we pay taxes, we will in turn get things like police, fire, senior services, schools, and the upkeep of our infrastructure. This idea dates back to the 1600s and has been reflected
in the founding principles of the US since 1776, the birth of our nation. So, as many may disagree with the override, I think it's important that the city moves forward on one to continue the promise it has shown to its residents for generations. East Hampton is a little city with a big heart, and we
need to be cautious and caring towards not just each other, but you, the city council and the mayor, as we move forward through this time of financial uncertainty. I also want to mention that I could not begin to imagine East Hampton Schools without every single teacher, staff member, club, sport, art,
and program there currently is. Thank you. >> Thank you. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Okay. My name is Kathleen Joss. I live at 60 Division Street. That was tough to follow. I just like to go back.
>> I believe that you can do a great job. >> Okay. So, I didn't intend to speak this evening, but something that was said by the mayor within the first beginnings of his talk was six to eight more liquor licenses. And I'm concerned about six to eight more liquor licenses here in this
town. Where would they be? Do we really need them? Are we going to be a party town? Um, I'm a walker and I walk a lot and you might as well rename Plain Street 191 because they go down there like they're doing something on the
highway. Um, and I please donate, you know, please allow me to be your collector. Let me give out tickets and I will raise you money for this town and take none for myself because there is nothing but speeding going on in this
town on every road that I walk. Now today I just happened to went go past fire ants. There was an accident there with this little red sports car all crunched up and I'm thinking on this dry day on an early afternoon, why is this car in that condition? Why, you know,
why does you need a fire department? You need the the ambulance. There's this whole big thing going on because two people couldn't control their cars. So, you're gonna add six to eight more liquor licenses to the town. I'd like to know why. And I don't think they're
going to make that much more money for you. Um I would raise more money if I gave out speeding tickets. And be the be the speeding trap. There are we live we have lived in many different places. There's a town that's a speed trap. Don't speed through it and you won't get a ticket. Back in the old days, speed
and tickets used to be $100 and then 50 $10 for every mile you you went over. So, it was a $150 ticket most of the time for most people. So, I don't know why you're afraid to give out speeding tickets. And I know it's a manual thing. It costs people to have a guy out there
doing this, but be the speed trap. Let people know if they go through East Hampton, they're going to get a ticket. Period. And all you have to do is scare them for a while. It doesn't have to be forever. Anyway, that's all I have to say. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Please state your
name and address for the record. >> Hi. Um, Carol Broer, 72 Oliver Streets. Carol with a K. Um, I'm so against the override. I think we need to live within a budget. I think uh the I want to say when the mayor was speaking, it was all
I could think of was blah blah blah blah blah. All we hear is fire school, you know, one minute health benefits on the rise. Well, I just had a major surgery and have had major surgeries, several. I'm a retired uh disabled retired ER
nurse by not by choice, but by health. I know the cost of health care. I know what I pay. I know what it costs me continually to go for all the appointments that I have and surgeries that I have and and physical therapy. Um, we need to make the cuts. Talk about catastrophic. If you want to use the
buzzwords that try to to cause fear in people. Um, one minute it's health costs. Well, no, then it's fire, then it's police, then it's school. We always use those buzz buzzwords when we looking for, you know, the town city's looking for money. It's always the road pot's going to get us more road money. Pot's
going to get us more school money. I don't see it on our roads. I don't see improvement on our roads. I don't see the services that we're getting for supposedly budget. Um, I'm I'm just terribly against it. um that's what's happening. Let's bring we don't need more low-income housing or
moderate income housing um to to add to our sewer cost and add and and this isn't just a property a real estate tax on the questionnaire that that that was put out um maybe it was a sample questionnaire for the yes no it's not just real estate taxes it's it's
personal property personal property taxes people need to look that up what that means with the state and with the city and what you can do with that and what fees you can get charged for against personal property, machinery, different things on your property um
that can be taxed. Um so I'm I'm very much against it. We need to live within budget. We all need we've all lived in budgets. I've had to cut out so much. Uh I couldn't even afford a dog because he can't afford the food. He can't afford the veterary bill. Um we all have to
pinch our pennies and I think the city needs to start doing that as well. um and stop hiring people on with grant money that ends up being a permanent position uh benefit position when it was only supposed to be temporary, excuse me, a temporary position. Um it's
garbage. Be transparent. That's bologoney that anything's transparent. Nothing has been transparent. Um thank you. I do appreciate your time. I do apprec the questions that were brought up. I do appreciate the voice thing because I had my vocal cords on one of my surgeries that was cut and I
couldn't talk. People don't know how precious a voice is. >> Thank you. Thank you. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Chris O' Conor, 21 Ashley Circle. I am Adam adamantly opposed to the 2 and a half override. I will start with some
facts. Number one, East Hampton citizens did not cause the $8 million gap. And I take the 8 million million as being 6.9 plus the 1.1 that was referred to by Mayor uh Derby. Number two, East Hampton citizens were not told about this until
we were $8 million in the hole. Not at $2 million, not at $4 million, and not even at $6 million. Number three, Mayor Derby wants East Hampton citizens to pay $7 million in tax increases to cover that gap. Number four, elected officials
are required to make the cuts necessary to balance the budget just as we do in our own budgets at home. That would take care of the current crisis at hand, the crisis created and allowed by our elected officials by our city processes.
A former city councelor, Owen Zarrett, had posted an online uh entry on April 15th that I really, really appreciated and is related to these facts. He shared that he recognizes and even partially owned the lack of diligence and
attention needed for East Hampton's budgeting stewardship in in the past and that potentially contributed to this gap and that the business financial acumen is not as present or strong in the elected officials as it perhaps should
be. I really appreciated Owen's transparency and his intent to help us improve and assist East Hampton to be better and going forward. You can actually feel his sincerity in his post.
By identifying the problems, owning he was probably a part of that and then suggesting how we move forward is honest and it's helpful. The huge $8 million gap in our operating budget is indeed evidence of this collective oversight. Clearly, there is more to this budget
than just transportation cost and healthcare. There's a quote by Albert Einstein that says, "No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it." This highlights the idea that
problems cannot be solved the same way that the thinking by the thinking that created them. Therefore, going forward, it's obvious we need a different model and mindset to operate from and diligence adhered to the same. This
should include this should include we cannot be everything to everybody and that is okay. We are acting and spending like we are a big city. We are not. We cannot take on projects, expenditures, etc. that have unfavorable associated risk.
We cannot expect anyone to come and save us. The state funding has decreased and will continue to do so because of said policies. We need to embrace our independence. It's not going to feel good, but we will feel good at the in the end. Vote no on the override. Thank
you for your attention. >> Please state your name and address for the record. >> Jen Sandler, 26. Um, yeah, thanks for um for being here and for listening. And I am struck by um by the the frustration of folks um about
how we got here. Um and I honestly don't know exactly how we got here. Um and um but but a lot of things do make sense to me which is like some the the notion that we can only increase our revenue by 2.5%. And that is not what inflation is
and we all know that. Um so it makes sense that things have gotten out of whack. why we only have a month to figure this out is problematic, right? And so there should be some accounting for that. Um, and also like here we are and I get that and I think you get that.
Um, and I think so I think that there is a there there is a there is in the room obviously um the room is evidence um on all sides of a desire for a more democratic process for making decisions about our budget. Um, and I think we
could have a more democratic process. I think we could involve citizens more regularly um in um engagement with city budgets um with stating what their priorities are with stating when there is scarcity, what do we want to to cut, right? And what don't we want to cut?
