Now it's easy if I didn't like the live stream. Sorry. >> Think I think I just saw something. >> Here we go. Yeah. >> Halloween recordings. >> Yes. >> Okay. I am calling the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. on Thursday, March 12th,
2026. This meeting is being recorded. We'll start with the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. And I'd like to welcome Dan Fox, the chair of select board. Uh, also Alec Bby, the chair of the finance committee, volley takes vice chair of that committee to our meeting tonight. We're
looking forward to working collaboratively with the town as we work on our fiscal year 2027 budget. >> So Dan, I know it's helped for you. I mean, honestly, I think that we're going to let Al Kamali lead this since they know the numbers best here just to
support if I can answer questions from level. >> That's good. Thank you. >> Yeah. So, thanks for having me. Um, as you guys know, as a finance committee member, I'm more of a watchdog than a director of how budgets get allocated.
But in my role as watchdog, I also advise the town and assist them, taking a kind of second look at things and and helping advise them on, you know, challenging situations like this year. Um, I think everybody's been following along, but there's a very large townwide
deficit. Um, things have been getting chipped away at on both town and school side. um when the town was looking at how it how it approached addressing its share of the deficit, it had to take a very hard look at what was driving that
deficit. we've talked about for years about how there are other general government costs I'll call which include health insurance the largest pension um retirement health insurance for retirees things like that um that are carried on
the town side of the budget but benefit both town and school both employees and retirees um we've always heard this 60/40 split I've never really gotten great analysis in past years on that as an accountant I actually like to see
line by line, can I see a supportable percentage? Um, so when we when we started looking at this, we said, okay, what's the townwide deficit in one column? I'll share my screen here just to get started. Send request. It might be a little small, but I'm not
sure if you guys are able to see. Uh, number two, >> zoom in on >> I can zoom in. I'll have to kind of go left and right at some. So very simply, if we start at at this analysis starts at what I'll call the the 2026 balanced
operating budget without debt service, that also does not include enterprise funds for people that like to check the numbers along the way. So I like to be very clear there. where we were at last year. All town department budgets were at 47968952
and the school's bottom line budget was 49120287 for a total of 97.1 million. So where we landed last year was of of that revenue figure without debt service without enterprise funds the schools were about
51% of the budget. We've talked about this 50/50 split. Um thatcher has talked about that. Um this the finance department has talked about that for years splitting revenues 50/50. I just want to point out that it was 5149 last year and and over the years I I looked
at an analysis that went back as as early as fiscal year 23. Um it wasn't pretty much a 50/50 split, but there are obviously some years o where there's certain needs of each side that outweigh one another. So that shifted over the years, but over the last 10 years it's
either been 5149 or 50. So, it's direction. >> Alex, if we have questions, do you want us to hold them to the end? >> Next step is is to look at >> what's available for revenue this year. Okay. >> And and when we look at that,
>> Jen has her hand raised and I think she's trying to say something. >> Okay. >> Can you hear me? Can you hear me? >> I can't hear you. Frank Make something, Jet. >> Can you hear me? >> Yeah. Yeah. Now we can.
>> So, do you want us to hold questions to the end or do you want us to ask as you're going along? >> Be helpful if you hold them till the end. >> Okay. Just because I don't understand where you got the numbers so far. So, okay. >> The school's bottom line budget from last year 4912087.
That's in the fin handbook. And then this is the town side budget without debt service and without enterprise funds from the FINCOM handbook. >> Okay. >> All right.
>> So that was what was available for town and school operating budgets last year. The revenue is one piece of what's available this year. And then there's offsets to revenue. So, we've talked about this net approximately 600,000 less of available revenue this year. I
kind of want to walk through the details of that cuz I think maybe you all have some questions and maybe some other people watching select board meetings have had some questions. Um, so where where do we start? Um, one question I've heard is there was a presentation by Thatcher
last week, I think, and there was a $101 million number, and people are wondering why is the available revenue to split between talent schools 96.5. Okay, so before we start divvying up this revenue for operating budgets, there are some things that offset that
revenue before we even get there, right? Allowance for abatements. So whatever your property tax revenue is every year, before you start allocating that out, you have to put aside a reserve for people that request property tax. That decreased it by about 740 grand. Any
state aid you get every year, the net amount of state aid is offset by direct state assessment offsets for things that are not in the operating budgets. That was about 2.5 million. There's a snow and ice reserve funding which is outside
of the general fund, small 150 grand. There's two tax levy funded war warrant articles that have at least been in the warrant at the exact same amounts for the last 10 years since I've been involved probably dating back before that about 450 grand. And then there's
the Essex AI school article funding which is also an article that doesn't go into the general fund budget. That's about 636,000. So I know that came up at your so believe me as a CPA that's working closely with this. If there's questions about numbers reconciling, I
am reconciling everything to a dollar. So that's that's the split between townside and school side, right? Another way to look at the 600,000 difference of available revenue compared to last year would be to look at that available revenue and break it down into the
changes in revenue and the changes in those offsets year-over-year that net to the $600,000 less. So, very quickly, I've been through this probably five times in the last 6 months, but I'll do it again. Um, property tax revenue, prop 2 and a half plus new growth went up by
about 2.1 million. Local receipts forecasted came down by about a million this year. That was largely driven by interest income, which we've looked at year-to- date. Interest rates have come down. The amount invested has come down.
Um, it's also driven by, I believe, some of the excise tax on vehicles. Remember, when we're estimating these things, you cannot overestimate revenues. That's that's a recipe for budgeting disaster. So, you have to be a little bit conservative. Um, enterprise funds reimbursement of
town costs. So what that means is that water and sewer and um and department or the recck department they reimburse the town for some of the costs it pays for on their behalf that their enterprise funds don't. That was additional revenue. This one's the big driver. Okay, we've
talked about free cash challenges for the last few years and the reliance on free cash has been a recurring. If we're only using five million, which I believe there's about five and a half is the estimate as to what's available. If we're only using five million of that
for the operating budget, if we use seven last year, right away that's eating up the property tax, right? So, that's a big challenge. If that was even, then we would have more money to split between the two sides, right? Additional state aid came up, but then
that offset kind of decreased a piece of it. the allowance for abatements came up a bit. I think we all know there's been a lot of news about abatements the last few years. So I think that reserve is is pretty well thought out by the finance team >> and it's also the tax exemptions.
>> Tax exemptions as well. >> Um increase in the school assessment was actually pretty small and I think the snow and ice reserve was not funded last year but I think after this year maybe we need to refund it a little bit. Um so that's where the 600,000 comes from. It's it's actually pretty simple. If you
if you look back at the kind of summary tab, we had 97.1 million to split between town and schools last year, and we have $600,000 less. We know both town and schools have union contracts that go up by at least 2 to 3%, probably more in some years. We have steps and lanes on
both sides. We have significant benefits increases. We have all sorts of things. Inflation, right? We've talked about this. Read the FINCOM handbook. Um or not the handbook, the report. Um I've referenced all this for like three three years now. Um so that creates a huge
challenge, right? So where we focused is column L to start. So the townwide available revenue before we split between townside schools is about 96.5 million. Okay. What I received while you gave me this
number, it was an updated number. your your starting point this year was 50,89363 before it came down. Does that seem accurate to you all? I received a couple figures at some, but I I think we took it from a document that was sent out
>> that so >> this appropriate turn up. Um, >> um, I mean, so we have offsets in ours like circuit breaker offset, >> right? It's this is only the the >> that's net of that. >> Yeah. Not included any of that.
>> Got you. >> You found 1.7ish to get to level. >> Correct. >> That's about 1.7. >> So I had 50 million 736. Is that what you were showing? >> I think I have 809 but >> I think that's we >> Yeah, we're within 100,000. So yes.
>> Um and then the town side as of I think the data the source data I pulled as of 131. So this would have been around state of the town in Munice as submitted by departments and as estimated at that time um for things like benefits that
have changed since then it was about 53.4. So you can see there was a $7.7 million deficit. Now that doesn't mean that there's 7.7 million of cuts if we adjust health insurance between January and when it was finalized last week. That's
not a cut. That's an adjustments to a budget. Right? So I'm going to walk through that. Um, so we're we're in column L, so we have a townwide deficit of 7.7. We've talked for years about, you know, the town is carrying costs that benefit both town and school side.
