We'll call this uh meeting to order. >> All present. >> All present >> except Steve. >> Except Steve >> and Bill. >> The green box. We think he's talking. We just can't hear him. >> We can't hear. >> Yeah. >> Bill, we can't hear you at all if you're
trying to speak. >> Where's Where's >> He's talking. He's talking. We can >> now we're talking >> where it says Bill R, but we can't hear you. >> All right.
>> Pledge allegiance. >> Come out those speakers. Peter, >> we'll do the pledge of >> 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. >> All right, we'll kick it off with the midyear uh fiscal year 26 financial review. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so just a a
brief summary is that we are trending toward expectations. Uh, given our budget, departments are positioned to use um, if not the entirety, the vast majority of their budgets, current trends are suggest stable findings. Um,
health insurance is an important area to monitor. We're currently on track for this fiscal year. Um, we might even end up with a little surplus. Knock on wood. Um, we have uh building exper expenses.
Uh, given the new construction of town hall and the senior center, there's been um some maintenance expenses since it's over a year old. So, we're not under warranty anymore. Um, so we're trending toward a potential deficit. We may have
to come back to the finance committee for um a reserve transfer or we could do it under uh end of year transfer. Um also electricity uh due to the um new construction of buildings uh we
need to realign the electric expenses to the appropriate accounts which we're doing for fiscal 27. As you know, the snow and ice budget has been um spoken for and um more than spoken for. Um
there's a couple other accounts that are trending close to the appropriation. Uh unemployment, um data processing. Um essentially our
revenues are trending right at projections. Inspection fees is where we would expect it to be this time of year. Interest income is a little lower than last year. Uh the taxes are trending um a little up but generally in line
with expectations. That's the midyear report subject to your questions. How bad's the snow and ice? >> Um, the final totals are coming in Friday. That's the deadline to submit them up the chain to MIMA to try to get
federal money to reimburse some of it. We had budgeted 80,000 as prior years. Um, earmarked 250,000. We're probably north of that, closer to 300. >> Was a hell of a storm. and and then a
great job by DPW and the contractors, the water and sewer emergency personnel. >> They didn't >> can't speak highly enough. >> Any other questions? >> Mark, could you speak a little bit towards um what you mentioned about the building maintenance expenses and could
you give some examples of what you're incurring? >> Uh, sure. there's um many uh building issues that we're still running into and and actually we're
running up against uh for example the the AV room in here was 80° and we can't figure out how to cool it if someone didn't >> balance the system, >> you know, set it properly. So, we have
to leave the door open until someone can figure out how to cool the equipment, otherwise it's going to overheat. >> Um, there's some issues in the bathrooms upstairs where the the drains are not working properly, so they had to put a new grinder pump in. Um, other plumbing
issues that I don't fully understand the mechanics. Uh, uh, what else? Building and maintenance. >> None of that's under warranty or is that >> it? It should be. and and we're following up with with them. Um,
for example, I'm still not fully satisfied on the AV equipment. Um, as you can tell, we can't hear Bill yet. So, I'm holding that $300,000 they charged to design this system until it
functions. They're not getting paid. Um, >> apparently they can hear him on Zoom. >> Okay. >> So, I mean, Past we've had to >> turn on the sound on a laptop and mic it up. >> Right. >> Can we try that?
>> Perhaps. >> Oh, >> there you go. >> A small voice emerged from the laptop. >> Bill. >> Oh, dear.
>> Never work. from when the building first opened >> designed it way too complicated. >> We we had them rewire an analog wire because it it was too >> fancy. >> All right. >> And any other questions?
>> Yeah. Uh two things on uh snow and ice. Uh, one I I'm not a me a weather like uh junkie or anything, but I was looking at some data this morning that apparently suggested that most years when you have
60 in by now you get 80. So that 300,000 is probably going to get worse unfortunately. Um, and then the other thing on it is during the select board meeting um, last week there was talk about the state of emergency allowing for maybe some state funding. Have we heard anything about that? Is there
anything more concrete about what that could mean? >> Right. So, I was actually on a call with with Governor Healey and and the other managers and mayors, and they're looking into putting a bulk request in. So, we've asked fire, police, DPW, even the
contractors to send all their receipts in. Okay. So once we compile those and it looks like it could be between 50 and 100 our expenses for that storm, but they're going to take all the cities and towns if it reaches the federal threshold. So
our governor is going to give it to the our federal counterparts and you know it might take a literal act of Congress. >> Yeah. >> Don't hold your breath. >> Yeah, I'm not going to hold my breath there. But hopefully does the state have any money before it gets to the federal
level? Um, that's that's the billion dollar question this budget season. >> They're >> that was >> I mean the governor came out with a budget and and where Norton's essentially level funded from where we've been for the last 10 years. >> Yeah. I guess you're going to get into a
lot of that. So, okay. Thank you, >> Mhm. >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. I was going to ask with the storm, do we have any unplanned like structural damage like roof deflection? Any damage to vehicles? Anything that is going to
require potential capital improvements? Anything we didn't expect that's damage related other than just cleaning up? There was a Ford Explorer that might be totaled. >> What? >> Uh, one of our plows hit one of our town
vehicles. >> Damn. pulling into a fire station parking lot. So, we're submitting an insurance claim. So, that's our deductible basically. We we pay about a million dollars for insurance every year. So, might go up a little, but
probably not as a result of one accident, but >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yes, sir. What about come spring here, these roads are going to be in atrocious condition, the potholes with this uh
winter the way it is. Are we allocating any money towards that or adding that into this disaster fund? Um seeing I see already potholes all over the place and it's early.
>> That's a very creative idea. I can certainly ask Highway and DPW to estimate the freeze and thaw impact of the blizzard of 2026. >> Any other questions, >> Mr. Chair? >> Yes, Sandra.