Um, and everyone's going to have different ideas and you're not going to resolve it in three minute, you know, increments of, you know, a a water hose of I mean, it's you're sitting here and listening and I appreciate you listening and this isn't this isn't this actually isn't what democracy looks like. Like it's not it's the best we've got, but
it's not um it's not the best we can do. So I am hopeful that that at the very least that this will lead to a more democratic discussion about what our values are and how we put our money where our mouth is with respect to the override. We obviously need you, I
think, to vote for us to have an override vote because we should decide. You shouldn't decide. We should decide. Um and we do need a lot of information in order to make a good decision. This is not a great timeline for us to have a lot of information. And so that's problematic and we got to do the best we can to educate as many of ourselves as
possible about what it would mean to pass an override and what it would mean to not pass an override for real for each of us. Um I don't understand why we can't pass a progressive tax. I don't understand why we why we have to flat tax everybody the same because there are a lot of people in this city who can
afford it. And the notion that we wouldn't pass an override and those people who can afford to save the really crucial services of this city is tragic in my view. Um we should have a chance to to force the people who can afford it and we should protect the people who
can't afford it. And the fact that we can't figure that out is a problem. It shouldn't be this sort of voluntary charity thing. It is government's job to compel the people who can afford to pay it to pay it and to also protect the um the folks who can't who are on fixed income and who don't have the funds to
um to to scrape and do this. It's going to hurt everybody, but um but it's it it'll decimate some people's budgets and it'll just be like a real bummer for a lot of people. So, it's okay for it to be a bummer. >> Thank you. Uh next, also I just want to
remind folks um when you're speaking, you're speaking to the council. So don't look to the mayor or look to everyone else, right? You're you're talking to the council, right? So please state your name and address for the record. >> Uh Carl Prawl, underline farm 15 Tori. I
didn't come prepared with pen or paper, so this is going to be scattered. I'm sorry for that, but I did hear Mayor Derby uh mention that we're going to turn over every rock, every stone, and look for cuts everywhere. I'm hoping we're going to do the same thing,
looking for different sources of revenue. This is clearly a problem that's not going to solve itself. Two and a half increase every year, inflation the way it is, fuel the way it is, apparently gravel the way it is, right? It's not these numbers are not
going to equal. So, what is the city doing to pursue new lines of revenue? You know, new liquor licenses, great. Attracting developers, great. But that really takes a lot out of our control and has been repeated by others in the
room and I think we all know the state's not coming to save us. Washington DC is not coming to save us. So I would really love it if as we're going through this period and I'm kind of happy I lost the election right now. So good luck guys.
Um I'd really love it if we're looking at more ways of getting revenue. I know for a fact that under Mass General law chapter 59 section five every like Williston is not due their
property tax nullification like every year the assessor has to go and look at that and decide if they're serving the public good or if they're actually serving a limited membership and that's in Mass General law. We could be looking at how we get our fiber optic back might
cost us some money but that's revenue. Why don't we do trash pickup in town? That's revenue. Why are we not looking at imminent domain on Eversource who is gouging everyone in this room to control some funds? And not saying any of this is possible. I have no idea. It's
shooting for the stars. But if we're looking for cuts everywhere, we need to be looking for revenue everywhere as well. And that might mean expanding local government. That might mean offering more services here in East Hampton and not turning to USA trash.
not turning to republic, not turning to ever source or national grid or all of these corporate entities that councelor jam ragu very well put out are just sapping us the parasites on this community and until we build up the parallel systems
the alternates here in town. We're not going to get out from this and we're just going to be facing the same situation next year or in 3 years or in 5 years or whenever it gets back there. We need to be able to control the cost of our lives. So, please look under every rock and every stone, but let's
find new revenue. Maybe it's speed traps. Thank you. >> Thank you. Please state your name and address. >> Caroline Kushing, Main Street Precinct 4. And um listening to everybody and hearing different opinions,
the question before you tonight is to have an override or not to over have an override. And it seems important to have the override and listen to people's voices um which you're doing tonight. And um I I'm I'm kind of speaking to the the
pyramid the grading idea. Um because things are so late, we have one chance and it's all or nothing is what I am hearing and I just listening here I you know googled this like South Hadley
has a higher per capita than East Hampton even. So people with more means in uh South Hadley and they couldn't pass things. Um I I hear that there might be challenges with communicating it but maybe we need
to take on the communication challenge >> to have something uh rather than nothing and um this gets in we will talk more about this but you know the idea like 2.5 it doesn't
meet inflation there are there are factors beyond control there are larger factors factors within the state factors within the government um at the federal level and I think people are tire I'm tired I'll say this of being told to
live within our means people who are living within their means who just want to have decent schools while at the national level there are tax cuts for billionaires and we spend $1 billion a day on Iran and you cannot fix these
things only we can only you can set up the uh context for us to do the override and be in dialogue with each other. So, thank you. >> Thank you. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Hi everybody. I'm Sam Hunter. I live at
8 Mayor Street. Um and I'm on the school committee. I'm not speaking necessarily on behalf of the school committee. Um I'm asking the city council to please vote tonight to support the $6.9 million override um uh special election on June 9th, which is the next step in this pro process. The reason I think it's really
important to do that tonight specifically is because all of this needs to get out in the public and we can't really do that until we have that step. So, we won't know what cuts are going to look like until we know that that this is the next step. So, we've
been waiting on this step to happen so that we can move ahead in um kind of understanding and communicating more what various scenarios might look like. Um, I will say, uh, I, you know, Prop 2 and a half passed in 1982. Um, we can't
raise property taxes by more than 2.5% um, since 1988. And, um, the rate of inflation since 1982 has been on average 3.5%. Just with the way that math works, this was going to end up happening at some point. And the fact that it's happening in so many communities right
now, I think is a real testimony to just like how financially conservative and shrewd our our small towns are. Um, I'll just also say when we're talking about low-income folks, this this is definitely something that is going to affect some people more than other others. But one of the things that also
happens if you're living on a limited budget is you begin to lose services uh that you received before when the city can't pay for them. So, for example, we currently have full day preschool. Finally, we finally have full day preschool again in town. This is the number one issue I hear from parents. Uh
one of the number well number two or three uh that I hear from parents is that they want access to full day preschool so they can go to work. And if this doesn't pass, um we're not going to have full day preschool anymore. So those families are going to have to either stop working or they're going to have to find other sources of child
care. And they're not going to be able to find sources of child care that match the cost of them attending um our full day preschool. So the the other thing is we offer a summer uh food program. We offer we operate that at a slight um loss to the district. Any child can go.
There's no eligibility. You just show up, you get free food. We It's a slight loss to our district, but we've always thought it was in keeping with our vision for the city and in keeping with what the priorities of the city were. We want kids to have access to food in the summer. Uh because we're operating it as a loss, we have to consider cutting it
for next year if we don't pass the override. And that means that families who might have been spared an override um will then have to find um more uh room in their budget for groceries. So like this is not a zero sum like people are going to only pay more when there's an override. We're all going to pay more
whether or not there is an override. Um so I'm asking you all to um follow the process. Let us have this public conversation in public. Um and also, you know, I'm trying to put information out online kind of as I get it and as it's available. So, please um feel free to
talk to me about what would be helpful in that regard. Thank you everybody. >> Thank you. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Hi, Dan Sadonic. I'm on the board of assessors. Uh but I'm not representing the board tonight. I'm just speaking on
my own behalf. I've seen a rough draft of the numbers and it doesn't look good. I would encourage you, you've taken in a lot of information tonight. I would encourage you to put the question forward at 6.9,
but if you don't feel that that's going to pass and that it's too much, offer a lower alternative because I personally feel some people would vote for a lower number that wouldn't vote for 6.9.
And any question you put forward, if 50 pacing, we don't do our job and get the information out. No override is going to pass. If it's a $100, if it's a million dollars, if it's $7 million, it's not going to pass if the people don't know
what is going to take place, what's going to get cut. And I think I'm glad I'm on this side of the podium and not sitting there and having to make this decision. But I would request that you approve the 6.9.
And if you feel that's too high, let the voters decide, but include another number. what you come up with as a number that's lower. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mayor Derby. We do have some >> I know. I know. Before we get to the
folks online, just real quick, there were a couple of questions that folks had asked just to provide some information. Uh why didn't we have a treasurer? >> Um so, um in the previous administration, there was uh some turnover in the finance department.
there was some restructuring. Um and uh the last treasurer we had ended up having to leave for personal reasons. Uh it was um you know I think that there was an effort to replace the treasurer. Uh it just took a significant amount of
time which I think ended up being around 8 months. >> Great. Uh just real quick, you mentioned this why six to eight uh liquor licenses. How does that impact? >> Yeah. So I mean huge. We're not talking about bars. We're talking about um the ability to capture more restaurants in
the city. Um we do have a local option restaurant tax. So having more restaurants in the city drives more economic development, but it also drives more revenue. Um and we have limited sources um locally to raise revenue. Um,
restaurants are one of those places where we can raise revenue and it, you know, I know a lot of people that have opened restaurants and and have restaurants and unfortunately the the markup on food is is very small. Um, and so in order to to have a successful
restaurant, you really need to have a liquor license to be able to allow people um to drink with their meal. >> And just real quick, uh, we've touched on this a little bit, but why only a month to figure all this out? Yeah, like I said before, you know, this is um in relation to the fact that Free Cash did
not get certified until March. Again, um that is related to the fact that we didn't have a treasurer for so long. Um that we had to hire a consultant to help us reconcile our books and um those books when they got reconciled, that kind of starts the process of being able
to certify for cash, which didn't get certified till March. >> Great. Thank you very much. >> Follow up on that. Uh, can we get to the people online and then >> your call? >> Uh, let me go to the people online and then we'll come back. All right.