We've heard back of a napkin estimates of 60%. Why don't we try to take a look at this and and see what's driving that deficit and really take a hard look at at both sides. So what we did was I I reviewed
there's there's a part of the townside budget called other general government. It's not general government. It's at the bottom. It's other general government. And I asked about every single line with Alicia um our town finance director. Which of these lines have any costs even
a dollar attributable to school employees or retirees? And the six we identified were pension annual required contribution, health insurance for active employees, life insurance, health insurance for retirees,
PEC Medicare reimbursement to retirees, and the transfer to the OPED trust. So we started with last year's budget and we said, okay, what were the budgeted line items for each of those last year? And then what I asked Alicia and the town finance department which
included our fincom clerk who's Linda Gford is actually on the retirement board or or maybe employed by the town and involved in that. Um and then you know folks in Alicia's group that kind of deal closer with benefits and HR and whatnot. They worked as a team to best
estimate of those line items how much is attributable to townside employees or retirees versus schools. I I think I've been very clear, Mike, in the last few weeks when there maybe has been questions about this. I did not audit these percentages. I only have so much
capacity in my day. That being said, they don't feel directionally off of what we've talked about in years past. But if there's questions between school finance and town finance about how those percentages were uh come or
analyzed, then I think the sides need to work together to figure that. Um, so like like I always say when I create a spreadsheet, if there's inputs into it that the spreadsheet's outcome is only as good as its inputs. So if there's any discrepancies there, then that that's where it would be. But I did not audit
those um hard, let's put it that way. Um, so what we did was we looked at the the budget for each of those six numbers and then what we were able to do, I think you guys probably saw a slide that looked like this in Thatcher's presentation last week that sort of estimated the percentage splits of
those. I did a lot of checks to make sure I linked in the right percentages. So what we did was we took the total budgeted line items for those six over to the left and then we took each of the percentages attributable to schools and we said okay what if we were to take
last year's budget on the expense side and shift those costs line by line to say what is the true school estimated budget rather than just 49 million if we were to include the school portion of
the the other general government costs. We came up with 61.3 million based on that analysis, which happens to be 63% of the 97.1 million of available revenue last year. So it's a little more than the 6040, but
it's not directionally off. So now we've reset last year's budget. Now we have to look at, okay, what if we were going to relook at how we split revenues moving forward just for this analysis for now, right? There's
$600,000 less available revenue this year. Let's split it. 6337. It's pretty close. It's It's not materially different. It's 380 versus 220. Right. So, now we've reset last year's budget to or this year's budget,
sorry, to what's available. Now, let's look at those costs that I said were submitted by both town and schools at the start of this process. 104.1 million. Right? Then we took those exact same line items in the budget and I have
adjusted these to bring them down since it was at 15% active health insurance. She's reduced it to 11. I've shifted that to 11 in this analysis. The I believe it's called the PEC Medicare reimbursement was at 7 as of the state of the town. It's now at five based on
last week's news. I've shifted that down as well. So, I've kept up to date with with what's going on in the news and things like that. So, when we add the costs that are on the town side of the budget today using those same ratios based on the analysis of actuals from
last year to the 50.8 million, what that says is the schools have 64.2 million of requested budget before any cuts, right? Plus plus their share of the other general government lines of that budget. and the town has only 39.9 or about 40
million actually. So now what I've done is I've said okay we've shifted the revenue allocation and the expense side using a pretty solid analysis and from my perspective it's pretty economically fair uh from my perspective um as long as those inputs are right as I mentioned
uh so really now what we've done is we've said okay we have $7.7 million of a deficit our estimate is that 3.2 2 million is driven by costs that are in the school budget plus school costs that are in the other on other general government budget and 4.5 million is on
the town side. As of the time I did this analysis, I believe you guys have presented a budget that was even to last year. So at the bottom I simply said you had found about 1.7 million and now I'm saying that this
analysis is 3.2 2 million which is about a 1.5 a little north of $ 1.5 million difference. That is where that number came from. Happy to share the spreadsheet. It has all sorts of support data uh behind it and I link every every
number in it to where where the data is coming from. Um that left the town with a significant 4.5 million to find. Um which we can talk about more in a minute. But quite frankly, this is not actually that complicated. I don't I I I
guess I'll pause for questions. It's it's pretty straightforward what we're doing. We're kind of looking at last year's budget then saying, "Okay, how much of that truthfully?" I And I think you guys report numbers to Desi with those benefits cost in there as well, if that makes sense. So, I guess I'll pause
for questions on this analysis. Jen on the floor. >> Jen. >> Uh, nope. I don't have to go first. Someone go ahead me. >> I think this makes a lot of sense. This is how I, as a finance person,
would think about correctly allocating costs to kind of the the body that manages it. For me, the open points are are those percentages which are driving these inputs accurate. I would want us to do the diligence to make sure that we agree with it, >> right? >> Um,
>> and for me it's about like, okay, is this a framework we're going to use moving forward? When I look at those, I'm like, okay, this means we're going to have to what were the actual allocations and what was the delta between what we budgeted and what the actual was and now we're going to set new percentages and we need to make sure that we're transferring and it just
feels like it could get a little bit overly >> complex to operationalize. But I think like largely the framework assuming that the percentage inputs you're using make sense, it's very easy to follow and makes sense. >> Yeah. And and you make a great point because I've thought about this as well.
if this is a framework that's going to be used whether it's in a sheet like this or or between Mike and Alicia moving forward or if it's legitimately just putting these six line items into your budget and your bottom line is not you know 49.1 last year at 61.4 and then
obviously both sides have to work together because this is a townwide analysis and there's there's there's folks on each side doing it. Um but I mean that's just kind of presentation at the moment. So, um, but but what I would say as I thought about this is, you know, in years where I think we had
that, uh, that PEC presentation from the Massachusetts Health Insurance, the the pack uh, last week, uh, GIC, sorry, the pack GIC, I I lose the acronyms. Um and if we looked at the last 5 years, the active life insurance line or sorry
health insurance line was going up like two two and then the last 3 years it's dropped to six six 14 right so this is this is really the benefits costs are really driving a big piece of this deficit along with less available
revenues as well um and and what I would say and if that got back to a point you know if you're going to use the framework work that you mentioned. Moving forward, if it gets back to a 2 to three, the schools would be still getting if you if you adopt this, right, 63% or whatever the most recent year's
allocation was of the available revenues. And then those line items, if they're only going up by two, then then that could be a net benefit, right, in those years. And and that's what's fair, right? Um and and I looked back, we looked at a 10-year kagger on both the
schools growth and the town side without these benefit costs. Both have grown at about 4% over the last 10 years. Um so again, we talk about a structural challenge as I mentioned deficit was another word. We know property tax revenue only grows at 2 and 1 half to three and both sides have been growing
at four, right? So that's where a lot of the available free cash has gone and I think it's sort of a perfect storm this year with last year the 14% and then another 10 plus% on the health insurance again. So we've kind of been moving the needle of available revenue and the
expenses going up and we've kind of hit our our bump on the road. Uh I will say I'm not surprised we are here. Um if you read any of our FIMCON reports, we've been saying this is coming um and it's here. So, um, at the end of the day, I
think it's it's a fair I will say, um, Molly didn't know if I wanted to over complicate it, but I did look at the 50/50 and I simply said if schools had 1.2 million more last year than town, and if we went back to 50/50, you're given 600 back, right? And then we have
600 less, you're giving 300. You're go coming down 300. So the other option that I thought about was well if you want to stick with the 50/50 and just not actually dig into this you would have had to come down 900 right so it it
it's directionally you know 600,000 is a lot of money but you know on a $50 million budget it's not like a massive percentage if that makes sense. So um I I guess what else did I miss >> Can I can I add one thing too? I think one thing that's also different this year is our revenue is actually down
year-over-year. You know, driven by the things that Alec had mentioned, but in a normal year, we would see some revenue growth and that would be split according to this framework of 63% to schools in 37. So, we just don't see that in this
year. So, it is really a perfect um I agree with, you know, a lot of what Melissa said that the framework makes sense to me. I can understand how you level there. And I appreciate that it's a number, you know, assuming the inputs
are accurate that's based on actual school related expenses as opposed to, you know, pulling a number out of a hat and leaving budgets balance. And a thing that I'm struggling with is it's a different framework than what
we've used in the past. And now you're talking about okay if we use this framework going going forward it has these benefits for the schools and you know 900 600 a lot or a little in the budget but we're looking at
actual educators in our classrooms with our students. So how do we take the leap of saying okay you know we will move to this new framework and know that next year when a different problem comes forward there isn't a different
framework proposed as the solution to that problem. I think that's sort of what I'm struggling with is I can get behind this but how do I have the confidence that I don't have to get behind something else a year from now? I I think what I would like to see too and
again this is you know based on conferences I've attended watching what other towns are doing. What I would like to see is at the beginning of every budget season having and we can decide how this plays out but having a group with representation from the select for
um and school committee to discuss this in advance right to and to come at it with this framework. There will be, you know, this is this is a budget season unlike any I've ever seen, right? But there will be new challenges that we face and so I think meeting at the the
beginning of the budget process to set expectations to discuss the needs and to work together on how they will be addressed I think will is my recommendation for a path forward. And again, it is what I've seen in you know best practice across Massachusetts. Can
I just Mr. Chair just um I would agree with that and I just want to I just think if we're going to move in this direction that's what the committees decide I'm just telling we need to do >> I would think that we need to agree upon when the star budget season is for us it
doesn't seem like it was so I just want to make sure we're align that way because if we if we had these disc if we had this level of discussion back in October over November to the degree we'd be having much, you know, this be much different conversation, right? So,
you want to >> I I >> I'd like to just follow up on that too, Kate. I think if I I think what I'm hearing from you is how do you know that with Splunk can do the same, right? And it's also it's positions versus people, right? Your seats versus people. And next year, you're going to have two
potentially two new SL members. So I mean I think I would be happy to bring to my board something that would that to to to whatever that looks like. I think that a firm policy and we've talked about this
of the exact exact percentages and all that I think in can in her pulled us because there are going to be some years so maybe it's a guideline that we use some guidelines or whatever word we want to use and you know I can't speak for my board but I would be happy to bring it back to them and and propose that that
we do a vote on that moving forward if that would make you guys feel comfortable. think if I was in your position based on what Melissa said and what you said um that that that I would feel very awful to >> I like the idea of you know formalizing
the guideline in some way um I think I would also like it to include you know the framework that Molly talked about you know it's that we're coming to some sort of agreement as to this is how the budget process is going to work in the future so that we don't find ourselves in this position
Yes. >> So along those lines, excuse me, >> again, I'm looking to add, you know, want to people's plate already, but would at least a two-year budgeting cycle help too because I, you know, I
know we're talking about significant issues this year, but I think most people on the school committee are expecting a similar issue next year. And I'm not, you know, does it make sense to kind of look at that together? >> I love everything about that. I mean even longer. I would love to be able to
look three years and be able to prioritize and demands so that so that nothing comes as a surprise. And again and that is a lot of what from even what I'm hearing that is what is discussed in these upfront budget meetings not just the current it is also looking looking
forward. So I do I love that idea. Um, I think also one thing just to add, um, what I like about this framework is it feels like it actually is reflective of how the town and the schools operate and it just is more logical to me than
having a 50/50 split where you have all these shared expenses. So, so I just wanted to I think you kind of said that. >> Yeah. And and one other point, I know Mike has a question, too. Um, I think we were getting to this $1.5 million number or or folks other than me were getting
to it in a much more back napkin way. And this was the only reason why I started kind of breaking it down this way was to try to actually support it, right? Rather than just say, "Hey, our health insurance and our pension are going up by this and I've heard this 60% number and 60% of those increases are
1.5." I said, "That doesn't really feel like a sound analysis." So, um, we happened to land in a similar spot. Sometimes you get lucky, right? Um, so, so I just wanted to point that out as well. So, there was a little bit late in the game.