>> A non snow related question. Um I don't know if it's it belongs here or not, but Mark, can you talk a little bit about some of the um new positions that have been added in the last few months? um kind of where they fit into the budget. >> Um
sure. Um >> you're probably referring to the DPW director as one of them. >> Yep. >> So that's split uh 15% highway and 85% water and sewer. So that's no new money.
That's essentially not filling two positions and filling one position. >> And the Sorry to say that again. You didn't you you did not fill a position in the highway department. Is that >> correct? >> Okay. So, was that the position we tried
to add in last year that that then got cut back out? >> I wasn't here. >> Okay. Yeah. We had added a position to or we backfilled the position for high for highway. >> Yes. I I believe that was it. So that's
the one that got that that got cut and then that money was used for the DPW director. Is that how that shook out? >> That's right. >> And the um assistant town manager essentially took the place of the assistant to the town manager
>> at a lower rate. Um also, um the IT director took the balance of the part-time IT specialist and we're projecting a savings going into
next year. Um because we'll be using less of 150 an hour consultant and more of 50 an hour staff member. >> Perfect. Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. Yes. >> Just to circle back on on Sandy's point,
on Highway we funded $100,000 from the cemetery fund. They can only be used in theory for the cemetery fund. So, you couldn't use those funds
to hire a DPW director. I I don't believe the way that that uh was written up because it was a trust fund. Correct me if I'm wrong, James. So, I'm not sure how that is all playing out. Again, in the spring, I'm not sure
if you were here or not, Mark, but um the select board agreed to transfer $100,000 to increase the staffing of the highway department so we could better maintain the cemeteries. And that was that added position. So, I'm not sure. And that bylaw trust fund that's there
states it those funds can only be used for cemetery maintenance. So, that's something to be looked into. James, do we actually lose a position or are we still talking about the one unfilled position that's been open? >> Mr. Chair, James, I'm the town accountant. Um, it was 80,000, not
100,000 >> and that money was added to the budget, not to uh you know how they usually give out 200,000 from the Hicks fund to fund the budget. It was 280,000 to help fund the budget for 2026. I'm not sure if it was two position if
or if it was one position. I do know that uh I believe we recently hired someone there uh for that position um for the highway. Um and uh there there are enough funds in the budget to pay for both the 15% portion of the DPW
director and the new position that was hired um at the highway department to finish out the year. >> Okay. All right. >> Yeah. >> Any other questions?
>> All right. We'll move on to the fiscal year 2025 turnbacks. Uh thank you. So fiscal 25 closed with turnbacks of $725,000 representing the smallest turnbacks in
the general fund in the past 9 years. Um so this is this means that our budget is tight and pretty much on point where where spending is. Um the it was driven by turnbacks in um the reserve fund, the
the clerk's office, miscellaneous categories, um public safety, schools, um looks like the largest turnback was actually from schools. But um all in all,
this this represents a budget that's uh pretty much matching budgeted expenses and revenues on the on all departments. Mr. Chair,
>> yes. Why uh 81,000 from the police department? That seems high. Are they short a position? I would I don't know definitively. I would say probably vacancies and the time it takes to hire when one officer retires and
another hires and and also the difference in when they start they start at a lower step and the ones that leave they're leaving at a higher step. So that also leaves some money on the table. >> Any other questions? All right, we'll uh go to fiscal year 27
budget overview and timeline. Uh Bassam. Thank you. So happy to present an overview of Norton's financial condition. Uh don't worry, there won't be a surprise quiz at the end. This will thank you for laughing there. This will be a brief overview. Um
I'm looking at the current condition where we are. We're not just trying to survive this year. We're trying to create a plan to bring us into the next 5 years, the next 10 years down the road. Next. So this is our base 83 million general
fund 7.5 enterprise and in a nutshell um our starting position uh going into next year is um most of the revenues are generated from real estate tax. Uh state aid has been flat. We have our excise
which is a big um revenue driver as our building permits and that results from economic activity. Um the downside is we're using 2.7 million of savings and free cash to to prop up the budget. Um
the good thing good news is we have the opportunity to to fix this. So uh next and this is just to show the the spending dollar totals not necessarily the percentage growth but how much the three major departments make up of the
budget um school, police and fire. So uh over time our expenses increase and our revenue um doesn't increase to match them historically. Uh next.
So this just shows where we are in our current budget. Um with 50% of the year done, 45.7 expended. Um we're pretty much on target where we expected to be. departments are operating appropriately and um we're
watching all the expenses closely because we understand uh that we need to be fiscally conscious in all of our operations. Um so this is why um a multi-year strategy is necessary. Next.
So, as we mentioned, the turnbacks were at a historic low in a budget of $83 million. Uh, this represents less than 1% of the budget. So, it's it's really tight. It might seem like $725,000 is a lot, but it's it's really small room for
error. Um that's >> so we really should have a margin that could absorb um unexpected costs like insurance or whatever the market conditions throw at us. Next >> unless it's based on two years. And this
just kind of illustrates the the expected new growth versus the what we're filling in the budget with savings and free cash. Um so at this rate it would take 5 years of $600,000 new growth to
>> balance the budget. >> Mr. Chairman, >> yes. Hasn't new growth run over a million dollars a year for the last several years? Is this lower than expected? Historically, it has been running
higher. Um, I believe this last year was uh 800. Um, the assessor typically estimates conservatively. Um, so I I am hopeful it'll it'll be higher. >> So when you say new growth, it's this is just the real estate tax new growth.