>> So, we're going to go to the people online. Thank you so much. So, we're going to start with the folks online. Julie Slavit, I see your hand is raised. Can you please state your name and address for the record? And you will have to unmute yourself.
Julie, can you hear us? We can't hear you. Um, Julie, we're going to come back to you. Liz Perry, please unmute yourself. State your name and uh address for the record. >> I think we got
>> Okay, now we have >> Hi, not here. Sorry. Um, hi. I'm I'm Liz Perry. Um I live in WI 3. Um so I had um I had one question and then one comment. Um and the question that I had was um
why is it that the the budgets are being um cut by the size of the budget versus what is important to the community. Um you know it just seems like education is important so let's not cut that one as much even though it's the largest
budget. And then my statement is without the the two budgets being presented to the city council, it feels weird that you're going to be voting on this override. Now, I know that there is a deadline for it to be voted on for us to call the election in time without
getting sued, but I would wait till the absolute deadline, which I think you have another week before the budgets are in front of you because as you were talking about confusing the public, the headlines tomorrow are going to read city council voted for an override,
which is going to give people the impression that that's that you had the budget in front of you and it was informed decision. I would like you to suspend this this vote tonight and wait for the next week when you have the two
budgets in front of you before you decide to call for an override. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh Julie, we have you. Uh please state your name and address for the record. >> Julie Slavet, 14 Nicholls Way. I
couldn't find where my my unmute button was. >> You're good. >> So, I just I have a few questions um and a few comments. One of them is um I actually remember voting no on Proposition 2 and a half. It was the first time I voted. Um and Proposition 2
and a half is um a really stupid was a really stupid law to pass. Um and it's unbelievable that it's still in existence, honestly. Um, property taxes are also a really um a really um dumb
way to um to support local government. You know, they're just it's not equitable. It's it's not a good way to support local government. But that's sort of what we're stuck with. Um but one of the, you know, one of the things to think about is that the value of our
homes in East Hampton um is directly related to the quality of the schools. the quality of our streets, the quality of our commercial district. So, people should think about that. Um, I'm very, my husband and I are very privileged and live in a really wonderful condo that's
at the high end. Um, but we know that the schools and all the public services that we get in this town are directly related to us um maintaining and and impre improving that value. Um, the other point I wanted to make is that um,
it was difficult tonight. This stuff is really complicated and it would have been very useful to have some slides. The mayor talked about having some infographics. I don't know why those weren't shared. Somebody mentioned communication um, and this you and
communication needs to really improve um, because misinformation is, you know, already out there about this. Um, the other thing is that this is your override. I don't, you know, the mayor can say it's not his override, city council can say it's not their override. This is your override. Um, so it's
really, um, your job to sell this, um, and to ex in a way that explains it to people. I know that you can't tell people how to vote, um, but people really need to see the impact of this um, on on residents. Um, I think that's
really important. the again the a budget reflects the values of the community um which is why the school budget is so big um such a big portion of the budget. Um I would just recommend a couple of things. Um one of them is that
>> you have 30 seconds. >> Hello. >> You have 30 seconds. >> All right. That a task force on impact be set up and that a task force on revenue be established. I don't know why we don't pay for parking in East Hampton.
Um, uh, and thank you very much. >> Thank you. Uh, Leslie Sh. >> Thank you. I'm Leslie Sh. I live on Nashanic Street. Um, some people will say, "You, Ren, this doesn't affect
you." Well, I'm telling you, and Nathan Marque told you, it will affect all of us. My landlord isn't going to absorb the increased cost. And frankly, I'm surprised he hasn't raised the rent already. He's not in business to give away. His expensive has already risen,
have already risen. Fuel, utility, building maintenance, and materials have gone up. Now, my husband and I have basically been retired most of this century, and we thought we'd be comfortable, but nobody ever thought the
cost of living would go up as high as it has. There are some weeks I'm at the food bank. We haven't gone out to eat or to any sort of event unless you count the hospital and the doctor as you know a real long time.
But between 2015 and 2025, we had an average inflation rate of 3% a year. Now, some people will say, well, you know, 3% and we can only raise 2.5. We shouldn't be that far out of whack. But that's the consumer price index.
That is not the cost that government things pay. We have it doesn't include the cost of salaries, educational material, health insurance, workers comp, gravel, the cost of black top.
With supply chain issues and some corporations making outrageous profit, there's no way the city could keep up with only two and a half% a year. But now we find the city is short by a lot. And it's not that we've been poorly
managed, but I will admit there have been a couple of hairbrain commitments made, especially using those COVID relief funds on permanent positions. But that's in the past. We can't go back and undo them. We can sit here all night and
say that was a bad decision and so and so is to blame for it. But that's not going to get us where we are today. There's no sense in blaming the select board when most of them haven't even been there more than I'd
say six years. I mean I can see three who've been there that longer than that. Um, I know that things are going to have to be cut back. I just hope it's not too far. Fire and EMS already run at
skeleton levels. Couple of weeks ago, we needed mutual aid from Southampton, Northampton, and Barnes. And then next week, we had a fire at one of the mill buildings. Can you imagine if our fire department were not as well
trained and well equipped as they were to find that fire before it spread? We'd really be out of luck then if our mills went up. >> Leslie, speaking of >> Leslie, your time is up. >> Okay. >> Do you want to finish that thought or
Okay. Well, I was just going to say don't cut the library because if you cut the library, you won't be able to use the public library anywhere in the state. >> Great. Thank you so much. >> Thank you, Leslie. Uh Sean, you're up
next. Please state your name and uh address for the record. >> Uh John Abbott Summer Street. Um, so I just uh wanted to uh you know have folks acknowledge uh that this is in fact um larger forces under control. Um I
appreciate councelor Jenna Demar McUade mentioning that um this is you know an outli stealing from the the citizens of Massachusetts and the citizens of East Hampton and federal money that gets pulled from the state budget also gets p pulled from city budgets. Um so and
that's on top of um as previous speakers pointed out um a really bad decision back in the 80s to limit the amount of increases we could have through fun cities um at a rate that is well below inflation. So nothing was ever going to keep up. So that's obvious. Um and uh so obviously I support um being able to do
the override to try and correct some of those decisions from the past. Not the decisions made by the city but rather the decisions made to limit the uh amount that cities could adjust their budgets and the flexibility that they had. Um, I for one wish that we could go for the full uh override that we need, the full eight and a half or whatever
that was being mentioned earlier. Um, and I understand that may not be politically feasible. And I also understand that there's a lot of folks that this is going to be um very, you know, very difficult to deal with. Um, but it's going to be very difficult to deal with no matter which way we go. Service cuts are also difficult to deal with, even if folks don't want to admit
that sort of thing. But we really need to be able to cover the budget to uh to have stability to get us through to some possibility of not having Trump in charge anymore because that's the point at which like maybe we'll get some stability in the country again and maybe we'll like stop dealing with these uh
you know insane random things happening to us, the tariffs, the wars, all the other stuff that's happening. Um but I also want to support the person who spoke earlier that said that we need to find uh new ways of raising revenue. And I want to point out that there is other things that we can do that we're already working on. For instance, councelor
Jamrock McUade's uh zoning ordinance updates. Uh infill is infinitely uh more uh cost effective than building than uh than building out new neighborhoods because you're already using your existing infrastructure. So it doesn't really cost you much more, but it does
raise more property taxes for you. Um so it is the city centers, the dense areas tend to support tax- wise um the rest of the city. Um, that's almost certainly true in East Hampton, although I haven't been able to verify that yet. Um, but it's true almost everywhere. Um, to go
along with the uh the things be being able to do things like zoning updates. Um, and finding other revenue because finding revenue is very important. Um, you know, we could even go a little bit more uh exotic. We could look at things like a land tax instead of a property tax because really when you get right down to it, a land tax is a much more
efficient way of um taxing the amount of support that any given property needs compared to uh you know in terms of like the percentage of budget that any given particular property takes up. Um and uh and then the last thing I wanted to briefly touch on was I do think that we
should do a lot of communication and I hope that both uh you know this body and everybody who works for the city um will will go ahead and like embrace their expertise and you know let people know what's going on and and help us figure out what we should be doing. One of the
things that has always like your time is >> the people that we hire to be experts. >> Sean your time is up. Please finish your thoughts to do that. >> Great. Thank you so much. Leslie Button, you are up. >> Leslie Button, Five Fox Run, East
Hampton, Massachusetts. So, thank you for the opportunity to speak. Um, so I'm going to say first of all that I have a lot of experience managing budgets at a significant level. No, not a $65 million level, but a significant level. And one of the things that I had to do as part
of preparing a budget for the future is tax on um anticipated costs in increased costs of doing business for certain materials um for like a three-year period of time. So here's my I guess
it's a I don't know this question or suggestion. Um, I was able to find the FY26 budget on the government website, city east of East website. Um but in terms of transparency
um what is sort of lacking for me as a resident is there's the proposition 2 1/2% level uh funding increase which I understand but what are the contractual
costs of increase for other things um so for example um if there's a contract with health care insurers for increased costs for uh employees. What is that level? Um
what is the level of increases for uh the contract with the teachers association for example and so forth and so on. You get my idea. I think um I think that that is one of the pieces for me that is missing. Um it is here we are
the next fiscal year is said to be in like two two months. Um and it's not just what we're facing in 2027 but what's beyond that and how can city council and others to make that more
transparent to people. And I know this it's an incredible amount of work and I appreciate everything any everybody has done. Um, but I think that's one of the missing missing pieces for people is how did we get here? Um, and how do we
anticipate that for the future? >> Thank you. >> Great. Thank you, Leslie. Um, Mayor Derby, there's a couple questions if you don't mind just answering them. I think they've been discussed, but um, and then I want to make sure that Councelor
Kisinski has his follow-up question. uh why is the budget uh being cut proportionally? So, it's about equity and fairness. Um, you know, the the largest uh component
of the budget. I mean, as we look across the city um in order to be fair needs to absorb the largest impact if we're looking at cuts because smaller departments would not be able
like I met with some departments today that are two people. um that's a significant difference than a department that has hundreds of people. Um and so you can't really spread out the the impact across a twoperson department in
the same way you can across a department that has dozens and dozens of people. So it's it's just about fairness. >> Why can't we wait another week? Um, >> hang on just one second. We're gonna find There it is.