>> Yeah. Sorry. So, I I want to thank Dan and Molly, Alec from this hospital. Um, last week we met, he showed me the spreadsheet first. I saw of it. It's Friday afternoon. I get it. Um I have a
couple of them just >> I think in the future it'll be critical to include where we're 63% of this number that we're earlier in the discussion about how we formulate this stuff. >> Yeah. because I couldn't explain it to our committee until I saw it and I and I
still didn't know that I can explain it as well as you guys could because you guys built if you just wrote Thatcher's you had it up there earlier that FY27 benefits cost analysis and I think we had this conversation on Friday it's confirming the numbers it's
the formula works potentially within that spreadsheet but bad data in is bad data exactly um I share mine if Did you share it? Did you have to share it badly? >> Oh. Oh, sorry. I didn't I'm sharing my screen. Maybe it just did. So,
>> right took away from >> usually. So, this >> on line seven screen 17 on my screen. It might be 18 on your screen. Uh, we have the GIC active. Yeah, I believe they're using numbers that came over from the town. 81.71 million.
I took our exact roster of people who have benefits, what plan they're on. I put in the new rates as of Friday when they were released. And I get this was done before Friday and before the GIC release rates. But I came up with our number of people on GIC
to be 8.370. >> Yeah. And I do >> which is a small cushion on that line that has has dropped. So there's also a cushion down below of $350,000. So now we have two cushions built into into benefits and it's affecting our
number. And if we're 63 37, why isn't the cushion also 350,000 is split 50/50? >> Yeah. I mean I I would say my only response is that you know Alicia needs to work with you to kind of get
>> I get that but we're like we're at the 11th hour. I mean I don't know that we have time for Alicia and I to sit down and meet. >> Okay. I I I as we said started this I started this bad data in is bad data out and if I don't agree with the data I
can't advise the committee that I think that this is a great idea. I think it is a great idea if the data was substantiated. >> There is a there is a cushion in that number that that needs to be there because of the variability. But it is at this point we know based on looking at
year-to- date numbers is also the cushion. >> Right. Right. No no >> I don't think I've accept I've got a row in mind row 20 that says GIC for cushions. GS Christian for change is 350,000 for the town and the school and it's not up on but I have
it on the same side I >> yeah I guess I didn't pull that line in I didn't I guess we'll have >> maybe I should share my screen because this is >> you want to share your screen >> but I I agree there's a cushion but looks like there be seem to be two cushions and two cushions is $350,000
for us that's likely four to five positions out of our budget that we're going to have to cut. Well, >> so do we keep a cushion or do we keep our staff? Right. >> We >> can I can I just touch on and I think Dan um >> I guess I'm not I don't have an answer
to that. >> It's not your job to I mean right you're fine you're for all intents and purpose is volunteering your time. Okay. Yeah. >> No, but I think it's an excellent point like there should be a cushion in there, but it should be reasonable and to the extent that it is overstated.
You know, we've been trying to bring down that cushion for years now, right? And so, you know, based on looking at year-to- date numbers, I agree with you. There is a cushion and I think we've said like these numbers need to be adjusted. It will be returned to the town. >> Yes.
>> Following that ratio with the same it be specific to active health insurance, right? So, your share of that. >> So, so this spreadsheet if if if Sorry, I'll reshare. I I thought you were going to share your screen for a second. Um if this $13.1 million number came down
between now and next week, we would rerun this analysis. And if if if it said 1.3 million, then you'd get 200,000 back. And and Dan has I've sat with him and I've sat with uh Thatcher and Alicia and they agree with all of it. But I'm very adamant that if they're making
changes to anything that it gets reflected in here like I said before >> and that's that's clearly important, right? And you know I think I think this discussion has been great. I think the split in in justifying it. So I I echo Mike. I think that I'm thankful for this analysis, but I also share Mike's
concern too where you know, oh, it's a couple hundred thousand there 63 that's that's people that's bodies that's that's lively because that's so yes I have to notify people they don't have a job and then oh by the way well the number looks different so never mind you
know I like that I can't I won't up >> and we're experiencing the same thing I'm saying that we agree with that and we need to tighten this up like yesterday >> yeah Thank you. And just on on the I just think it's a good segue um in terms
of bodies you mentioned. Um so this analysis as I'm showing after the reallocation stopped again sorry is at 4.5 million right for the town
side. That's before any adjustments to anything any cuts. It was at six before because we just shifted 1.5 over before we got there. So that's net of the 1.5. Um I've been sitting and following along what you and Alicia and Thatcher, Alicia
and Thatcher have been proposing and you guys have been going back. There's about a million dollars of cuts, adjustments and cuts on the town side that that have happened between state of the town and now that are really just adjustments to the health insurance is the largest
piece. adjustments to that reimbursement to retirees line. A couple changes through department meetings when they were finalizing. So before the ask of the schools to come $1.5 million below last year, the town
was short $5 million on their side, right? And we're looking at what are we looking at a a 39 a $40 million budgetish, right? Um, I'm sorry, $35.5 million budget if you're splitting it the the 376 million. So 5 million over
that is a lot larger of a percentage on the talent side. And and I'll take the opportunity to speak here because I I'll speak again Monday at my meeting, but I've been waiting for your meetings to have go before I've had a chance to talk. I've I've heard people asking about whether these cuts are real
thatcher's talking about at his most recent meeting. Um, what I can say is that I've looked at the cuts be in all three scenarios before the 1.5 million ask of the schools below level last year and before the trash fee that I think
you guys were were talking about last night, that $5 million gap would have resulted in between 50 and 60 employees in the town center. So, ju just to put it into perspective, right? If if the schools were level funded to last year,
how many positions would you have cut in that scenario? >> That's our proposed budget, Alex. >> 2.75. >> So, so if that's the way it stayed, the town would have 55 positions on the line
to a lot lesser number of employees total to rule 14. >> I think the analysis that is differences, too. So, yeah, I mean, that's >> it's not Yes. >> Alex, can I ask a question? >> Yeah. >> So, out of the four, these numbers are
bouncing around. Four and a half, five million, whatever it is under the net deficit. So, from what I Well, can you tell me whether that number includes the trash fee? >> Not yet. >> Does not.
>> Okay. So that >> so that means that you are taking this is where I also am having some struggle understanding because if the trash fee is being taken out of the town side of government but it's being reallocated
under a fee being charged to the to the um homeowners um that's not a cut >> that's not a deficit three and a half hang on three or whatever it is 2.5 I don't know what the number is $2.58
million is not a deficit that's being covered by another revenue source. >> So I can I can kind of walk through this if you'd like. And and by the way the trash fee has not been discussed by the FINO at all. That that is a select board decision that we will react to on
Monday. So >> hang on one second because what I'd like to say too is that when you're looking you're looking at a $3.2 $2 million cut on the town side, I think, inclusive of the 1.5. But remember, we did the same thing, which we're not getting credit for. In other words, we moved out almost
a million dollars out of our of our level funded budget and moved it into revolving funds, right? We didn't take that's not being counted as a cut. So, move somewhere else. >> Yeah. So to react to your 5 million question, what I was saying was if if
the town had not asked the schools to come down below level funds last year, right? It would have been 1.5 million more than the number that I have highlighted in this analysis because this analysis shift >> where but you're but you're you're you're taking out the trash contract. Is
that >> we're going to get there in a second. I'm going to get there in a second. So, what I'm saying is that if you add that 1.5 back to the 4.5, it was a $6 million deficit based on what was in Munice as of the state of the town. They've
adjusted budgets since then, including reducing the health insurance estimate by about a million, right? That left it at 5 million. Right? If you add 1.5 million to 4.5 million, that's six. And then they've made budget adjustments since then of five. This is before any
ask of the schools below level last year. Before any trash fee that number, if they were to go through with that and stop there, no trash fee, no ask of the schools below level. I can assure you that I've seen a list that has 55
employees cut on the town side. From there, the way that presented, I'm I'm also a citizen watching Thatcher present, right? He said 1.5 million will be asked in schools that in the cuts analysis if we're looking at three
columns restored about 15 to 20 positions. So before any trash fee after asking the schools based on a pretty level analysis that we we think is as long as the inputs in like we said is pretty economically sound we're still at
a $3.5 million deficit on the town side. I have seen a list of the $3.5 million cuts before we talk about trash fee, which isn't necessarily a conversation for the school committee meeting, but that's 40 positions on the town side before they consider the trash field.
Okay. And I know, >> but my question again, you're not I'm not getting an answer to my question. If the >> my understanding is they took they are taking the trash out of the budget, so it's going to be paid for. >> They have I haven't got there yet. And I
just said they have a $3.5 million deficit before the trash fee idea was even thought about and that represents 40 positions. Does that make sense? >> Yeah. >> If they didn't use the trash feed to cover to cover the $3.5 million deficit,
they would have had to cut 40 positions. >> Okay. >> And then that created a decision point for the select board, which I'm watching as a as a citizen, that they had to make a decision. Do they want to risk cutting 40 positions, which is 22%
of townside government covered by the general fund? that that is a very large amount and that would include um I mean the way this works the original 55 to 60 as reported was and and I confirmed this
myself a full shutdown of the library full shutdown of the COA full shutdown of the wreck and park cemetery chief con uh chief procurement officer two police officers three members of community planning and development assessor senior clerk two custodians six to eight public
works and facilities That was the starting point. After asking the schools per this analysis to come down, like I said, they restored about 15 of those, right? Through the process, right? That restored the town planner and the conservation agent and
about 15 public works in everything else I said before that is still out. I haven't deliberated on the trash fee yet. It sounds like you all did last night. um that I believe restored about half of those 40 positions. So still
there's 20 positions which is about 10% of the townside budget that are being cut even if they do implement the trash. Um that's the best I can explain it right now if that makes sense. These are not scarce. >> Actually it doesn't. I'm sorry I don't
understand. >> Well tune in on Monday night and I'll show you a list of the three scenarios. >> It's not the scenarios. It's I'm just I mean I'm just looking at what I consider the bottom line of a net deficit and on the town side there's a there is going
to it sounds like there is going to be an option that that's coming out of their budget at least that's what I understand what I'm hearing and Dan chime in if I'm wrong maybe not maybe you're going to keep the tra the trash contract in the budget >> the trash contract stays in the budget
>> okay if it's not implemented potential offset. >> What we decided to move forward with last night >> is to instruct that to move forward in with the assumption that the trash the trash pickup and uh disposal comes out
of the budget. That is correct. So you are at where Alex said at the bottom line >> where we are still looking at cutting depending upon what you use as a a denominator uh between 10 and 11% of total employees.