>> Correct. >> Okay. Not any excise or any anything else. >> Yes, I believe that's right. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So, we're not going to solve this problem with new growth alone unless we have a a an awesome year, which is
always possible. Let's let's drive some new growth. That's that's definitely something we're looking into doing. Um, next, and this slide just illustrates the the trend in state aid. This this shows that
every year after year state aid is increasing at an average of 2% while many of our budget drivers are increasing at double that. So effectively our state created state aid is decreasing. The the buying power of
our state aid is lower each successive year. Meaning the state is keeping more of our money and not helping the the schools, the the roads, the public safety where we would like the money to go. >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes.
>> Mark, how much are the tiffs that we keep giving away hurting our new growth? We get new businesses in town, but we entice them by giving them >> pretty significant. >> Oh, the the tiffs. Um, it it definitely handicaps us. I mean,
it's it's it's good to encourage new growth. I mean, Al Nylm's a good example. They're they're bringing new growth in, but we're kind of hamstringing ourselves by not recognizing a significant a significant
portion of that until I have to look at the chart, but it's like at least year five and then it starts to trend higher to and then year 10 we get all the new growth, >> but you know, year 1 to five we're only getting like 5% of the new growth. So
they they do have an addition which they're asking for another tiff on and let's just say we're going to negotiate hard. >> I know some of the tiffs in the past had requirements to hire local people and things. I don't know if that's always come to fruition as far as the the
devils in the details and whether it gets followed up on. >> Yeah, we will put a a local preference option in the in the tiff for them to hire local. Um that that's a good thought to follow up on that and see if they actually do. Uh Mr. Chairman,
>> yes. >> Is there a schedule mark somewhere? Um I don't know if James has it of all the tiffs that are out there and what their expirations are and what that's looking like. I don't know if that's somewhere in a file.
>> Yes, and I can provide that to the committee. Um the assessor gave that to me a little while ago. I believe there are only about five active tiffs >> and on those tiffs and including the new one that you know is coming up. I would also put in there that uh uh mandate
that all their vehicles are registered in Norton. A lot of them uh rent vehicles and and so on so for out of state and they don't we get uh the short end of the stick on that. So I you know I would make that mandatory too. You're saying that that's not in there
now. You going forward? >> I don't I I don't know. I know I know a lot of companies rent and lease from out of state and and go around that. So, you know, that's something I would look into with any uh new tiffs that are out there. Love it.
Um, next. So, this is just a list of current year uh risk registers. These are not surprising. We're actively monitoring this. We we expected snow and ice to be um not where it is, but higher. Um there's electricity. We expected to have
to adjust after moving into these two fine buildings. um health insurance we did project the increase so um you know things are going as expected on
the risk register. Next the rising costs the four main drivers here are health insurance are pension oped capital and debt and collective bargaining. Uh currently the town side collective bargaining agreements are under negotiation. I understand the
school side might um already have uh reached an agreement. I'm not sure if it's ratified yet. Um but these are our drivers. We'll hit them one by one. First health insurance. Next. So unfortunately our our new growth is
estimated at 1.3 million and our health insurance cost for next year is estimated at 1.1 million. That's the bad news. Um there's many factors, macroeconomic factors, uh the
weight loss drug uh claims, the whole economic um area that's affecting all cities and towns across the country. Um we're exploring options. We're actively exploring options. We might have something to present in a week or two.
Um we're not looking to change the contribution at this time. It's currently 7525. Uh town pays 75% of health insurance. Employees pay 25% of the premiums. Um I mean everything's on the table. Um but
we're looking at structuring plans a little bit differently with deductibles and premiums that would benefit both the town and employees. Um Mr. Chair. >> Yes. So we so Mark we still bel uh
belong to a consortium with with other towns. >> Yes sir. >> And everybody pulls this insurance together. >> Yes. >> So my question is and I've been I think I've been this is my sixth year here on this committee and as some of you know I'm a small business owner as well. Uh
and every year with this health insurance I have a handful of people on my plan. I don't belong to any group. My increase is 12%. Your increase belonging to a group with thousands and thousands of people is 12%. And I've
seen that over the last 6 years over and over again. And I'm saying I don't think they're doing us any favor being part of this group because if I'm a little guy with handful of people and my increases are the same and some years it's been less than this massive group with
thousands of people in it over x amount of towns. I'm not sure who's negotiating here. That's all. And that's another thing that I would recommend gets looked at. >> Uh for sure. There's probably we're going to compare. We've we've
heard that it's less than GIC actually, but I'd like to verify that and verify that Maya is not a better option. A lot of cities and towns use them. Um I'm I'm hearing that the overall in Massachusetts is 14%. So 12 is better than that. doesn't make me feel a whole
lot better. Um, but and I'm informed that our claims are actually higher than the consortium group. So, on that aspect, we're saving money by being grouped with cities and towns with lower
claim ratios. Are you allowed to go out and call, I don't know, Blue Cross or a broker and say, "Okay, uh, uh, we want to put the Norton uh, health plan out to bid. Is that allowed or is that forbidden under the agreement with the other towns just to have something to compare it to?
>> I mean, we can always make a phone call. I don't think that's forbidden. Um, but if we did make the decision to to move out, you know, of course, we'd check with the unions and make sure that that we're not doing something that's that's and and also that we'd have to follow
the terms of the contract. And so, we'd be leaving whatever, you know, benefit. And then, you know, they they have just like any partnership agreement, there's terms you have to follow when you leave and they're not favorable to the people that are leaving. So, we would take a one-time
hit. Whether that's beneficial in the long run, something to be looked at. Um so, so yeah, we're continuing to discuss health insurance actively. This is the biggest um hurdle um while we're putting the budget together. Next,
pension and oped. Our total long-term liability combining the two is uh about $118 million. We spend about $12 million. 6 million in OPED and 6 million in pension annually.