>> Yeah, there you go. Um, so waiting another week, I think it puts us very close to the deadline. Um, I think that, um, with this timeline that we're on, well, it's tight. Another week doesn't really change that. It's still tight. Um and you know while um we
originally um were on a different timeline which was much tighter than this timeline. Um so you know I feel comfortable enough with looking at the June 9 um date for the election to be able to have this amount of time to be able to give people
the information that they need. Um you know I mean obviously this was not something that we planned to do. This was not something we wanted to do. And honestly, we knew that we probably were and going to have to do this. I I talked about it at the senior center building
committee weeks ago when I said when, you know, we knew that there was a deficit that we thought we could plug for this year and then we were going to have to plan potentially for an override next year and we would have a whole year. That was the timeline I wanted.
Um, this this timeline is not ideal, but it's the timeline that we have and that, you know, we're going to have to work with what we have. >> Great. And I think I mean this was a question but really I think it's more just a statement. Um so you don't need
to respond to this and then I'll turn it over to councelor Kisinski. But I think someone said can we improve communication? Um and I think that that's something that this council needs to do and I think anyone working on this override if we pass it this evening uh
we really need to do what we can to improve that. So I appreciate you asking answering those questions but councelor Kwisinski uh you had a followup. Well, just to make things clear, I think for everybody, everyone seemed to have a lot or rather many people had the question
>> why such a short time frame and we hear the the reason from the past well the tre you we didn't have a treasurer we didn't have the information we but why people need I think need to understand why only six weeks now why not
two months three months so that we can time this out have folks consider it be part of a process. Be transparent. Be open. >> Mhm. >> And I I think it's the answer is all because of the budget that's coming out. But we need to hear that from you.
>> So there's two answers. Um and I'll say the first one because we've already talked about this. Um schools have a a statutorial deadline to notify teachers at the end of the school year if they are going to be returning. That deadline
is um June 15th. Uh originally we thought it was June 1st. Thankfully it's June 15th. Um with the June 1st timeline that would have put us at the overhead at May 26th. That would have been like I said earlier a very short timeline. Um so that's one of the pieces. The other
piece is the city budget uh does need to be passed um before July 1st. Um so you know that's we need to have a balanced budget state law. Um and so that's one of the reasons those are the two reasons
why now this timeline is where it is. >> Um and and can I is it possible to just there was a question that um was asked and I wanted to address it. Uh it was about uh cannabis establishments. Mhm. >> Uh and I think a lot of people, you
know, rightfully so, when those came into the city, one of the things that happened was there was a host community agreement and there was also um a community impact agreement. So those two things cost the dispensaries a significant amount of money that they
paid to the city. Um that money is completely gone. Uh, I did not get to see any of that money when I when I became interim mayor. That money was spent. We do still, however, bring in a local option excise tax. Um,
and I will say that that local option excise tax is, and I don't have the exact number, so but I I do know that it's in the $300,000 range. So, that's what we're getting. Um it's it's not the big money that was originally which would ended up being you know we had a
cannabis um mitigation impact fund I believe we called it. Um and we funded you know an ambulance we funded road improvements and and flashers at crosswalks and you know but that money was spent. Um and so really now all we have is the local option tax. >> Great. Thank you for answering that
question. Um so as a process um I think what we need to do is we need to decide whether or not we want to move forward with this um option. So I think what we have to do is I need to receive a motion
um and then we need to have a conversation about uh whether or not there's going to be amendments to that particular motion. I think that's just going to be the cleanest opportunity for us to kind of move forward. Um, but councelor Pete, do you have your hand up? >> I would prepared to make that when you're >> Okay, great. So, I think that's going to
be easiest for us to then begin to engage in this dialogue about do we have this or not have this? So, uh, Councelor Pete, would you like to make a motion? >> All right. I would make a motion that the city council sub special election for June 9th, 2026 to vote on a proposed
tax levy override of $6,900,000. >> Second. So, we have a motion and a second to set a uh special election for Tuesday, June 9th to discuss the um proposed uh tax
levy override. >> No, go ahead. >> That's not what I heard. >> What did I say? >> I I >> I say things wrong all the time, but >> we weren't discussing anything. We were we were setting instructing I believe
instructing the clerk to schedule in a a >> is that that's the motion. So what would be really helpful is if we read the actual >> Oh yeah, I'll do the actual do the actual >> um Okay, it's uh
>> in accordance >> this one. Okay. Yep. >> I'll do it again. Better. Uh I I retract my previous motion. May I retract my second? >> Okay. >> Retracted second retracted motion to please move forward. >> I will make a motion that in accordance
with Massachusetts general laws part one title I don't know my n um chapter 59 section 21 CG. I hereby call on the east >> okay so city council hereby
>> yeah the city uh yeah I mean to the city council accept the following language for an override of proposition 2 and a half. Um, the question submitted to the voter shall be
worded as follow or and and yet to uh and that the city council instruct the city clerk to schedule the special election with said language on Tuesday, June 9th. The question submitted to the voters shall be worded as follows. Shall
the city of East Hampton be allowed to assess an additional $6,900,000 in real estate and personal property taxes for the purpose of operating the municipal government and public schools for the fiscal year beginning July 1st,
2026? Yes or no? >> Second. So, we have a motion and a second in accordance with Massachusetts General Law Part One, Title 9, Chapter 59, Section 21 CG, that the city council will set a uh special election with the
bel the affforementioned language to be set for Tuesday, June 9th. Any further discussion? Well, I I think the question was, is this be does this become the only >> item on the special election?
>> So, would you like to make an amendment? >> Well, I I thought we would perhaps have some discussion, but I'd be happy to make an amendment. >> I think that's what we're doing. So, >> I I I would be happy to make to to suggest an amendment to to this. Great. and that is to add an additional
question to the uh ballot where the voters would be asked uh shall the city of East Hampton be allowed to assess an additional $3,450,000
dollars in real estate and personal property taxes for the purposes of operating the municipal government and public schools for the fiscal year beginning July 1st, 202026. Yes or no? >> Okay. So, we
>> Is there a second? >> Well, that's >> to the amendment. >> Uh, is there a second? >> Second. >> So, we have a motion and a second to add
uh a second question. Salvage City of East Hampton be allowed to assess an additional 3,450,000 uh in real estate and personal property for the purposes of operating the municipal government and public schools for the fiscal year beginning July 1st,
2026. Yes or no? Any further discussion? Councelor Peak. >> Yeah. Um I'm not opposed to doing something like this, but do you mind if I inquire as to where that number came from? Councelor Kuzinski, would you like to respond?