>> What's that number Alan Dan? >> 20 positions 10 to 11%. >> What's the net deficit number? >> It's it's about 1.58. So, so it would be 1.5 million versus the schools at 3.2 million.
>> No, that they've also made cuts that will I will highlight to about 1 million. That will Yeah, exactly. >> So, I'm asking what would be what will be the projected net deficit? What? >> It's two and a half to It's 2 and a half to three million. The 1.5 is is what
they would not consider asking back for at this point. >> I I There are going to be cuts including positions that potentially cut. >> I'm just trying to ask for what the net deficit will be on the town side after on the assumption that that trash fee is
offset that the trash contract expense is offset by another revenue source. >> Per this spreadsheet, if you were to reduce the 4.5 million by 2 million, it would be about 2.5,000 >> versus a school at 3.2. Okay. Thank you.
That's where >> I thought you were asking about the cuts which I I think we'll get into a little bit more. >> No, I'm not asking about the cuts because I think at this point we should be looking at the numbers and then you know then that's when you obviously have to back this stuff in. >> But the the trash fee is is from my
perspective which again it wasn't it's not FinCom's idea. We're reacting to it. >> The deficit was 4.5. The trash fee is a solution to that that >> our executive body discussed last night and and decided to address.
>> So the $4.5 million deficit. >> Yeah. But it offsets the def I mean that's important just like we found the ability to do that through revolving funds which again offsets a deficit and then saves jobs. So, if >> you're going to talk apples to apples, Jen, should you be looking at our our
deficit after the trash fee and you should be looking at what your cuts were using the revolving funds? >> Yes, that's exactly right. >> Yeah. So, I think that if you're really going to analyze that, there's a fair amount coming out of revolving funds, you could look at what we're doing with trash fees as a similar
>> but that 3.2 too is that question >> and that is actually there's about about 325,000 that was of the 1.7 that was moved revolving funds right so there's there's some that came out from the
special educ I'm sorry from um the circuit breaker and then there was some you know before the 1.7 from special K or special educ the kindergarten tuition sorry just so many funny and So included in the 1.7 is
about 325,000. So you would say >> well no it would be on top of that model. >> Yes. >> No in >> in the 1.7 there's 325,000 that was shifted to revolve. >> No that would be in like 2.1 million we shifted 300. We had a net.
>> Yep. >> Y >> yes I'm going to push back on. >> It's actually I apologize. It's $348,94. it is in that it's included in the 1.7 million that is listed as a cut and I'm happy to walk you through each line.
>> So we don't have I mean we don't have to do that here. I I'm going to disagree. That's not my recollection from our subcommittee meetings. But that being said, I think going back in meetings. >> Okay. So I think at more of like the 50,000 foot level going back to
Melissa's comment at the beginning um that so in 2023 we were discussing this in the fall of 2023 when we started our budget um process to do just this. Now it's two and a half years later and
we're now getting the numbers we asked for two and a half years ago to begin this process. So that's great. That's good. Um, but we do need to see, you know, what we're seeing here, what was budgeted. We do need to see what was actually spent, what was encumbered,
right? Versus what was budgeted for. Like that that we that we do need to see as well, which I don't believe are in in these numbers. And I also want to point out um that maybe no one at this table or at that table remembers, but you know
in 200 I think it was 200 um 20 there there was and is anou between the select board and the school committee to do just what you were describing earlier which is to have annual meetings around issues
particularly around the budget that came out of the um the difficulties we that in 20 2019 and and there have been requests in the past to do that with the select with the select board and it hasn't taken place. So I don't think we necessarily need to reinvent the wheel.
We probably need to look at theou that already exists. Maybe it needs to be adjusted but I think it's important you know that we understand that this has been attempted before and I hope that you know maybe we can actually be successful at it. But I do think where we it still
doesn't help where where we sit right now. We I guess the question to the committee is are we going forward with this version of a budget that we have in front of us with the shifting of of of expenses and corresponding revenue and
um and budgeted revenue this year for this FY27 budget because there's some lot of work to be done in a short period of time or do we move forward with how we have done it and what we were asked to do and what we did complete last month. Um, and have this be, you know,
more of a working project for FY28. >> Like I mentioned before, if if you went with the 5050 split from the independent watchd dogs perspective, the schools would be at 90 900,000 less than last year. >> Oh, and okay. And we can talk about I
just we don't know trying to understand. We >> don't I don't know that level level to last year was ever on the table from from the independent parties perspective here. Well, it was up until about, you know, four or five weeks ago. All throughout the season, that was what we were being >> directed to my perspective.
>> Yeah. I sat at a table with you, Alec and Molly. You were like, "This is what we're doing. Level funded." That was the directive. I understand things have shifted. I'm not I'm not saying things haven't shifted. >> Let me respond to that. Let me respond to that. I sat in the meeting and I said, I've been on this committee for 10
years and you can read my FINCOM reports to town meeting that we have a structural deficit and that what's coming is here. It was October and we had a revenue forecast that suggested we had $700,000 less of available revenue.
And I said we have not completed the three-year expense forecast that'll be presented in December. As of now, I said I would expect the most you're going to get is level to last year and maybe less than that. We were not when I said that
to you, I'm a finance committee member trying to nudge you in the right direction. That wasn't a directive for me. I don't I don't make policy as to how to allocate revenue between town and schools. And I believe you record your meeting so you guys can all look back at what I said. So if that was what you
heard, it it wasn't a directive from the town when we had that meeting that you just referenced. I just wanted to make that. >> So again, I'm just asking where are we moving for? Where are we going with from this point? It feels like everybody wants to move
and I have a select board member to my right here that wants to whether it's a firm policy allocation or just a direction to collaborate in the fall annually and figure out these shared costs and how to allocate them and and
how to look at the available revenues for each side. Whether it's a shift of actual school department budget as presented or just a an analysis done before that bottom line that gets presented. That's a presentational issue for me. But it sounds like both sides
need to work together and and figure out how to address this. And like I said, the only reason why I got into the townside cuts is cuz I've been hearing a lot in the public about that these are scare tactics. And and what I can assure you is they're not. And if the schools
were at level and the no trash fee, which was a new concept that I've heard in the last few weeks here as being considered, the town was cutting 50 to 60 employees and that would have been if the schools were leveled last year. I just wanted to make that point so that people understand the magnitude of that. I I understand and the schools have been
absolutely fabulous to work with. I've been doing this for 10 years. the collaboration between the select board, school committee, school leadership, Fincom, which I feel like we've always sort of tried to play nice, but um it's been better than it's ever been since
since these two right here have been here. Um so I appreciate that, but we've hit our fiscal cliff and we're short 6 to8 million, whatever number you want to use. And that's a reason to relook at things, right? So that's part of the reason we're looking at it. That's
really all I know. If if I just go back to the 50,000 foot perspective, >> um you know, we've put together just one budget. >> Yeah. >> As of this time, >> y >> um but I don't think we can consider it
a balanced budget anymore given the numbers that you just that we all just discussed. >> Right. So, Jen, this is a little bit to your question as to where the committee is. Um you know, careful a little bit of those words um
Al because we are required as a town meeting to present to pass a balanced budget. So what that means is we have to pass a budget correct me if I'm wrong Alec that is reflective of the projected revenues. So I think in terms of a level funded budget it sounds like you know that sailed
>> we're required to make a recommendation to town meeting. So there there are columns in in the way we present at two town meeting that say budget requested versus budget recommended and and It's always been equal since I've been on the committee, but there is an opportunity for a department to say, "Hey, we want
more." And the Fincom has to decide whether they recommend that or not. So, there can be a discrepancy to town meeting as to what a department requests versus what we recommend. >> Yeah. >> And correct me if I'm wrong, budget. >> The balanced budget we present might not
be what we request, >> but can the town pass a an unbalanced budget? Like, can the can the town >> No, it can't. But, you know, there would have to be a vote on that a town meeting or a hold or whatnot, right? I think the vote would be on what Fincom has recommended, but there would there would
be the opportunity to hold. I'm also not the best at like the town meeting and how it works. I think we can figure that out if there's questions over the next few months. So I think the the issue I guess the question I guess I guess to the school committee is well and fol
like are we going forward with um this sort of shift of both revenue and expense and trying to quickly do what could be up to a year's worth of work in a short period of time or do we want to um have that be a longer term project
and you know come to some sort of an agreement on what we we need to look that to reduce I mean it's very very hard to say but to reduce and cut the budget from last year from I'm sorry this year to next year um in the number
that will um help the town achieve over you know help the town overall achieve a goal of a balanced budget I think um there so the committee needs to ensure that the schools have the resources that they need to be able
to meet our goals It's kind of our overarching goal, but I think we requesting a budget that exceeds the town's allocation by a million half dollars without a clear path towards funding that million and a half
is a symbolic gesture, not a long-term governing strategy. it's going to result in a successful hopefully multi-year override that fixes the structural deficit problem once and for all. And so
I don't want to ask you guys to cut another million and a half from your budget, but I think it we have to present a balanced budget in lock step with the town for a few reasons. One to retain control voting voting a balanced budget
ourselves. I don't want the floor of town meeting to turn into something where it spirals out of control and we we're kind of on our back foot and and we're like at the mercy of what's happening and then kind of turn into we owe it to staff students to make the
decisions ourselves and have a plan for how we would want this to go in this very dire situation that we need to be clear I do not want and I do not support. So I will be supporting it. I think for any sort of override campaign to pass,
the school committee and the select board need to be operating together. This is one town. We live and we die together. This is not the schools. This is not the town. We all live here together. We all want this to be the best community with the best schools
that it possibly can be. And I think again voting a budget that does not fit into what the town is doing is just uh will not achieve that outcome. Um so I I don't support the additional cuts, but I
think we need to present a budget that way and then I will do everything in my power to support an override to ensure that those are all restored. And I I hope then some I the scenarios you guys talked about last night. I I would Yes.