Pension is on a defined schedule. I believe it's scheduled to be paid off completely in the next 8 or so years and OPED uh it's going to take longer. It remains approximately 98% unfunded. Uh
we're making dents in it lately. Um but we're paying interest at $4.5 million a year and this is essentially unfunded. You remember how there was like a pension crisis like decades ago
or and people were pensions were going bust and people were wondering why? It's because they weren't looking forward to the retirement costs. And the new thing is not a new thing but but people are realizing that once the pension's full,
we need to satisfy the health insurance costs of our retirees. So ideally, we'd be matching expenses and revenues and covering each employees portion as we go. And it's just decades of trying to
make up for it. So that's why we're we're not alone in this position. Many cities and towns are, but the more we can put a concerted effort toward it, the better we'll be in the long run. Um, essentially it's comparable to an
$80 million balance on a credit card at 4.5 interest, which which here is oh sorry, 5.75 interest. That's what we're paying. And that's about 4.5 million a year. Uh, next
capital and debt. So, our capital requests for this year are 1.3 million and we actually are looking forward um more than in the past, our outyear capital requests for the next 10 years are $25.2 million. So, as you can see,
that would equate to about 2 million a year. Um if if you're making the 10-year average, so we should plan debt service to be steady each year so we can take free cash and put it towards a certain percentage of of capital. Um our annual
debt service is 8.6 6 million. Um, which is in a normal range overall. Could be better, could be worse. Um, but that that's something we're looking at. In debt service fades, if we're not adding to
it, it decreases over time and we're not planning to add to it. Um, since the debt exclusion for the the, you know, the the three buildings that were approved. Uh, next, >> Mr. Chair.
>> Yes. >> What do we have a number what the cost is to service that debt outside of the debt exclusion? Debt that is not covered from debt exclusion. What's the annual servicing of that? >> I it's my tongue.
>> If you don't have it today, >> about 4 million of that >> of that 8.6 >> 4.6. So $4 million >> is debt excluded. >> Okay. So you don't know have the servicing cost >> on that? You don't have to have it
today. I mean for future meetings if you have a servicing cost of the debt that's not debt excluded what it's costing us. >> 12.6 >> is that that's it is >> yeah it would be the difference. >> Yeah. >> 8 something minus the four. >> So 8.6 minus. >> So what is the to what is the total?
>> Go back. Uh, >> right there. >> Well, to the one that says capital and debt. >> Yeah. 8.6 is the total annual debt service. >> That's what we owe. 8.6 million. >> That's what we pay per year. >> Oh, that's what we pay per year. So,
what is the amount owed? >> Oh, multiply that times about 20, I don't know, 150 million. >> Well, that's I'll >> Yeah, you don't have to you don't have to have it right now, James. Next time around, I'll send us a
I mean, if the committee's interested, we can forward the whole audit report, all 80 pages of it. It's on there. >> Well, 8 8.6 million a year just to serve as debt is a lot of money. I mean, it's a lot of money. I mean, if you didn't have half that, you'd be in a
tremendously different financial position. >> Well, it's what 10 10% of our budget. >> Yes. I mean, Yeah, it's a lot. >> Well, you'd have to cover the $50 million that you owe. >> Well, you shouldn't have charged it to begin with, but that's I've been saying
that for all these years here. >> Yeah. So, so this is why we need a multi-year plan to to make sure we're our debt service is where we want it to be as a percentage of our budget. So next so prioritization is not optional. Uh we
need to prioritize. Uh we get requests from all the departments that exceed what we can afford to uh borrow for. Um we can't control the budget pressures, the volatility in the federal and the state budgets. It all gets pushed down
locally. Um, we have to have a balanced budget. The federal government doesn't. Um, so things local services unfortunately take the brunt of it. Um, and we're in contact with our
representatives and congressmen, senators, um, constantly asking for for help with local needs where our tax money should be going. And hopefully we can make strides on that. But we need to have a solid base where we can withstand
this volatility that gets pushed down to us next. So there's structural con constraints. Um our expenses are growing. We're subject to inflation like everyone else. And our revenues, you know, absent and
override are not growing as fast as the expenses are. That's just the math of it. Next. So, the only responsible approach is to align our spending with our revenue to
not use one-time funds to pay for recurring services. It's >> not what we would like to to to fund. It's it's the responsible thing what we have to fund. We we can't spend money
that we don't have. It's so the plan is not to rip the band-aid off in one year, but to make a multi-year gradual phased approach toward having a true balanced budget. And it's
we can do it next. Um, so we we have a plan. We're we're working the plan. The plan is going to protect our stabilization reserves. It's going to protect our free cash for one-time expenses that we should use it
for, for capital expenses, for onetime investments, for savings. Um, it's we'll present the budget as soon as we can balance it in the next few weeks hopefully. Um, next.
So, we're we're looking to to avoid volatility, to have it stable, transparent, to where everything makes sense. We're preserving the long-term service delivery. We're putting oursel in a stable position for future generations, for future children, for um
future public safety. Um, that's the goal, to reduce volatility, to make it more stable, more predictable. Um uh and the last slide Bassum. So looking forward we are one Norton um
where we can budget together, we can work together, find efficiencies within departments to to make this work, not just for this year but five years, 10 years down the road. And we're going to make responsible choices and we'll have a
strong future this year and going forward. Mr. Chair. >> Yes. >> Mark, what has been your charge to the department heads? Is it fiscal um level funded level serviced? Um everything's on negotiations now. You know, you're
not going to do 000. I don't think that's going to happen. So, what's the game plan overall? you >> as there's there's hard choices like like any budget year. Um but it seems that
this year's starting point is a little more challenging than historically speaking. Um we're asking budgets to uh departments to come in with uh barebones budgets. Um it's not a typical year
where they would come in with say a a 5% increase or a level service even. It's the base is level funded um with adjustments for contractual increases. We have bargaining agreements we need to
honor. People are still stepping. Um people are still getting longevity. Um contracts we have, you know, the price of salt's going up next year. we have to buy salt, so we have to pay more for it. Um, so it's going to be somewhere between level funding and level service.