>> The number came from being closer in line to the amount of money that we were digging out of our uh reserves and stabilization last in the past
fiscal budget. So, this is a little less than that amount. It's one half of the amount. It's one half of the pain for the citizens who would vote yes to this measure as opposed to the 6.9. It's a stop gap measure. It's hoped that
the mayor it will carry us for a year or two and get us through the current process. It's also der derived from looking at the override request override questions from other communities.
Most communities opted for a two tiered system where they had one figure and a second figure. That second figure received far more votes than the first figure.
I think we need to give this city every chance possible to move forward and our citizens the right to move forward with options. They could decide 6.9 is the number. They could decide 3.45 is the number.
They could decide zero is the number. But this gives our folks options. >> Councelor Marquee, >> I agree. Um, thank you, Madam President. I agree with um, Councelor Peak's original assessment. I believe that this
will add too much confusion. I believe that um, people will be thinking they're voting for 6.9 million and then 3.45 million. Um, I think it's too much confusions. I think a lot of the reasons
that um some of the may less informed voters that which we were in charge of communicating, I think that they'll be confused and I would be more in favor if it were possible down the road having
another special election rather than um having two ballot questions unless it was a either or like a bubble choice where it could Yes on this, yes on, and you could only fill in one. There would be three
options unless it was designed like that. >> I saw your hand, council Newton. >> Yeah. Um, I would propose 3.9. Um, but the other thing I wanted to ask about was I know we have rank choice
voting in East Hampton. Is it possible, and you probably know the answer, Tom, for this to be a rank choice question so that people, and I'm guessing it's probably no, but I just want to cl make sure. >> Councelor Peak, would you like to answer that question just because I know you
love rank choice voting? I could answer it, but I'm going to give you that. >> Yeah. No, our charter authorizes that for the election of certain officials, but we don't have anything authorizing that for ballot questions. Um, but it's a great question. >> I also heard you propose 3.9, but we're
in another motion, so we we're not doing that right. So, we already have an amendment on the floor. Uh, Councelor Peak and then councelor Jamro McQuade. >> Yeah. I just want to um since councelor Marque made my point, I just want to make sure that I'm
accurately representing my position on this. I'm not in theory opposed to the inclusion of a second number, but if there's a second number, I do think that there's a cost and a benefit to it. There's tradeoffs. I think that the
advantage is it gives us a little bit of insurance if the first number falls a little bit short that maybe the second the lower number maybe that's okay. and you know that that could be a non-trivial you know uh that could make a difference for a lot of services uh in
the situation where we don't get enough support for the full number. So I'm not inherently opposed to this. I just think that if we are doing it there needs to be a full understanding because we are the people who are putting this on the ballot, right? Like people are going to be coming to us for answers on these
things. There needs to be a very full understanding from all of our municipal leadership that there's going to be in this very short timeline an additional uh burden to educate people to make sure
that they understand that the way that these pyramid things work. If the if both pass the only the bigger number goes into effect because you're going to see people who either genuinely don't understand this or understand it
perfectly well and are just not acting in good faith who are going to say that that it's that oh so we put 3 uh 345 on there. they're going to say, "Oh, well, this is actually an 11
million override because these they're asking for 3.45 and they're also asking for 6.9." So, it's just I I'm not saying that I couldn't be talked into supporting something like this. I just this was a concern that I have heard that I've seen played out in other
communities. And if if that's what makes my colleagues most comfortable, I'm okay with it. I just want to make sure we understand the costs and benefits before we sign on to something like that. >> Madam President, may >> councelor >> I just have an information question for
>> um I'll allow it. Councelor Kisinski, >> I have an information question for the clerk that'll help I think understand some of this and that is the cost of a municipal election. >> Um yes, it's approximately 16,000 15 to
16,000. That's program programming of machines, printing of ballots, which we have to pay. >> I'm not sure everybody heard that. >> It's approximately 15 to 16,000. Um, it's just about 10,000 for the election workers during the day and then I
generally don't get paid. I can take time off if I have extra hours I put in. But it's the main crux of it is the election workers are about 10,000 for the day. And then we and we're required to have certain number of election workers by state law. Um and then there's programming of the machines. We
have the regular um machines that most people are used to using. There is an automark for people who um need assistance marking their ballot. That's just about a thousand just to program that and then printing of the ballots. >> Just to point out the cost of doing this. I I would love to be able to say
let's do it for one and then do it for another, but I think there's reason to consolidate. >> Thank you for that. Uh, and you're very much appreciated, Marian. Uh, councelor Jamar McQueen.
>> Uh, thank you, Madam President. Um, I think what's sort of troubling and tricky for me about adding in another number is just I think that while cutting the number in half would be like half the pain for the taxpayer, I don't
know if it would necessarily be half the pain for the city. Like I think that it's a little simplistic to think about budgets in that way where like it's possible to just make half the cuts and it'll be the same. It'll be half the impact. I think that we've learned that when you start making cuts, you start
having to pay for unemployment benefits. You start losing kids to choice out to other districts. And it's hard for us without the two budgets in front of us to understand what that means. like what am I giving up if I'm if I'm giving uh or if I'm you know if I'm going to the
ballot, what am I giving up? I'm sure it would be clear by then, but it just for me it seems like when we're weighing these options, it's really hard to know. It just feels like we're throwing spaghetti at a wall. Um and I hate I hate that feeling. But I also know that
the 6.9 number has been toiled over by the finance team um for a long time who have been looking at these numbers that I don't have access to. So I guess I would defer to the other members on the council that have been privy to those
conversations to sort of get a sense of the feasibility of that. And um and then I would urge everyone um that we should just be really intentional about that number. And I I don't think that we should just cut it in half. I think that we should have a wholesome discussion
about that what it means. >> Councelor Peak. >> Yeah. To that point, um there's a question that I think perhaps only the mayor can answer, but um if we were to go with a second lower
number for the budget process, would that then require us to consider three budgets? one with the full amount, one with the intermediate amount, and one with the lower amount. That is my understanding. And they are nodding.
>> Actually, hang on a second. Mayor Derby, can you for the people who can't see you nodding, could you just speak to that? >> I am nodding. >> Okay. >> Yes, it would. And and that, like I said, I just met with half of the departments today, meeting with the other half tomorrow to go over the the
second part of the budget. So that means we'd have to meet with all of the departments again for a third round of you know adjustments. Um so um yeah. >> Great. Thank you. Uh councelor Peak do you want to finish your thought? >> Sure. Yeah. I just um
look it's a stressful time for everyone and if that's something that we really decide we want to do then I don't imagine the department heads will be thrilled but it is what it is. But I just I just think that you know in terms of a budget process that we are going
through um which is going to involve a lot of I hope voter education and voter participation. Um again I'm not against this. I can be talked into it. I just I do want to just
point out that I think there is a little bit of a liability for information overload when you're I mean two budgets one thing, three budgets, you know, we'll do it. We'll get it done. It's just it's um I just I don't want us to take a vote on this and then
rec suddenly be like, "Oh, wait. That's what that means." Like that's that's a whole headache. So, I just want to just point it out. That's all. >> Other discussion? Uh councelor Schmidt? Yeah. Um, I do have a quick clarifying question. I don't if anybody here could answer this for me, but let's say we did
have the two uh questions on a ballot and one of them clearly had more people vote in favor of it than the other. Is that all we're looking at? Or if the other question had more than 51% of the vote, would that one be passing? I just
wanted to clarify that for myself and others. >> That's sure. Um, if the larger number receives 50% plus one of the votes, if it receives a majority of the votes, it passes. Uh, even if the other one gets
the 90% and that one gets 51%, the bigger one passes. If the bigger one bigger dollar amount Yeah. If the bigger dollar amount fails, >> but the lower dollar amount does receive a majority, then then and only then
would that be the number that passes. >> Okay. >> You have a follow-up question, Council Schmidt. >> Uh I have a different question. I appreciate that clarification. Um I think that's really useful for us to consider. Um I also just want to uh sort of echo the sentiment of some of my
colleagues here. I do um have some trepidation about further confusing an already complicated matter. And I do want to sort of recognize and and give my respect to uh the conversations that have been had by the the budget um task force um that they you know came up with
with that number um as as the best option that they wanted to recommend. And and I'm hesitant to to come up with just a number right the second. Um, that being said, uh, I believe somebody mentioned earlier, um, you know, uh,
sort of increasing the likelihood of of getting something out of this if if we have a lower option. People are almost always going to vote, I think, more for the lower option, right? Um, but I I fear that with these two options, we're not actually giving the complete
picture. And um this may be an additional amendment that you would want me to bring to the table. But I would actually if we're going to be adding to this um I think I would like to see that the actual number that we need for sort of solveny moving forward uh is also
included in that budget so that we're not seeing the 6.9 and saying oh that's that's the most that we need. We're actually creating you know uh the full picture for folks. That being said, if I may just put one more thing forward um
and kind of get on my own soap box for a second here. You know, we often think about communication as we just need to get the message out to people, right? Um but communication is far more complicated than that. Uh communication includes a sender of a message, a
receiver of a message, the message itself, and the noise that gets in the way of that message. Uh and so um you know thinking about the people who are going to be you know most impacted by this they may not be paying attention to
the information that we are putting out there because you they're paying attention to making their ends meet. Um, and I'm not sure that there's anything, you know, I want to see that the council and that the, you know, city does its due diligence to
put information out there, but I just wanted to also make it clear that sometimes because communication is a two-way street, there's only so much you can do to get a message out there, and there's still going to be places where your message does not reach the receiver. Um,
and so in those instances, I think simplicity is going to to work in our favor. Um, and so I just wanted to add that to the conversation that we're having here. Again, I just feel like we oversimplify communication and and the reality is there will be people who may
be reading the question for the first time at the ballot box and that's the reality of it. Um, >> great. Thank you. I saw some hands going this direction. Nope. Okay. Um, so we have a motion and
a second to uh I'll just read it again. Uh, shall the city of East Hampton be allowed to assess an additional 3.45 four five oh boy 3,450,000 uh in real estate and property taxes for the purpose of operating the municipal
government and public schools for the fiscal year beginning July 1st 2026. Um >> just wanted to put on on record I'm immuneable to uh councelor Newton's suggestion. I'm immune amanable to any
other second number. >> U so if there was further thought about that for the rationale that's fine. I'm not tied to the 3.45 >> councelor uh peak.