So I guess that's that's my field. I actually want to pick up that the right said and I agree with a lot of what we just said and you know I've been struggling since our meeting last week and have lost a lot of sleep over the idea of we have an
obligation to advocate for the schools and cutting is not moving the schools in the direction that we need to go. But we also we cannot stand apart from the town. We are intertwined. I think that the
spreadsheet you presented for me sort of solidified that we have been trying to run two separate budgets when we should it is one budget. You know all our funding sources for the most part coingle to some degree.
We share benefit expenses. It just we need to find a way to work together instead of sort of negotiating with one another for the pot of money that belongs to the entire community.
And what I heard last night at the select board meeting was perhaps the beginning of moving in a direction of putting forward a plan that if there was a commitment that the schools if the committee deliberates and
decides it wants to go in that direction could participate in that actually gives the opportunity I want which is to advocate for what we need in our schools as opposed to having a fight for the next two months
for a level funded budget that I don't think any of us sit here thinking, you know, sets our schools up for the success that we want to see. So, while I do not want to ask the superintendent and Mike to make additional cuts, I
struggle to see a path forward when we don't do that. But also, I think that the points Mike made tonight were well taken and I think that there is work that needs to be done to make sure that the number that we do
move forward with is accurate. We owe that to the people whose jobs we are talking about to make sure that the dollar amount is correct and it's not an estimate on an estimate, you know, on a percentage that we're not totally sure
about. So, you know, the clock is ticking, but I don't see how we move forward without doing that work as part of the process. >> Mike has his hand up, by the way. I don't know. >> My turn. >> So, I again two comments. The first one
is from the committee, and I may regret this in the future, but have we considered bringing the benefits into our budget? because at that point the cushion is ours and we can reduce that cushion and if we need to cut somewhere
else we will but it's on our side and the other part of that is the comment that was made about revolving funds and charging benefits to revolving funds if the benefits are sitting on the town side but on paper they're coming over to
us as a as part of the percentage formula if I charge benefits off to a revolving as I'm now told we need to do required by law. How does that benefit money that's been reduced on the town side get back to the our gent fund budget? Cuz
I'm not sure that it's going to. So if the benefits sit on our side, I can ensure that if I charge benefits off to the revolving fund that relieves some money in the general fund for us, not for the town. So if we have to cut 1.5,
and I'm not convinced the 1.5 is still a winner. I believe that we still have a lot of work to do. Um, how do we get to ensure that we're not working on ratios is just said ratios of numbers versus
actual data because I think we do a pretty good job of having data and analyzing data. I mean, we're one department. I know the town has seven or eight departments and I get it's a much different animal on that side. I would just feel more comfortable that if we're going to have to make these cuts that
impact lives impact our our students, forget lives, our students, education, we should have control over what we're the other point is to the everybody. One of the big numbers on here is the
pension. This is something that is not any of our fault. This is goes back 30 or 40 years from people who retired and they not to any fault of theirs but they weren't contributing 11% to the pension like we are now. They were contributing a lot less 5 7 6%. We are now making up
that debt. So 2.8 million our split number is from years and years ago of of debt. It's it's and and you guys can correct me if I'm wrong but that's my understanding. It's a little bit more complicated than that too, right? Because the the the
asset base that is funding that tension is also not keeping up every year with healthcare expenses. So, you're projecting a liability long into the future. You have an asset base that is helping to fund it. You have inputs coming from people contributing. You
have money coming out. It is it's very complicated, >> but it's from it's not anything that's resolved in the last 5 years. by >> by but it is also there is a component from recurrent employees that are also contributing but but to your point it is
it is a legacy liability for sure it is a legacy liability from you know it it's but it's it is a it's a monster pensions are monsters really and but but it but in any event it is still a liability that's been funded or that's been
created by school and town employees you know over the years and I would if I could just make one comment Mike it would I mean again I don't know the u how realistic it is to think this will be done you know before town meeting but to take a look at those pension numbers
because correct me if I'm wrong the majority of the employees on the school side are are teachers and administrators that are in the in this in the state pension that this town does not contribute to and it's the non um you know it's our other I think it's the you
know like the food service custodians bus drivers. They're on the town pension side, but it would it seemed to me that the town would have a greater percentage of employees. >> It does >> in the town pension. >> Yeah. I mean, like I said, these aren't my numbers. I didn't deep analyze this.
I didn't I asked Alicia and her team to do it, so I think they need to justify it all to Mike, I guess. But I will say that that seems to be correct in what I'm looking at because it says the active life insurance percentage schools is 66 but then the pensions pension is
only 39. So >> it seems to be a shift between those two lines >> and and the way the way you can tell is anybody who's licensed and required to have a license by DESIE goes into MTRS and anybody who does not have a license that's not required to have a license by Desi goes into the town. And I can tell
you that out of our 520 or so FTE total, um, we know that at least 35 I think are unit A because that's the number we'll be using during negotiations last year. Plus all the administrators, all the principles, assistant principles, uh, special
education staff, um, who aren't in unit A. Um, I said John, Julia, Lisa Marie. So we're probably 325 to 330 of our 500 and something are in MTR. So more than 50% are outside the top
>> Yeah. Yeah. Um the other thing that um I think that again on the 50,000 foot level and I'm not going to be here but if the decision is made between the two committees and there's an agreement that the the benefits are going to come over um OPEV and the health insurance
benefits are over coming over to the school side. I would suggest that the school committee would want a seat at that bargaining table um with those units that bargain for those benefits because if we're going to be responsible for paying them in our budget, we ought to be responsible, you know, have a seat
at the table and I believe the negotiations are going on now. I I I think I'm not 100% sure, but that would be I would think that would be very important. >> Sounds reasonable to me.
Yeah, that finance committee here as a citizen. Yeah. >> Does anyone on the committee have a comment about that? Is that something that you would think is I think it's important >> that makes sense if it's if it's something that's going to affect our budget
>> and it's negotiated. >> Yeah. And now is that something we think is realistic since we're talking 27 or is this given that we have to change you know probably doesn't it's probably not a it sounds like it makes sense for us to do. I'm not sure if it makes sense to
do right now is my question or should we do it now because I'm I'm hearing please let me know if I'm misinterpreting things. At least I've heard several people say that we probably need to put together, right, what's more of a
balanced budget that is an additional 1.5 million less than what we have right now. >> I don't agree with that. I mean, correct, Mike doesn't seem to agree with that number either. So, I don't think that we should be throwing a number out. I think we probably should try to button up what that number is and then come
back and decide is that >> I think I think it's more complicated then >> if you have to cut 1.5 million >> the reality is 80% of our budget is setups. So in order to get to employ you're going to have to have some reduction in force rift pink slips whatever you want to
call them. For every one of those I issue I do need to account for unemployment for those positions. However I will likely have some benefit savings because we haven't done the benefits anymore. So there's so that 1.5 could creep up to 1.7 1.8 after
unemployment but might come back down to 1.6 once once you have the benefit savings. depends on the share of them. Individual plan, a family plan until we get some directive on which way to go. Yeah, we can >> Yeah, that that's a good point because Alicia had sort of in the scenarios on
the town side those exact things unemployment and I've mentioned to her we well do we understand what the schools are cutting before or after the 1.5 and how that may impact um not not the unemployment but the the insurance which is sitting on the town side
because that would go into this as well. Let me just finish my thought a little bit too and that again just to reiterate what Melissa said is I don't support that right they definitely do not support that budget but I think it's important to show what that budget would look like and then I do think we have to
look at a more fully funded budget that includes some of the issues that we think are coming next year and look to have that sourced appropriately probably through an over >> Yeah. I mean, I don't agree with what most of what everybody's still saying.