Um, still trying to work out the details. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. >> Um, just a question too about what the the timeline is. I know you've you've asked for budgets. when when are those due from departments and when will um we
have some more information about what the requests are from the different departments. >> Um so I actually really proactively approached this. They were due around Christmas. Um but we are trying to make
uh adjustments where we can. So, we're still evaluating um the the future of some budgets. So, well, I I'd say more than half of them are are ready. And I spoke to our our
chair, Mr. Rotundi, earlier and I I do have a sample schedule here. Um did did everyone receive that? >> Yes. >> Yeah. So, we're looking at starting next week um on the 1 2 3 4 5 six on those seven
topics. Then the following week would hit public safety, a couple big departments, police and fire. And then we would, you know, go down the list and then by the time we get to the end, um hopefully we would have the numbers ready for you. Um so it's it it's
coming. And then the full budget I I expect would be out April 6th. That's when the charter requires it to be out. So, has to be balanced by April 6th. >> Does that mean that we'll be getting the the budgets right before we discuss
them, the requests, or is there any chance we can get them ahead of time? >> Um, we can we'll get them to you as soon as we can. Uh, we're actively putting them together. If if I had them, I would give them to you.
I'm making them. Um, so like forgive me if I get it to you on a Friday for a Monday morning. You guys signed up to this. I I say that as you know, tongue and cheek. I've been a part of a few finance committees and uh I will proactively get
you as much as I can. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. Yes. So, for the three people at home that may be watching this, um, what we're talking about here, if we're talking about level funding budgets, not
level service budgets, is cuts across the board, schools, fire, police, highway, probably everywhere. I mean, everywhere you have contracts that are upd, you know, I've been in this town over 25 years. Um, and we've used free cash for
as long as I've been here. So, if we're talking now about, you know, we're not going to use free cash anymore, onetime funds, you are talking about cuts across the board, not in one year. Okay. But I mean that's the direction it's going
because the as you said earlier the expenses rise faster than the revenue. So I as long as everybody's okay with that. I mean I think that should be put out there that you know that's the road we're going down. And also I would ask the chair Bill I don't know if you can
hear me the vice chair we don't vote on any any line item until we see it all. So we can all uh yeah that you know have a discussion on department by department and priorities. Thank you. >> I I would suggest that's a little
alarmist. We're not trying that the goal that's keeping me up at night is not to lay off anyone and to keep the service where it is. Any other questions? No. >> So,
>> do we have a way that Bill can >> Yeah, Bill is >> Can we just call him and have him speak? Doesn't we have his number? >> Yeah. >> Just call him and put it to the microphone. >> Calling you, Bill. >> It's funny that people >> at all, Bill. People on Zoom can hear
him, but we can't. So, it's almost like a speaker issue here somewhere. >> Hey, Bonnie. >> Hi, Bill. >> Ask him. You got to fix this, buddy. >> That's going to be on. >> Try again.
>> I think he has to mute. >> This is what it was like all mute yourself. This is why we >> I did not mute myself. >> That's good. All right. Now >> we can hear you. >> And we can hear you. >> Awesome. >> Who needs $800,000?
>> Um, >> what's on your mind? >> Yeah. Do you have anything that you want to say, Bill? >> Well, I'm not I'm not up. Brandon's doing a great job, so I'm just going to sit back here. Oh, we thought you had a question or state a comment.
>> Well, no. I've been talking into my computer, so I'm figuring the the audio in your room isn't on to hear me cuz I I can hear everything you guys are doing. >> That is correct.
>> So, um I I guess getting back to the the question on the budget. So I think Mark we spoke earlier that you know we'll be getting them you know as they come. So next week we'll be
getting some budgets. Um but as Zach said and as I said earlier today we we don't really vote until we see the full picture. So >> I think next meeting Bill is actually
just some of the um the non-budget kind of uh warrant articles and stuff. >> Oh, those are fun. >> Yeah, I think that's right. It's not that right. Yeah, >> it says assessor accounting reserve. >> Well, it is it is accounting assessors.
>> But but you're right. a do you want the first big budgets will be March 16th with police and fire >> uh Mr. chair. So as you're with the schedule just to kind of clarify. So in the past what we've done is these
departments have presented their budgets, their requests and we go through a few weeks of that where all the department heads are meeting with us. they're giving us their requests and then by that April 6th around that date um you're then providing us your
recommendations for all of the departments and that's when we collectively start looking at it together and then vote um on each department's budget. So that's how we've done it in the past. You can guide us if you'd like to do it differently. And then yeah, when it comes to the Warren
articles, I would recommend until we see the full budget picture that we would first be reviewing articles that aren't really budget related. >> Uh, however the committee wants to proceed, >> completing articles, things like that.
>> Um, >> no more comments. Is there a preference on how we proceed? >> No, I mean I I suggested that this schedule actually my schedule was a little different, but after speaking with Bill, I edited it and and this is
version 2.0, but it's certainly subject to the will of the committee. And that's about eight meetings. Seven meetings. Eight meetings. >> Three, four. Right. Seven and one backup
if necessary. >> When is the town meeting again? >> May 18th. >> And then we had discussed potentially going through an average of three warrant articles each meeting. There's currently 27. and a few might might be
withdrawn. Um, and a few of them are just placeholders. >> I think again at a minimum I'd probably try to do and unless it's planning board, no offense to planning board, most of the other ones generally go
quicker. So I try to do as many as possible in an evening. >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. >> Uh the other thing I would just ask is that we make sure that the planning board has discussed the article before
if it's an article from them before we discuss so we know what they're you sometimes they've ended up changing it or um changing their mind on it. So I would just rather and the same thing with a select board. if there's an article that that they um you know in the past sometimes they've taken things
off and so to have them weigh in on some of those articles first would be helpful. >> Okay, I have noted those preferences. Then Mark, quick question for each meeting. Is will the department heads be presenting or is that you presenting?