>> I almost said mayor but I held back. >> Um good job. >> So yeah I I think that um I I'm not sure that I'm I'm in on this number. I'm open to the idea of another number, but I think I would like to figure uh if we're going to do that to use a number that
that has sort of a rationale of saying this is the number like for instance what it could be is to say this is the number if we use the remaining reserves that we can use without damaging our bond rating. This is the minimum number we would have to be good for just this
year. And that would still leave us in a really bad spot going forward. But at least like there's some rationale to that number being tied to something and I think councelor Newton that's what you were suggesting. >> Do you want to speak to that council? >> Yeah. So I was suggesting the 3.9. Is it
possible to ask Evan a question or is that not possible? >> Um Evan Leau would you >> I think that you are maybe the numbers guy at the moment. >> Okay. Uh, can you please state your name and
role for the city? >> Sure. Uh, Evan Leo, assistant to the mayor. >> Okay. So, I'm looking at your copy >> that is looking at the proposed 2027 what was originally proposed by the departments and then the reduced and I know that the mayor has said that this
is not final. >> Correct. >> Right. However, I have also looked through it a little bit and seen that like the school department their 2.7 is already put in there even though they haven't um divvied up how they're going to do that. So, it looks like you have
gone through and you have like reduced the budget by your what you would like and it looks to be just over or just under 3.9 for the reduced versus the proposed. So, do you think it's possible that the 3.9 would cover us for next
year alone? And the mayor could answer too. >> So, I would definitely like to air to the mayor on that. I would just like to say um >> yes, I yes, that's beyond my pay scale for sure, but um what I would like to
say is that file you're looking at um that is a work in progress. I'm sure a lot of people are having a lot of questions about what this Excel file is. Um but this is um what we've been referencing with department heads through these meetings this week. Um this is also you know my
personal notes as it said is for many of you. This is also my first time going through a municipal budget process. I'm learning this along with a lot of you. Um but so some of that stuff it might seem all over the place but that's
because that's mine. We just wanted a copy to share with you that was mostly up to date as of last week. Um, great. >> Thank you. Yes. Let me >> Mayor Derby, would you like to respond? >> Yeah. So, we do have multiple um
operating budgets. So, that just happens to be Evans that uh he shared. Um, so I would just remind that that 3.9 million is um this small gap that we have right now that
does not take into account the increases that we're expecting to see. So that small 3.9 using 2 million of stabilization um is going to grow to 7.9 by the end of
next fiscal year. And let me just get the numbers right. So I know this because we've done the projections. Um it's again I I have to say this is this it compounds in um 28 9.5 million. So that if we don't pass an override that
and if we pass a small one there will be a difference between those two. Uh and then by 2029 it's 15.1 million. That's if there's no override because those costs are costs that are going to we've extrapolated the the what we've seen now
is percentage increases and we've extrapolated those across five years and without you know a significant input to balance the financial footing those are
going to continue to grow. Um, but with an override at 6.9, that is going to allow us to make cuts to be able to change the trajectory to offset those increases into the future
and minimize those. Um, with a a three a $3 million, it's we're really we're going to be back. >> So, just want to make that really clear. >> Uh, followup question, council. So, I totally understand what you're saying
and I I totally get that the 6.9 would put us in a really good place. I'm asking for just next year with 3.9 allow us to survive just next year if we were to do a second ballot question because it's either 6.9 or nothing, right? And
if we were to get nothing, >> would 3.9 make us safe for next year? 3.9 would be helpful in some respect because it would stave off um some of the cuts, but there's still going to
have to be significant cuts to >> offset the compounding piece of this that this is going to continue to grow, right? So, if we um had No, I just want to be like really clear. Last year it was $4 million out
of stabilization to to fill the budget deficit. Then I think it was somewhere in the $280,000 range, Tom, maybe you can remember more effectively than I can from tax rate stabilization. Uh and then there was uh I think there was one other line that
was onetime funds that got put towards balancing the budget last year. So that ended up being more like 4.5 million of onetime funds used to balance the budget. Which is why and you can see it now where we are with like you know potentially needing
significantly more than that. It compounds year after year. So last year it was like 4.5 million to to to plug that hole. Next year it will be significantly more. So if we only get 3.9, there's still going to be a very big gap.