No one wants to make these cuts. I don't think we're doing the schools any favors by not playing ball town. And um you know, if we refuse to make cuts, then the cuts that have to be made on the town side to offset that are probably
going to fall in our laps in terms of public opinion, and that's not going to help us in the future or this year. Um, we do need to come up with a number so that we can tell Mike and John what to do. So,
how do we get that number and when do we get it? Cuz we sort of set up this meeting. I know it was quick turn, but we set up this meeting to get that number and we're still not sure about what that is and we need to move quickly. particularly like I don't want to pivot too quickly but
particularly if we're going to start to also ask John and Mike to look at override scenarios like the select points already because we don't want to fall behind there and so what
Mike you may need to restate exactly what you need to get a number that you can be confident in so that we can give you direction I'm going to jump in for a second because I trying to stay quiet over here. But I think um I honestly
think um Alicia needs to dig back in some of the stuff Mike just brought up about the pension about cuz you know we're talking percentages right 637 and all that stuff and just that quick math Mike just did on on the pension side of things there's there's a lot of money on the table because that's not 50/50 you
know so it's to side there. So I think if you're looking at that piece you're looking at at one point Alex said this $900,000 it could be a $600,000 debt delta like those are the things that matter right 600,000 is you know x amount of teachers like and I know that
is going to cut it so at the end of the day I need from the committee a number that's that's close to possible is what the number is going to be 1.5 has been thrown out there and I think Alec Alec has done a nice job of kind of yeah substantiating that however ever. And this is no offense to anybody. I'm just
not convinced that number is the right number because I don't think the data input will, you know, wear it this week. I think it needs to be a little bit more analysis, but I can't wait two, three, four more weeks for that. I have there's a lot a lot of work to the 14.75 FTS
that we've already cut into a level fund and budget. We work on season. This isn't like, oh, we can turn around and cut x amount of our positions in a week's time. So I would just ask that the committee come up with something that makes sense based upon either a
range maybe or something and then once we get the actual number which I'm have right it's okay we don't have an actual number then we can make another adjustment of some sort but I don't want to create a scenario having to figure out how to come up with $ 1.5 million if
that 1.5 million ends up being 900 or 1.2. I mean, that's that's real money. That's real people. And I will just say this one last thing. Regardless of whatever that number is, and I said this from the very beginning, we did a level fun budget. We're in the business of
students. This will 100% impact classrooms, which is going to 100% impact students. I get it. It's it's what we need to do. I really need to play ball. We need to work together. That's the only way this town can move forward. I'm not saying that I I guess I
don't want to cut money people, but it will 100% impact students. I'm an educator. I'm an educational leader in the district and it's my job to try to do what's best for our kids. This is not best for our kids. We're in a position
that really was caused by none of us. Um and we need to figure out a way through this. Um this year is bad. Next year is going to be way worse. Way worse. So we we need to plan now for the future too. So this can't be a little band-aid and say okay we get through it. Next year is
going to be worse. So override override cuts cuts whatever this has to we have to like as soon as we get a meeting done now we're going to start this chair. I mean it can't be. So I just I just need to say those things. I will take the direction of the school committee and
Mike and I will work with that team to do what we need to do. However that whatever that number is and how we need to get to it, we'll figure it out. >> Let me just make John. Thank you. And let me just make a comment to the other committee members. This is this is tough stuff, right? I mean, this is, you know,
we're elected or appointed to do a job and that's to advocate for the schools. Of course, we need to be partners. We are also, you know, residents of the town and we care about the town, but we are we are the school committee and our job is to advocate for the budget that we need. Kate, you wrote a letter to the school committee last year signed with
two other parents demanding that the school committee do a fully funded budget, not a level service budget, not a level funded budget, a fully funded budget. That was your demand last year. So, you can see that it's it's not easy, right? There's a lot of pressure and there's a lot of demand and that's
understandable and that's what we're faced with. But our job is to advocate for the schools. And you know, to Alex's point earlier, the the town meeting will ultimately vote on on a recommended budget from the from the finance committee, but the school committee is
the o is the other only body in town that can go to town meeting with a request for what it wants. We can do that. I'm not suggest I'm not suggesting that that's what we do, but we have the right to do it. And at some point, we have to decide. And that's what John's
saying. and he says he's absolutely right and they it is not them their job to give us the number. It's our job to tell to give them the directive. What does this committee want to do? I'm asking each of you the four of you. And at some point, we didn't have public
comment tonight, Al. I don't know how many people in the room because I can't see, but we've got a number of folks online. I don't know if there's an interest in hearing from public comment in the spirit of transparency and good governance. I would, but I don't know if the rest of the committee would. >> Yeah, we um you know, we had public
comment last week. We'll have public comment this coming week. The only reason we didn't have it tonight was just to ensure we have enough time with the select board member and the finance committee members here. That was the reason, Jen. >> Well, we could open it up now if there's an interest. I don't know if I don't know. I don't if there's people want to
>> go back to I want to go back to your first question, Jen. So I I clearly want to, you know, in working with the town put together what we have less an amount, right? And to me, I would look to Mike and Alicia
to work on if there's there's edits to the numbers that were presented tonight. So I think that's one thing we need to do. And then the second thing would be, I think Jen, you just mentioned this, what a fully funded budget would look like. what we recommend that we need to
really do the right job for our students. Um, but again, that's going to be tied to an additional source of revenue. But I think >> well, a fully funded budget would have been a directive last November to our to the subcommittee and to the administration. We were never ever
tasked with that. That is its own set of weeks and months of work. Going back, John, correct me if I'm wrong. Like a fully funded budget means you go back to the drawing board and you start with your administrator. That is not something we have time for. >> I would think.
>> No way. No way. >> Then there's only one choice, Jan, right? What other choice is there besides >> I don't I mean our job is to come is to present a budget at town meeting based on the you know working with the
town and the projected revenues. I don't >> I guess I don't understand. We're working with the town, right? Collaborating around a budget that makes sense for both sides, >> right? >> I think we I think Alex showed what that looks like tonight.
>> Yeah. >> That's not a fully funded budget. >> No, I understand that's but that's what we're being asked to, right, as collaborative. >> So that Mike needs guidance on is he going to try to find 1.5 or what number?
you want to go. >> My response to that is we need Alicia available to do the work to validate the issues that Mike has to help us determine what that number is. Is she available to do the work? >> Make her available.
>> I mean, you might want to do a range of one to two. What if what if what if the analysis is wrong in the other direction and it comes out at 2 million? If you if we're questioning the analysis and and there's discreping the analysis, I think your spreadsheet is solid. I
think the data the spreadsheet's not the analysis. I didn't perform the percentages. I had nothing to do with it. The spreadsheet is different from that. I'm saying if we're questioning what Alicia did, what if you look at it and it goes the other way? >> Then we have to deal with that. Okay.
>> Like we need the facts. I mean, >> exactly. So if you're looking for a range, you might want to widen that range is what I'm saying. One to two million. Maybe 1.5's in the middle. >> I mean, the other option is Melissa, if you wants to go back to the subcommittee level and we could work with Mike on
this. I don't know. I mean, we don't >> we need Alicia and we need Mike. >> So I spoke with Alicia yesterday afternoon. She is back tonight. Her and I are meeting tomorrow. >> Okay. So, >> I would say like you guys sit in a room and don't leave that room until you have all your questions answered and you feel
good about the numbers that she's providing, then you can stand behind it. >> Easier said. >> I No, actually I concur. I mean, and there I really think there's like six budget buckets and it's the buckets that we don't control. Yeah. >> So, if I can understand those six buckets and I think I understand the health insurance one because I have the
roster. I think I I understand the retirees because I have the roster and my numbers just don't match the numbers that that are in the formula spreadsheet. And you're right, maybe one of the other formulas is off in the other direction and maybe you're right.
Maybe that 1.5 is now 1.8 and but >> we just need to know what the real number is. And once we know what the real number is, we will work. >> It's completely reasonable. We got to sit side by side looking. >> Can I help a little bit here? >> I think we asked you for 1.5.
>> Okay. >> So, I don't have full authority here, but I can tell you based on conversations I've had, that's what was presented and what we have directed our town administrator and Alicia to work off of and our scenario B
last night. So, I think that if you want to set a ceiling on it, okay, I again I'm I'm one of five people, but based on what we talked about last night, those are the assumptions that we're going through on the town side. So, you know, I would
feel comfortable if we're talking about a range that if I were in your position that I would use that as a >> but we have every I mean, don't so correct me if I'm wrong, Dan. What I heard last night too is that you're looking to offset the increase in the
costs of the benefits. So we're asking just to we want to we want to solidify that number. If you're asking for 1.5 million because that's what you need and whether it's encompassing or it's more than th those budgets then then ask that and that's something that this >> that's not what I said. What I said is
that when Mike and Alicia get together and reconcile if what Al just suggested that that number goes up, we are not again I can speak for myself only myself because I'm one person here. I'm not sitting with my board but that the numbers that we
directed them to go was 1.5. I am not asking for more and that's not what that and Alicia are working on on their side. That's all I can contribute from that. If I was in your position based on what we talked about last night, which
coincides with Al's numbers, we are not making assumptions that these numbers are going. >> So the question is when Mike and Alicia said, you know, does the number go down and if so >> and it might come down if the insurance
gets reanalyzed. She she on the fly last week changed it from 15 to 11. We're doing liaison meetings, guys. Like we're late in the game, too. Like I know there's a lot of pressure and time here. You can imagine how I feel. There's zero balanced budget. We have we have to vote on it two weeks, the whole thing. Not
just one, 15 of them. Right. So, I mean, this isn't ideal timing, but it is what it is, right? So I'm wondering if you know if you and Alicia are sitting down tomorrow, you know, does Al put a school committee meeting on the calendar for I
mean Tuesday is sort of the soonest he can post in the 48 hours, you know, so that we can come back and have that number >> or you can just say or you can just say >> use the number you not we're not doing yet. I think it's sort of a question of
>> where you you know you keep you say you want direction but so is it direction that >> we hear it's a numbers 1.5 I mean I think what is our wisdom that >> that's a low in you whether we do
>> I mean I I think scheduling another school committee meeting off cycle might not be necessary you could also just have this be the main agenda item for next week's meeting we have a meeting next week Right. It's just, >> you know, talking about the timing and it's, you know, a week from now as
opposed to >> Yeah. But we still, I mean, >> presumably, John, if you get this number and you'll come back with the number and with the suggested situation to meet that and we could potentially vote a budget next Thursday night.
>> So, is that reasonable? So, that it sounds like, you know, 1.5 is the ceiling. If you and Alicia agree to a different number, that's fine. >> Well, I think if we if we come up with different numbers, we need to go back to Fincom, which repopulate the spreadsheet. And how does that affect the tunnel?
>> I don't know. If that number comes down, >> it comes down, it adds more cuts and you just put a ceiling on it and they already are working towards that. So, >> but if it comes down for us, why wouldn't if it's based on insurance, why wouldn't it go down for them? >> I think I think the place that I'm found in the savings is in the insurance. >> And if the insurance is high, it's
higher on both sides. Yeah, if I can bring ours down, I don't, not to be fast, I don't care if Felicia brings her side down. I'm worried about our budget and our staff. >> What's that? >> Yes, it'll be done on the same allocation. You guys are going to sell your numbers. Get to that percentage
actuals. This percentage was done to do this. Get to actuals. Okay, this is the intention. >> She I think she she was using actuals. I I don't she's not in the room to defend what she did, but she wasn't she was using actuals. So, I think it's a great >> all due respect, our budget's been done for two months. We presented it a month
ago. >> Yeah. >> This we didn't stall this. We And and I get that and neither did anybody over there. But we are where we are. We're ready. Like we were ready. We were sprung like last Wednesday night that 1.5 needed to be cut from our
budget after we presented, had a hearing, had a school committee meeting the next night. I mean, we're under the gun. I think we're working to get there. I just don't feel like we are allowed to analyze the data that we're asked to
vote on. >> You you can look at it. Do you think it's zero? Do you think there's zero costs on the on the town side of this? >> I do not. >> Okay. So, the question is how far can you bring it down if you're questioning our data? That's my that's my >> question the data. It's not it's not questioning. And I just I want to say
this clearly. I I don't I'm not I'm not questioning Unleash's ability to that. I'm what I'm questioning is we went from 18% at one point on insurance to 15 and a seven to a 12 and a nine. >> The GIC voted last week.