>> Um I'm prepared to present the the whole thing. Um I I understand fire police fire police and schools want to present their own and and of course if you want any if you want to hear from any other department head um I I was thinking just
to have them here in the room and available for questions when when their department's up if that would help streamline things. >> Yes, I think. >> Yeah. Any other questions? No.
All right. Next item on the agenda is the spring annual town meeting warrant article list. So I believe there's 27 items on as we sit here today it
>> thank you. Um so I can you know go through these individually one by one give you a rundown or just give you a general uh sense of them. Usually number one is the big one. If it passes
April 11th election, it will go to the town meeting. That's the school roof, which um as numbers stand now. It's budgeted at a little north of 10 million after reimbursement. That comes
down approximately 4.5 million. um that would be a 20-year bond for the average taxpayer in year one about
$60 a year. Um trending down to year 20 would be about $30 a year. >> Mark, just a question. I'm trying to >> the um the 20 the the $10 million is that what the override amount would
be and then it gets written off as they get reimbursed the 5 million or whatever or we actually going to have the override for the $5 million the the non-reimburseed part. Um, so the amount >> selling point >> the amount wouldn't actually be on the the ballot. Um, if
>> the April 11th ballot won't have a dollar amount on it. Everyone will know how how much it is about. Um, but the town meeting warrant would have to vote to authorize spending the whole portion. Although we wouldn't spend the whole portion. We would I mean either
accounting can can work with the the company and have them reimburse us before we have to pay the money or we might have to pay the money then get a reimbursement. James, correct me if if I'm misstating this. >> A big difference on a sales pitch, I
think, if you look in a town to commit to 10 million. >> Anytime there's a project, we never borrow the whole amount up front. We do temporary notes with the bank. So, we may be borrowing a million dollars for the first six months. Once we make those payments, the school will submit for
reimbursement. We would get half a million back. that half a million would be used to pay the subsequent invoices from the vendor. And as long as the invoices are not greater than half a million at that point, we wouldn't be borrowing any more money until the end.
And once we know what the uh final u reimburseable amount is, we will go out and bond the approximately $4 million and a half, right? 4.5 depending on what the total cost is. So we we're not going to borrow 10 million.
Mr. Chair. >> Yes. >> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think I've seen an override without a dollar amount on it. Um I don't know if that's legal or not, but I mean, we've had a few overrides. I There's always a dollar amount on it, isn't there? >> Definitely wasn't a building project.
>> I mean, so I'm not sure you could >> on the on the ballot. You can't put it on the ballot, but at the town meeting, you have to. >> It threw me for a loop, too. I I went to the >> I thought it was on the ballot, but I could be wrong. I can I can give you the state guidance. I had to look it up because I I thought the same. >> Just one thing I want to mention. It's a
debt exclusion, not an override. Just so >> Okay. Big difference. >> Uh so that's >> so that's that's sort of the main event. Um we have the standard U chapter 90 and all the budget articles. U there are a
couple of zoning proposals. One is to amend the village center core district. Um some people feel it it it's too permissive. Some some people um feel that it's appropriate. Um so we're
waiting for um we'll have planning board weigh in on that before we ask you to weigh in on that. Um there is another zoning one later in the the list. I believe uh that's number 21 where they're trying to revise a definition
for top of the shop because there's a little confusion the way it's written now. Uh frankly, there's a lot of confusion on the way the whole zoning bylaw is written. But this definition in particular, um there's a question whether that includes residential or
what the commercial requirements are. So that definition does need to be changed in my opinion. But we'll let the planning board weigh in on that before we bring it to you folks. Um there's the the standard budget articles, um the revolving funds, um
just in case we're asking for supplements or transfers. Hopefully we're not. Um the compensated absences fund. That's worth mentioning. Uh we funded that. We were trying to keep that at about a million dollars. If you'll recall, we set that up about a
year or two ago. And it's good thing we did because the buyouts keep coming. Um we've had a few uh $100,000 buyouts and um we're probably down to I'd guess half a million, but it's it's
a substantial use of that fund. Um so we'll be looking to replenish that. Um and also that's one of our main focuses when we're negotiating these collective bargaining agreements to >> use it or lose it. >> Yes.
But we got to negotiate that. So, um, and then and I learned about something the the fire or not the fire, the police department did, and it's called, um, salary augmentation. You folks heard about that? >> No.
>> Sounds like a medical procedure. >> I'm going to butcher this. James is going to laugh at me, but it's um once they get about 20 years in service, they're allowed to take a I believe it's
a 10% raise for 3 years and then they're not allowed to to cash out their their vacation time when they retire. So it's like prepaying in a more manageable way to budget and and plan for the for the buyout in lie
of a buyout >> and it increases their pension forever >> as part of that >> if they retire in one of those three years. Well, no it doesn't. >> Oh, they did. >> There you go. So, so the the point is
we're creatively looking at ways to plan for these retirement uh buyout expenses. Um there's a there's a few uh potential public works projects, a West Main Street sewer expansion, and this would
drive development along West Main Street from the housing authority um up to uh Goat City, um Valentine's Tool, and allow those people to be able to connect to Town Sewer. It would include the
middle school. So it would be a good project for development, potentially add to new growth. It'd be an investment in our infrastructure and if we do invest along that corridor and other places that would put less squeeze in in the budget in future years. So there's smart
investments we we can be making and that I believe is one of them. Um so the the other project is a Mansfield interconnection. We we currently have a connection um with Mansfield for water. Um but it's deteriorating. It's only for
emergency use now. If if we needed emergency use of water, it's there today, but in order to keep it there for tomorrow, we need to reconstruct it and put a meter on it. So, they can charge us for water or or we can charge them for water if it's it's going the other way.
>> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. So, while you're on the topic of water, there was a lot of discussion prior years about purchasing water from other communities and uh PAS and all that. Is there anything coming up on
that? How's that being addressed? >> We're actively looking at that. Um there's six wells. I believe uh one of the wells did test for PAS, but five of the wells did not. We're actively removing iron and
manganese. That's the priority right now. But the well that tested for PAS, we're considering not using that well, not putting it offline for good. Cuz once you do that, the state says you can never bring it back without going through tremendous hurdles. So, we're
looking at not taking water from that well and taking water from the other wells. Eventually, we're looking to create a a PAS filtration system where three of the wells are so it would service the majority of the water. So,
we would be able to provide our own clean water to our residents. At the same time, we're looking at other sources um neighboring towns that could potentially sell us water. So, to have a combination to have options and you have to look at a lot of factors. The
engineers are looking at is the water groundwater? Is it surface water? What's the chemical composition? Does it have a fluoride? Um all these things. We're still looking at those. >> Talking too fast. >> Um so >> so yeah, those there's some projects.
There's um the assessors brought forward an abatement for veterans with trusts. This essentially would put veterans on the same page with um veterans with trusts on the same page with other veterans. Um I think there's only one person that
that would affect. Um there's acceptance of an abatement for continued environmental cleanup. That's number 20. And that would allow us to negotiate for past due taxes as a credit if somebody's performing environmental remediation work. Um, so
that would be a good way to put properties back on the tax role. Uh, there's the conversion of wine malt license to all alcoholic beverages. That would help spur economic growth. Um,
there's removal of the mandatory sewer tie-in rule. So, that has restricted growth in the past. There's a rule that says and and I'm not exactly sure how many years, but but public works is going to give me that, but that has
discouraged projects because people are saying, "Oh, if you're forcing us to connect to this and we're going to have to pay a betterment fee and and know that we don't want to pay extra, but if we defer that and absorb it in the in
the enterprise fund, it would create an incentive to development and the businesses coming and the increases on the new growth would outweigh any burden that we would sustain by making people tie in. So in in everyone I've talked to
this this seems like a no-brainer like we we want to spur smart growth and development. We want to increase our tax base and not and not burden the residents. >> Mr. Chair, >> yes. >> Uh quick question on that. Um I was curious. So that's coming from the DPW
themselves. I was actually because in the past when we've talked about that during the Elm Street uh sewer discussions when I reached out to the water department they were against changing that. So now I guess they they've reevaluated with the new leadership
perhaps. They they did not come to me voluntarily and say we want less money or but but in in conversations with with planning with um assessors with public works with water it it was agreed even
among the public works the water people that this will be good for development. >> Okay. Um, is there going to be anything on it about uh restrictions on like replacements, septic replacements if you do have sewer
or if you do have sewer available or is it just going to be no requirements at all? There's many any discussion that's like a little bit more nuanced. >> Uh, well, I mean, the price of connecting to to town sewer if if your sewer system fails would be more
advantageous than replacing a a septic system. go back a year and tell tell the folks argument against the Elm Street project cuz uh it was up for debate at the time, >> but I agree. >> So, we don't foresee a problem. We don't Okay. >> No. No. And it would be like when you
sell the property or when you transfer the property or when your septic fails, then it would make sense to connect. >> Mhm. >> Great. >> Um so, uh reconstruction of 140 and 123.
Hopefully, we can get that set up and teed off for for town meeting. We're looking at holding a public forum in the next month or so to get opinions on whether it should be a four-way stop, a a rotary, a roundabout in the center of
town. So, we'll see what people have to say about that and whether that should go forward to town meeting. Um 44 South Worester, there's there's a property where storm water is is
>> collecting from the whole street and then flooding onto private property. So there's there's an issue there with um we might be causing damage that we need to appropriately drain the water on South Worester Street.
house. It actually goes out to the ponds on the par three. I think floods out there. >> Yeah. Yeah. There there are already some pipes draining it to the golf course, the par 3. Um we'd be looking to add another pipe on the other side of the lot where the the water and if you seen
the video, it's it's flooding like a river. >> Wow. >> Drive drive by there when it rains real hard. >> That's where it got that waiting river name from. Um but on on the good news front, the uh Barrow Street flooding um knock on wood
is not a problem. >> Good job Jared. >> It's going to rain the next four days. So I would hold your comments >> especially with a frost and a G to go. >> Yep. >> You put it out there and >> and don't worry when all this >> and then um and then a couple
>> delete that from the video Shane. >> Yeah. and a couple other bylaw proposed changes just to um fix the wording of DPW director and and it's been proposed uh by the public works department uh to
make a bylaw for sidewalk maintenance given uh snow removal constraints in the highway department and the numerous complaints for cleaning the sidewalks. >> I didn't even know we had any outside of this building. >> We we don't have many sidewalks. >> No.
As a Freeman Street resident, I'm happy. I enjoy my sidewalk, my lone sidewalk. Isn't >> that nice? Okay, >> but that's it in a nutshell. Subject to your questions right there. >> True. >> Does anyone have any questions regarding
the warrant article list >> 140 intersection? I've been doing some research at the public robbery and back in March for 1990 they listed that intersection as the worst intersection in Norton and remember the yellow flag
that they had prior replacing with the travel act back in December 1997. >> Wow. >> North southwest is the worst intersection in Norton. I >> I agree. >> That is the worst by far. >> And and it's on the schedule. We're
trying to move that up. It's been on the schedule for >> Yeah. the whole time I've lived here. >> Since I had here, it was 2026. >> It's been moved and moved. >> So, the state's going to pay 80% of it. It's a tip project. Um, we're actively
trying to move that up into >> not not this summer, but next summer. >> We we paid for the engineering so we could speed it up and that still didn't help us. Northwest >> northwest to southwest. Yeah, we did few years ago. >> All right. Any other questions?