Councelor, who had their hand up first? Councelor Kinski. >> I think what we're looking at is M, Mr. Mayor, is a question of not filling the gap, but
what cuts would be required at a figure of 3.9 in order to balance the budget as opposed to the cuts that would be required at zero. I mean, it would be 3.9 million more cuts, but
>> I guess what I'm what I'm really asking is, are we talking about cuts or using stabilization monies, reserves to balance the budget? Because I think the time has come for us to bite the bullet. >> So, I would say
>> I I don't think we dip into our reserves or our stabilization at this point. And you know, if if we're using good um fiscal policy, we're going to try to avoid using our stabilization fund for a couple reasons. Um one is it's you know, using those funds reduces our capacity
to fund emergency things which happen. You know, I'll remind everybody of the generator at public safety this summer that, you know, ended up being offline for I think close to 3 weeks. We had to bring in a portable generator which was extremely expensive. Right. So those
types of things happen within cities especially with aging infrastructure. Um you know I think the the other thing to consider is you know as we look at these cuts beyond preserving our stabilization which I think is important you know there are ripple effects that happen. So
if these cuts happen to the schools that's going to have a ripple effect to people's property values. Now, you know, some people you appreciate that and some people are like, "Well, I'm not planning on selling my house, so it doesn't really matter." But it it does mean something. It does affect property
values. Um, and and generally, uh, it's considered to be like a 2 to 6% decrease in property values based on like the performance of your school. Um, so that's one thing. There's the other thing. It's called the, um, I I believe it's IPO, which is the insurance rating
that our public safety, which by the way, we were at. So, um, 10 is the worst, one is the best. We were at a five for years. Last year, we got upgraded to a three. Um, you might ask, why am I bringing this up? Well, it has a significant direct impact to the price
you pay for homeowners insurance. So, every number that that changes, it impacts your property, your um your homeowners insurance pretty significantly. So, you know, we might think, well, just cut it. Like, who's going to end up paying for that? like I
don't want to pay for it. We're it's one way or another there's gonna be someone's gonna pay, right? And whether it's with higher um homeowners insurance if we make the cuts or whether
it's a loss of property value um if we make the cuts or if it's the the cost of, you know, passing an override. And I think that these are the questions that we have to weigh. Um and and these are the hard questions that I think are
important to be grappling with right now because you know again there's no perfect number. >> But there is a number that is going to get us to a place where we can kind of find stability and keep things somewhat
normal. >> Thank you. Mayor Derby Councelor Peak. >> Thank you. >> This is more to my colleagues. So feel free. >> Thank you. Um, yeah. So I just want to make sure that when we're talking about the 6.9, we're we're clear about what we're talking about here. And when we're
talking about something like a 3.9, that we're clear what we're talking about here, which again is not saying that like I think that there's an obvious case for adding a lower number just in case the the tall the higher number doesn't work. But just as clear, if a $6.9 million override passes, that does
not mean that East Hampton is in a really great place fiscally. We are still going to need to make substantial cuts. We are going to have to figure out ways to realize some long-term savings. We are going to have to realize some ways to bring in some new revenues. And we're going to have to pray that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts decides
that maybe they should find some ways given that they're the ones imposing a lot of restrictions on what sort of revenues we can actually raise that they maybe are going to help us out a little bit. that that's what but like we are
not like a $6.9 million override still means cuts and it still means that maybe that gives us a couple of years before we either have to figure out some big structural stuff or we're in a we're back in a pretty bad situation. So I
just want to be clear about that like the actual number that we'd want to look for for a long-term like like long-term viability was 8.5. We felt that that number was likely not politically realistic. So this is already a paired
down number. Now obviously would having 3.9 be better than having nothing. Yes. Like that's $3.9 million of less cuts that you need to make sort of. It doesn't actually perfectly work out that way because every cut that you make only you only realize maybe 60 cents on that
savings. But you know there's still it's something instead of nothing. And I I'm not opposed to having something instead of nothing, but I want to make sure that we understand if we're going to do this and that we're prepared to communicate to voters that a 3.9 million override,
what that really probably realistically means for the city is that if we draw down our reserves to the minimum level that we realistically can do without affecting our our credit rating,
that we can probably get one year and then have to go back to the voters again unless there's a massive deflationary period or substantial state or federal relief. That is that's what we're
talking about here is saying do we like if if you vote for that you're you're not voting that and saying all right well that's enough they'll figure it like that is that is not enough. 6.9 is enough that maybe we can figure it out for 3 years. 3.1 is maybe enough that we could figure
it out maybe for one year if we draw down all of the money we saved up over co for rainy day and also leave us in a very very vulnerable situation it and I just want to make sure that we
understand that that's the that's realistically we're you know if we give that to people as an option I'm okay with that I know I'm repeating myself here it's getting late. Um because something's better than nothing. And I I get that. But I just want I don't want
it to end up in a situation where we're talking about it like, oh, 6.9 is, you know, we're good if we get 6.9, but 3.9 and we'll figure something. That's not where we are. 3.9 we are deeply screwed as a city. 6.9 we are still somewhat screwed as a city, but we have some
options for how we figure that. we at least get a couple years to maybe figure out a way there or get some lucky breaks where the Commonwealth decides to help out or inflation slows down because we lurch into a global recession or something like that's what we're
actually talking about for for this situation. So >> yeah, >> great. So we have a again we have a motion and a second unless someone would like to say something which is councelor Jam McQuade. Yeah, I guess I have a question for clarification and then
maybe a proposal or a potential way forward. Um, so throughout this process, I've heard um it said that if we pass the override vote, if the override vote passes at the ballot in um June, we don't necessarily have to raise the full
levy capacity. Um so my question is, is that correct? And also what is the timeline for when that has to be decided? >> Councelor Peak. >> Yes, that is correct. It's something that I think um we want to be a little bit cautious about how we message it
because I think it can be confusing. Um but yeah, all the the override authorizes us to raise up to this any given year. We could just decide to raise, you know, less than what we're totally allowed to do. There's reasons why
that's probably not sound fiscal management in the current legal structure that we have, but it's true that like if we got the full override and then something very fortuitous happened like we would have the you know suddenly the state is like hey we're doubling UGGA. Okay, great. We could
just >> and and would we check your temperature? >> Yeah. >> Would we have until the end of June to make that decision? Is it is that tied to the budget itself or is that tied to another decision? >> I think that that decision would actually come into place in the fall. Um
but uh that part of the tax rate that's part of the tax rate recap which I believe happens in October. >> Okay. Um so I guess councelor J. Okay. >> Yeah. So, I guess just for my own comfortability, this is sort of where
I'm where my brain has gone because I think through the budget process, the city council and the public will have a lot more information in front of us to like look at what this actually looks like, what these cuts could look like. And I think that we have we as a council
have the power to make those cuts on a line by line basis. And I think that if we personally I feel like I would feel a lot more comfortable taking the approach of asking or putting the vote to the 6.9
and then going in during the budget process and proposing additional cuts to say we don't agree with this. Do you think that we can lower this and then make that sort of how we're pairing down that number potentially just because without
the numbers in front of us it, you know, we only have the information that the mayor mentioned and what the budget task force has done and I just that just doesn't feel like I have the d like it doesn't feel like I've been given the opportunity to do the due diligence that I need to. Um, so that's sort of where
I'm at. Yeah, I think I think city council is challenged by we're we're dealing with numbers that feel really nebulous like there's we have nothing concrete. We are being told and I there's no reason for me not to want to
believe, right? Uh but we but we are kind of dealing with numbers that yes, other people have looked at them. Yes, people have had conversations, but for the rest of us, in order to be able to make a sound decision, like maybe we haven't seen that and it doesn't necessarily make sense to me to to go
with this particular number because it's not clear to me, right, Councelor Peak? >> Yeah, I mean, I I agree. I think that some of that is just the unfortunate situation of the timeline and when we found this information and >> the recalibrations that have to go in. I don't I just I want to make it clear when I say things like this, especially
in this context. I want to be really careful about how I'm saying this that I don't think that anyone did anything improper. This just landed the way that it did. But one reality of it is that if so, we're talking about 6.9 right now. It could be that we find $300,000 of
cuts that we feel comfortable making in the budget process and then you know what that number would look like would be different. But like um it's just an unfortunate thing that we have to decide on a number now because it needs to happen
before the end of the fiscal year. And like I I don't know if this works differently in other like because I even when our our all of our financial operations were completely on time, we were still starting a budget process in
in April, you know. So, I don't know that there's there's how much better we could make it, but I I do think that that's something it's just not it's not ideal, but the reality is like we need to set a number and then we get a shot at the actual budget, which would theoretically
change that number. So, it's tricky. >> Other discussion? So, we again we have a motion and a second on the >> on the amendment >> on the amendment. Um, councelor or vice president Jadzik.