>> I understand that. And that's my exactly. So how did she have you're using old data to tell us you need 1.5? That data was out. You're >> she's using the ratio from actuals and applying it to the new budget. on last Wednesday night. Yeah.
>> Thatcher said, "We need the schools to cut 1.5." On Thursday, DGIC voted. On Friday, we got the new rate. >> Yes. And I've updated the spreadsheet to to >> And our 1.5 didn't change with the new I that's what I don't understand. >> It it's it's been shifting to like 159
to 147 as we've changed the the amounts. >> And this is going this I'm not trying to get controversial because I have a lot of >> No, I mean a a couple percent doesn't shift this that much. So, so if you drill into this and shift the 62 to 60, it's not going to directionally change
it.$8 million in benefits, 2% can shift that a lot for us. That those are positions, >> right? I mean, I I know big numbers, it doesn't look like a lot, but for us, the crumbs make up the I can find enough crumbs to save a position. >> That's what that's what my job is. I
have to, you know, advocate for the students and the schools. You guys presented 1.5 m out of that. The GIC rates came out on I did a full analysis for every staff member on what their rate was and I I have a $350,000
difference from from at least the schedule the schedule was reacting to newspaper articles a week before it came out that that the what was it the GLP1 was out. It was it was already reported that that the >> you guys 11% in your formula. I have
9.6%. And and if we bring that down again, what I said earlier is that this 1.5 will come down. >> We're now voting on whatever comes down. We shouldn't be voting on 1.5. And we shouldn't be planning cuts that don't need to occur.
There's $350,000 difference between what Alicia put in that spreadsheet that showed last Wednesday and what I have plus another $350,000 buffer. That's 750. That's $700,000, which is half of what you're asking us to come up with. I'm going to just come up with path
don't know why nobody wants us to go look at the data. I think we should step in here and I agree like if honestly if you sit with her and there's $750,000 in cuts that don't have to happen. I mean I'm going to get you a medal. Like that would be
fabulous, right? So like please do like honestly like if that's something that and it's something you need us to participate in then you know I'm happy to sit with you because I think that would be a fabulous outcome honestly. Um, Al Al, I'd like to make a motion
that we uh direct Mike and John to work together with the finance director to um solidify these numbers and we come back next week with a presentation >> with with a new presentation and budget
reflecting whatever numbers that Mike and Alicia agreed to. >> I'll second that. Okay. The motion's been made by Jen, seconded by Melissa. We'll do a roll call. Jen
>> is Is there any deliberation? I didn't >> I'm sorry. Yes. Any further discussion? >> I think we're all being told that we need to live in reality. We need to have the right and I need my to be comfortable.
Any other? Okay, we'll go to a vote. Janet >> in favor. >> Henry >> in favor. >> Melissa >> in favor. >> Kate >> in favor.
>> D in favor. The motion passes. 5 Z. Yes. Anything else? Madam, fiscal year 27 budget. Well, set with us. I would just like to thank you guys for having us. Appreciate I think this is a very productive
conversation. Um, and I can tell you that you have my personal commitment to work with you guys as you were discussing as one town. I can't speak for everyone else, but you have my commitment to work with you guys. I do I I I've always said that I can't that I never felt comfortable coming to you guys with this without working together
with you for an over can't expect for you to make some cuts and to have to pay participate in the downside and not work with you on the side. So you do have my commitment to fight for as high as possible to work with you guys. So I do appreciate that and you know and Mike I look forward to seeing what you find out
with Alicia. Hopefully you're right. Hopefully you find a bunch of cuts on our side too. Let's let's figure that out and whatever it ends up at, we can all work together moving forward. And you know, maybe we we can have more meetings on on individual groups or whatever to to work together for that.
We can bring the schools and the towns to where we want to mar. >> Again, Al, I don't I'd ask the committee, is there anybody interested in opening up for public comment? Before we do that, thanks for hosting
me, but I just want to say I mean this I'm in my 10th year as a superintendent and in spirit of um just sharing uh I've had many many times when the collaboration between finance board and superintendent school committee and
board has not been this you know open and honest discussion. So I want to thank you. I know sometimes I may come across like I'm a little bit passionate, but I I um in the grand scheme of things, the ongoing dialogue is what's needed. Um you know, I haven't been
marbleheaded that long and walked into a lot of stuff here. And I think the only way we're going to get past this is to have these continued conversations and have these continued collaborations. And I just want to thank you free and the rest of your committees on the work because it is important work and we can
agree to disagree on certain things and that's fine. and that's how we move forward. So, I just want to say that publicly. Thank you. >> Um I also would like to say um you know as well that this is obviously the most difficult budget season that that I've certainly seen. Um we Pat here who how
long have you been on? >> He's our longest member and I like by far the biggest challenge that we faced. Um and and what I've loved to see in this process is that the two of you working through this, you really care. You care about our town. you care about our school, you care about the students,
and it is it shows in everything you do. So, I think that passion is a wonderful thing. And I also think that I have seen through the course of this entire process of everyone sitting at this table and I'll also include Julia um and um Lisa Marie and I'm going to throw Kristen in there cuz I know she's behind
a lot of the numbers that I feel very strongly that um and very thankful and grateful that this is the team that is leading us through this challenge for the schools. >> Thank you. >> Thanks a lot. are there any public comment
>> discuss that there >> I don't know if we want to talk about this now public but you know the the select board has already shifted to talking about an override and I think if organizations cuts we're going to want to
figure out how we're how we're going to try to get this one back >> yeah at the And you know in an ideal world yeah we give that you know the select board has offered a tier approach. So our tier one would be will
we fund the schools right like the way that they're I think Dan described it as invest in in Marvel and invest investing into the schools. Um whereas tier three would just be flowing back with some
cuts and then and then you know next >> um >> so I I don't want to lose any time on that >> and I do want to get a sense of what's realistic to ask from John
>> like Jen said we I we can't ask them to do a fully funded budget steer in the count and vote. It's not realistic, but if we could make strides in that direction, like it
I wonder if it makes sense to you, you know, they're going to go off and work on what they're bringing back to us next week. So, it can be an agenda item perhaps for next week. The committee, I don't have to be here next week. I got a family commitment, but for the committee to have a discussion about
how we want to move forward with, you know, putting together >> having them put together what they would recommend that we asked for. I think what we might want to bring sort of our own work is sort of our version of of
what Aaron present to that movie three tier that had >> you know the tier the duration and the goal of so that we sort of have something to workshop amongst ourselves rather than just
>> simple answer to the question is um the level service budget that we started this whole conversation with that October would be what I was saying go forward for cuz that would have been if the if we weren't even the deficit.
>> It's pretty simp in my in my opinion it's pretty simple that would mean that we would m still only still only maintain what we currently have without actually putting extra into all the programming. Um right now we're at level fund which means we've already cut
programming supplies staff reduced budget we have to do more of that. So if the question is what does John think that the school needs if that needs to be part of the override John thinks as the superintendent school that our level services budget that we would
have gone we would have gone for this year had had it not been for this $8 million deficit is what what I feel we need just to maintain. That's not that's that's not even pine sky. That's just to maintain. And I think anything further than that is just that it's pine sky.
And quite frankly, back to the initial conversation, if we're working on how to cut 1x amount million dollars, that can't also be coming back from the school. There's a separate budget on top. I just want to be clear. I we can we could probably do the original
number, but I there's no possible way we got time to do a separate budget on top. I don't know if that's what was being asked, but I'm just it's sense and I agree with you. I think my my question would be since the select board is doing
a more complicated tiered approach to to a an override, are we going to be on there and are we just going to be on there for their what what they're calling tier three to to restore things or are we going to contribute to the
other teams and maybe and I think that's probably the discussion we'll have next week if we add it as an agenda. and item. But those are those are my questions of most certain because I think >> some some of that is up to us. I mean we have a warrant article on the town
warrant to um to request additional revenue through what you know through the source of power position two and a half override for the purposes of the school district budget. >> Yeah. So it's to us I think. Um >> yeah I think it's just a question. Oh
sorry Jen go ahead. I just I also didn't maybe I I was listening in last night. Maybe I missed it, but I didn't I I heard several different um I guess options of the word or scenarios, but I did I wasn't sure that necessarily there was a conclusion last night through the select board. I don't know if Dan is
still there or not. Um as to specifically what they're looking at or that they're just also starting this process. >> They're starting the my understanding was that they're starting the process. They've asked Thatcher to present scenarios and >> and honestly I just don't want to fall
behind. You know, we've been ahead this whole time, right? And and I don't want to be caught flatfooted when it's time to ask the town for more if we have an opportunity. So, let's add it. If if everyone agrees, let's add it. I think it makes sense for
a discussion next week and you know perhaps I know it was a meeting next week where follows relative to ours so perhaps have clarity. >> Yeah, Hatcher is coming back on >> Thursday at one so short window of time
to digest. >> Yes. Yeah. >> But it sounds to me like we're that folks are including the superintendent are saying that this idea of coming forward with a fully funded budget is at this point not on the
table. I just want to make that clear or I want some clarity on that. >> I mean I think again we have to live in the real world. I would like to find some ways to make progress toward,
you know, like John says, we're we're just in a holding pattern with the with the budgets that we've been approving. If if the select board is going to take a tiered approach, I want at least some tiers, you know, is it is it
kindergarten funding included in there? And and I think that's all we need to discuss next. But I don't think I Jen I agree with you. I don't think we can say oh please prepare a level funded budget by next week or by town, you know. >> But I also think
>> what do the other committee members think? I mean, I think that we have a sense of what the needs I mean, John has pretty well articulated that, you know, we need to fund the level services budgets that we would have
brought forward this year. Um, I my understanding is the projections have been made about what our contractual obligations look like over the next couple of years. um people have priced out what you know kindergarten tuition costs you know
that's you know maybe not every single thing that if we all sat around for 6 months we would come up with as things you know to fund in the schools but I think that is really significant progress in the direction that you know people have been talking for a long time about trying to go um and certainly an
improvement over the level funded budget um that was presented lost wealth. So, you know, is it an opportunity to try and make something out of the really unfortunate situation that we all find ourselves sitting here
having to deal with? I do want to make sure we understand what the dollar amount is to shore up the multi-year issue we have on our hand. I I'm not interested in backing a band-aid situation. I'm interested in backing something that structurally fixes the
problem that we have in front of us. And I think to Kate's point, you've already done, you understand what the contractual obligations are, what those dollar amounts are. And so I think while it will not be a perfect multiple month exercise where you go to everybody, you ask them what they want.