>> Thank you. Um, yeah, I I really appreciate all the discussion. It's this is not an easy decision um overall for this particular amendment um any of it. And I I guess I just wanted to share a quick thought. And so I think similar to my colleague Councelor Peak, I I would
probably prefer one number, but I'm happy to support options because I heard loud and clear tonight from the public especially that options are something that people are amanable to. Um, my my one of my
concerns with having an option, and this is not necessarily a question or even a statement, but just a concern I'm putting out there, is, and I guess maybe more for the public than anyone else, is I am concerned that if we were to put this option of a lower number, it passes. We have to come back for more
money. I'm really really concerned what that looks like for us as a community next year because the amount of stress and frustration and fear and anger that we are experiencing right now and we are barely into it at this point. We have another month ahead of us. It's going to
get a lot more intense. But I just cannot even imagine what that will look and feel like when we come back next year with a lower number. So that is my main concern that's making me sweat a little bit beyond the uh the air not
being on right now. Um, and I just wanted to put that out there really again mainly for the public because I just want people to really understand this that if we go forward with this amendment, we give you options, which again I think is is a good thing to have to be really really clear about what
that means and to not be shocked if we go down that pathway because it will have to be the next step in the process because we're not going to figure this out in a year. It's just impossible to do that >> and we're certainly not going to figure it out tonight, right? Um, I see some
hands. Who was first? Uh, Council Newton. >> I really appreciate what everyone has said and it makes me feel comfortable with doing one number. >> Council Schmidt. >> Uh, thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to express my appreciation for
that point. I think it's a really salient point. Um, and I think one of the things we've also heard from folks tonight is a desire for fiscal responsibility from the city side. And I I feel like ask, you know, giving people
the impression that the lower number is going to fix things long term um whether or not that's our intention of of you know what we're trying to communicate here. But um to then come back I don't think exhibits financial responsibility
and I don't think would be viewed that way. And I think for that reason, you know, I'm I'm further given uh pause to kind of request that smaller amount. Councelor Marquee. >> From my understanding, 6.9
is the lower number and I'm not really comfortable with voting for any amendments that fall below 6.9 at this moment. So again, we have a motion and a second on the table for uh an additional 3.4
uh 3,450,000. Um any further discussion? So all those in favor? >> I >> yeah I to uh oppose
>> I or no >> we don't do a lot of >> uh any abstensions? Uh motion fails. Um any further
amendments to add or to the main motion? Saying none. Uh all right. So we have back to the original. So, we have a the main motion of uh shall the city of East Hampton be allowed to assess an additional 6,900,000 in real estate and personal
property taxes for the purposes of operating for municipal government and public schools for the fiscal beginning for the fiscal year beginning July 1st, 2026. Yes or no? Um, any further discussion? Councelor Peak, >> I know everyone's getting really sick of
hearing my voice. I know I am. Um, >> that's why you're mayor. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. >> Okay. Um, yeah. So, there's just a couple things I just wanted to because just that I've reacted to through this process that I just want to want to point out before we we take a vote. So,
the first thing I just want to say is that like >> the way that um the city um has just I I think there's there's two important things that when we're we're talking about this with our
constituents, we need to understand as being different. And what one of them is the way that the city has um over the last few years uh taken in and managed financial information uh so that they
can make decisions in a timely and responsible manner. The other issue is the fact that 2 and a half% revenue upgrades are not going to keep up through 6 years of supply chain supply side inflation. These are two different
issues. The first issue sucks and it's not acceptable and there's a lot of blame to go around and I think that I will take a good chunk of that myself as finance chair for seeing some of these things that were behind and saying okay well they're getting
caught up and not pushing and not being maybe like a little bit more like what can we do to to help you know make sure these processes get every little bit of support they need to get caught up and and things like that or see there's certain things I saw that I I probably should
said something and I didn't. So, I I own that 100% and I think there's a lot of other people here who could say that they have a thing like that. That is a thing. It's not good. We need to fix it. There are currently things that are being done to fix it. And it's on every one of us to make sure that it gets
fixed. And that's also not why we're here. We are here because year overyear we have passed budgets that preserve the level of services that we saw the that we had the year before while
simultaneously the cost of providing those services increased massively due to many issues that are not entirely under our control. And that doesn't mean that there's not things that we spent money on that maybe
we would want back. We are human. We've messed up. I've messed up. That's that is it's true and we should be accountable for that. But fundamentally, the reason why half the communities in Hampshire County, it feels like what West Hampton, Southampton, South Hadley,
Hadley, and us, just off the top of my head, um, are dealing with this and why many other communities are staring this down next year is because this is a systemic issue. The Mass Municipal Association, who's our trade organization, put out a report called
The Perfect Storm. It's on their website. If you Google MMA the perfect storm, you'll either get that or a really cool mixed martial arts thing. But I think you'll probably get the you'll probably get the the report if you scroll down for a minute. And um it
uh it it details exactly the ways that a lot of the cool the suggestions people brought in today about how we can raise revenue as a city. we are statutoily prohibited from doing. Like there's just there's a lot of things that are tough and it talks a lot about state
government aid and the fact that it has not kept up with this obvious gap that is growing between what we are allowed to raise by the Commonwealth's own laws and the costs that each and every one of
Massachusetts's 351 municipalities face. That leads us into a situation where whatever mistakes or brilliant decisions have been made over our last 30 years as a city, we are now in a
situation where we need as each and every one of us to make a choice whether we want to pay more tax revenue for basically the same services even actually like a little bit reduced services or we whether we want to
receive substantially less services at a similar level of taxation to what we have been accustomed to. Neither one of those are good options. There's not an option here where anyone in this room is going to walk away feeling good about
what that's going on. And another person could come at this from good faith and see it in a different place than I do. And that's fine. But my fundamental thing, what I really, really think is important here is that I do believe that the citizens of East Hampton deserve a
choice in this matter. They deserve a choice in which bad thing is going to happen. And that's why I think it's important that we do put this forward. And if people want to vote no on it, that's their choice. And we will honor that and we will make the painful cuts
that we need to. But I do think they deserve that choice. And that's why I really think it's important that we do this. >> So, we have a motion and a second. Um, any does anyone have any last
comments before I speak on this matter? Councelor Jam McQuade. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam President. I just want to acknowledge again how um and again, building off of uh Councelor Peak's comments, this is not a fun situation to be in at all. Um, and we're
all sharing the burden of our community. I think that that's also something that needs to be drilled home, too. It's not us up here making decisions about the broader community. It's all of us that are needing to make these decisions together. You elected us to represent
you. Um, and I think we all take that responsibility very seriously. So, I think moving forward, um, if this vote passes tonight and, um, we put this on the ballot, I know I'm committing personally and I I know that I could probably safely speak for a lot of my other colleagues on this council that we
will be dedicating ourselves to work diligently to provide you with the information that you need um, to make an informed decision. Um, and we will do our best to answer any questions you have moving forward. >> Any other final comments from
counselors? Before I say something, um, I'd like to, um, this is a particularly difficult conversation for me to have because last
year I was the only no vote for our budget. I was the only person who advocated and said that it was a mistake to spend $4.5 million out of our reserves. M
I I am so angry with myself that I was not more vocal more so than I was. It pains me to no end to have to sit here today and look at these numbers
knowing what we were going through last year. I I spoke I spent a lot of time with our auditor asking questions, trying to understand, came into the meeting and and did the best that I could to advocate against what we were doing. And
I failed. And it pains me because partly why it pains me is As a teenager, I will not forget my mother coming into my bedroom and
telling me to be quiet. Sh. and not having an understanding of what was going on and to ask her, "What is it?" And for her to say to me, "The electric company is here. Sh." And I said, "Well, why is the electric company
here?" I didn't pay the electric bill. And so then we had our electric shut off. I will never ever forget the sound of the electricity in our home being shut off. and to stand there in silence on a
winter day at the end of the day with the sun going down and being in darkness. And my mother who was a laborer turned and said, "Oh well," and walked out because she didn't know what to do
because she had spent her entire life being beaten down by poverty. At the same time, come to find out, she owed thousands of dollars in back property tax because she wasn't able to pay her property tax.
I had to call my grandmother. I had to ask my grandmother if my mother could now come and live with her. And I had to then do the embarrassing uh act of calling my brother's wife, my sister-in-law, because I couldn't ask my
brother if I could come and live with them. And I know that there are people in this community who are not going to be able to afford this. It's just not going to happen.
And I in making this particular choice and the voters get to decide, right? We're just saying here's a vote. Here's an option for you. We're we're behind, etc. and we need to cover these costs
and as has already been said right in in in reasons that are beyond our control. But it I know that people are going to have to be forced to leave this community. People who have lived in this community
their entire life. people who, as Counselor Smith stated, are at the end of coming into the twilight of their life and are going to have to make choices that force them to
leave their community or force them to not pay certain bills or make really dramatic choices that to compromise their own well-being. And I don't, in full honesty, I don't
know the right answer. And that's why this is so difficult, I think, for so many of us because we don't know what the right answer is. We don't know the numbers. But I am committed. We're going to get something for 6.9 and
I'm going to do everything that I possibly can to cut that even more. And I know that our department heads have been working tirelessly to get those number down. They've been working creatively to try to solve this particular issue for themselves. I
understand that and we're going to do more as c as councelor Jamre McUade said we're going to find ways work diligently to bring that number down even more. I've also had a conversation with uh uh uh Representative Gomez about
trying to organize an East Hampton advocacy day where maybe some of those people who can afford uh extra cost, maybe we can take a busload of people to Beacon Hill and have a conversation about how our communities in Western
Mass are being impacted by the lack of their diligence in making sure that we also have our needs had. And so that is my commitment. I've also made a point to tell councelor Peak that he needs to meet more
frequently with our auditor. Those are things that we can do. And so I think there's there's things that we're we're trying to do that we're taking responsibility for. But at the same time, this is painful.
It is so painful. Madam President, >> Councelor Kosinski, >> you're absolutely right. There are no easy answers and there are no right decisions. That's why we're going to leave it to the public. You made a statement that you were the
only one to vote no on the budget. And I just wanted to correct the record. I recall voting no on at least three sections of the budget and making amendments to reduce other sections including the legal section. Didn't want
it to go unnoted. We've tried to make cuts. We will make more cuts and I agree with you. We'll make more this year. >> So, we have a motion and a second. Uh any further discussion? All those in favor?
>> Opposed? Abstain. Motion passes. >> I will take a motion to adjurnn. >> Some move. >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to adjurnn. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. Abstain. Oh, actually we don't
need to do that. Uh uh. Oh, no. Actually, don't feel like uh abstain. Motion passes.