like we have a pretty directionally accurate number for what that is. >> I think if you just keep in mind that's that's both no in this level based upon going into the school right we're talking about that's not back up to
14.75 >> and then adding the three and a half and all that stuff. So the numbers will look different but you'll have a it's a journey to solve it for the numbers to find anybody numbers and um I think I
think at the end of the day um yeah we move forward with more I think we'll have much better I feel oh so much more confident after getting through numbers because that's going to help us navigate second question about what possible
might look like and what the be So, >> so before I when I built this year's original budget before we started looking at cuts and we had the $26 million level service budget increase, I also
did a budget for next year for fiscal 28. So, to answer your question, I know what that number is, but I don't know now that we've made some cuts, >> how much it come exactly. So if the idea is to fully go after what we lost this year lost and keep the services the same
that's a pretty I can give you the number people talk about dollar increases I think that's where we need our guidance from our fin kong because we don't know what the revenues are we don't need all of our budget increase we need the difference between the 60 the 63% revenue we increase to
our budget for us fiscal year 28 to what the one of the revenue projections and what is our number that's what we need for a 28. We need a 27 override, 28 override. And I think the town's in the same situation. They're talking about a multi-year override, you know, or an override to carry us through multiple
years. >> I I can't in good conscious or whatever even predict a fiscal 29. We we started even started negotiations. All the contracts are up. I mean, we could probably put some placeholder number in
there. Um but in in doing that I can probably do that in a week and get your number of9% statu that we want to look at. But I think the other part is do we bring the benefits because if we do then I need to
build that in for fiscal 28 cuz it's not going to be a 2% increase on benefits. Okay. I think somebody said it's an item was a 664 and now 75. You know that's where do we talk about then it's why I said I'll probably saying this
>> we don't know but Mike we also don't know that was my question back to the like what was budgeted what was what was encumbered what was expended we don't have I don't think we know what what were in those n you know in those numbers some of that may have been absorbed in
what was actually budgeted because that's what used to happen for years you know they overbudgeted the health insurance and that's where they, you know, had sort of found money. >> All right. So, I think we've gotten good input on what will one of the agenda
items next week. >> Is there anything else around the budget? >> Well, yeah. Yeah. There's two things. One, we still didn't decide whether we actually want to go forward with this on the benefit side. And do we want to direct Mike to I guess maybe there's two budgets that need to be prepared.
one that doesn't that includes um you know health insurance and and um pension benefits and one that doesn't and I still have the question out on the table whether we want to open this up for public comment. >> Yeah, I said yeah we'll address that. I'm open to that. I'll look at the will of the committee when we're just when
we're done discussing fiscal year 27 budget. >> I think the benefits are one line item additional in the budget. So I >> yeah so looked like op to operationalize >> the I think it's two two additional line items in the budget for benefits and one for retirey pension it could be up to
five or six lines >> I mean I prefer you managed it and it was in there that makes >> absolutely and I think >> you control it >> people always say how much is the how much of the benefits cost the town and my answer's always been I don't know and
and quite honestly they didn't >> not saying I didn't care But it wasn't something that I it wasn't my purge. So I didn't get myself involved in it. >> If we're if we're involved in it affects our budget, I think we're going to take a greater interest in controlling say controlling the cost, but
controlling how much is budget >> versus >> well also controlling the cost, Mike, I mean like you know so what happens is you start thinking about when you're doing hot new hires etc like what is the all-in cost and you know uh that you know that's important. Um, I I also
cannot emphasize enough that we got to get one shot of the apple here if this is what's going to happen. And we absolutely are going to need to have a seat at the table on the negotiation of these benefits going forward because if you don't have that, I'm only one vote, but I can't I wouldn't be able to
support bringing them over if we have no control over it. It would be like ask giving us the the contract for the for the five units and having and not having the ability to negotiate the contract. It's >> I talked to that the other day because I was like, "Oh, the private sector, we would be really negotiating like why are
these benefits?" And he was like, "No carrier will have us only stuff that then we're $2 million liability for them every year." Like we're kind of handed, >> but I agree with you, Jen. We still want to have a seat at the table. >> But there's also I mean there's still also, you know, I mean, not to get into
the nitty-gritty, but you know, how much of the of we are we paying versus the employee paying? Those are things that get negotiated regardless of the premium. >> I assume that's in the contract. I don't think it's okay. >> It's it's not it's not part of the you
know the the school contract. It's part of the PE contract which right now is being negotiated and that's on the town side. I'm just saying we need to have a seat at the table. >> Yeah. Agreed. >> All right. So there's um a suggestion that we open up public comment because
just want to know what the well I'm I support that but I want to know what the will of the committee is. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> All right. Uh so folks late >> I have a public comment. >> Yeah. So uh folks in the room if you
know we don't have a signup sheet but just you know come up to the mic. We still three minute. >> Oh yeah. >> And remote folks can raise their hands please if they want to make a comments. >> So I just want to confirm um what John you were saying that if you were asked
for what you would like to to include in an override who would say I want my level services budget back. Is that what you're saying? Oh did you mean level funded? >> Oh no. I I said that if if I were on the well basically if I were on the spot
tonight to say what would I want I would start with the level services budget that we started with >> which is $2.5 million more than what where you end >> right >> uh no some of it came down because of funds but >> like it was 1.7
was the level services after we >> we allocated >> okay all right so you keep the revolving funds the way that you set them up now or the salaries there So, so that's a $1.7 million override plus the contractual increases. Do you guys have any idea how much that's going to cost
next year? The increases. >> It's not just contractual. I mean, we need we we project contract services. >> By the way, not a press conference. This is a public contract. >> Yeah. Just I'm I'm answering questions. Sorry. >> Okay.
you guys the opportunity to educate the public because you are going to be asking them >> to raise their taxes and so it might be helpful to to beat them along in this process. >> It would be but it's also important to hear from the public based on what we deliberated tonight and that's what I was asking for public. I >> I live in town. I am the public also in
addition. >> So let's tell us what you think. >> That is not what I'm going to do. I'm still trying to figure it out just like so many other people. But if you don't want me to ask questions and help the public better understand it, I will email you guys. Thank you.
>> I mean, to me, public comment will be you Lee saying, Leah, you know, I would like to suggest to the committee what you just said, and that that will be fine with public comment. >> I'd like to suggest to the committee that they keep the public informed around >> Oh, yeah. or answer my emails when it
comes to um or media requests in general when it comes to what it is that you're going to be looking for and asking because then >> Right. There you go. Thank you. >> That's very fair that your emails get answered, Lee. That's a fair request.
>> I'll send you one tonight. >> Sarah, >> I'm not the spokesperson. That's the chair. So you talked about an MLOU and the need for it. Um we signed an MLOU in 2019 2020 school year between the select
board, the school committee that there would be designates from the school committee, the select board and um the FinCom that met uh where Danny said that needs to be signed and and then we'd have some assurances. I just want to read back the text thread from October
of 24 where I informed the then chair of the select board um of the of theou and I said there's an between the two boards that states we will have one sil wrote it um Kyle should have a copy of it and
she said fin and school committee I said nope select board school committee along with fin said that's not Thursday that's not Thursday's meeting Um, and it then this is where you need to be concerned. An entirely different board
is not bound to this is the the select board members comments. An entirely different board is not bound to anyou from years past, but I don't have a problem or reason not to. I then send theou this is what um I could pull up from the email. It's signed by joint
meeting. I tell her the dates and to ask Kyle for it that Lisa me had drafted it. I totally agree with the attent and we should absolutely but I'm just saying we don't have to those are this is the the select board those are basically vision statements and when a board entirely
turns over visions can change just making a technical point so while you're saying your safeguard is going to be anou it didn't save us here now did it I I've been requesting that we still had these meetings which we had up until that point the reps at those meetings
had changed typically on the select board side Moses had been their wrath. Um, and then they faulted and and so if you're hanging your hat on this flip-flopping on the procedure is going to be safeguarded by anou, you have
theou. It exists. You should be educating yourselves when you get on a board about theus in place historically. Many of you were around attending these meetings and it's not it's not okay to to put out to the public, oh, we're going to put this on paper. It's at fun.
it exists and you're not adhering to it. And and to say that's going to be the safeguard that's going to keep the schools next year from flip-flopping to another area or being asked to flip-flop again so that we're always the one that is on the wrong end of whatever matrix
we're using. Like that's just laughable. >> Thank you. Is there anyone else? >> Okay, we'll close. Anyone on the right? >> No, there's no >> no hands are up. All right, we'll close public comment. Thank you. >> Looking for a motion to adjurnn. >> Make a motion to adjourn.
>> I'll second. >> Motion beus, seconded by Henry. >> Um I think we need to uh roll call this. Jen or Jen. >> Um in favor >> Henry >> in favor. >> Melissa
>> in favor. in >> all in favor. The motion passes 5-0. Thank you everyone. The meeting is adjourned. >> Frank, can you make sure that's off?