All right. No, >> your seat back. >> Oh, you want your paper back? Thank you. >> Uh there is no old business. And next we uh have approval of previous minutes.
So, >> I understand the committee approved a a bunch of minutes at a meeting a month or two ago. Um, >> no, it was it was longer than that. >> No, I think they we met in November. I was >> Yeah, it was before the holidays.
>> Uh, so these are 2025's minutes. After these are done, we still need to get through 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, and even farther back. >> There are at least 50 minutes. I'm
informed. I was informed this morning. >> Hopefully, I'm wrong. That'd be great. >> Yeah, cuz we had approved minutes. I was chairback 2024. We had approved minutes through that April of 2024. We were caught up, but then we got behind after that. >> Okay. I think maybe someone needs to get
those approved minutes to the clerk's office. >> They Well, I know I delivered mine to the clerk's office when I was chair, but I can't speak to previous >> Not not pointing fingers. >> Oh, that bus hit you, huh? >> Damn. Um >> Ouch.
>> I can't speak to what happens to them after I drop them off either. >> Right. Yeah. So, we would side them and give them to >> the clerk's office, whoever was there. >> I was I was prior to Paula. So,
>> so I'm told the way to to deliver them now is to email agenda minutes.gov. That That's how it gets to them. >> I'm I'm sure they can take it. >> I had to hand deliver. Yeah. A hard copy. >> Yeah. We have a new clerk now. Or not
new. She's been here a year or two, but >> also they should be online. So, are you saying they're just not online? >> I'm saying they're not online and the clerk's office doesn't have record of them. >> I I can I can get the full list and cuz
if you approved them, why why am I having somebody go through the the the meeting and writing minutes again? So, >> really good question. >> Yeah. Again, it was through April of 2024 for from my memory that we the last the last meeting we had we didn't do minutes was that long 5 hour meeting.
Remember, >> we never saw minutes from that meeting. >> And Mark, I'm not sure how we could approve them if we weren't on the committee at the time and all that. I mean, the committee >> another good question. >> Yeah, >> that's so strange. >> I mean, I know you can vote if you're
not here. Um, if you watch the meeting and you're comfortable with it, you don't. But good question. >> We're not gonna have time to watch a bunch of meetings. >> Time to speak. >> So, so before you you have nine meeting minutes for 2025.
>> Absent. >> You can make someone make a motion. Uh, >> just make it long. >> That's what's the date on. >> Does anyone want to discuss any of the minutes? >> Couple silly edits. >> Move them all as one.
>> Can you move them all as one is? No. >> Yeah. >> Does anyone have any motions? >> Uh, to go through them. There's some misspellings and stuff, but >> spell check. Is it just clerical or is it
>> change the >> in the letter? >> I mean I mean they don't >> we should probably at least read the dates of the ones that we're voting on. >> Good idea. >> Yeah. I I I think we have to read them date by date. You just can't blatantly
approve them. >> And we can postpone it for another meeting. So, I'll make a motion for discussion. >> All right. Is there any discussion regarding the January 8th meeting minutes? >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes.
>> I believe Jen O'Neal spells her name with two L's. Sec uh third second page at the top. I would also note, Mr. Chair, that in the past we haven't all signed the minutes and I noticed that there's a
signature page. Um, typically it's been the chair. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, our names are on every meeting as whether or not we're present, but we don't send them. >> So, I'm the lucky person. Huh.
>> So, we can we can certainly make those changes if if the committee is inclined to, you know, approve it with those changes or if if you're more comfortable, we can make the changes and come back. Whatever you like. >> Typically, we've approved that, Mr. Chair.
Typically we've approved them uh with the changes because typically they're not you know the message >> is approved then it's fine. Other times when it's been more of a big change then we've needed to but that's been very
rare in my nine years. >> Is there anything else up for discussion regarding the January 8th minutes? Motion to approve the minutes with the changes. I >> Hang on. Do we want to No, we're going to do one at a time. I think
>> one at a time. Okay. >> We have to give the dates. Yeah. >> I'm sorry. >> I'll post like >> want me to read them all. I'll read off all the dates and do one vote.
>> I think you got to read all the dates. Bill, shall we vote on these one at a time or just read off all the dates and do one vote? What do you suggest, Mr. Chair? >> Um,
depends on how extensive the changes are, but if it's just a word here and there, I'd vote I just vote them. >> That made sense. I withdraw my motion that you >> Mr. Chairman.
>> Yes. I make a motion to approve minutes from September 29th, 2025, October 6th, 2025, November 17th, 2025, September 25th, 2025, September 15, 2025,
April Oh, Septe I'm sorry, September 22nd, 2025, April 23rd, 2025, April 14th, 2025. January 8th, 2025, February 24th, 2025,
and March 31st, 2025. I'll second that. Second and a motion and a second. >> I'm sorry. >> Any discussion? >> Can I ask a question? If some people were absent for a meeting,
>> you can still vote on them even if you weren't here. >> You can vote if you're comfortable that that reflects what happened at the meeting. >> Okay. >> All in favor? >> I >> I
>> All oppose. >> I unanimous. >> Yes. >> Um who's not here? So, it's 10. >> 10. >> Uh, yes. >> Steve Evans, the only one's not here. >> Steve Evans.
>> All right, >> that does minutes are approved. Are there anything else that anyone wants to bring up? Anyone? So, just to clarify, so we'll go back and we'll do the 2024 minutes after
April 2024. >> Um, I can look exactly what that meeting was, the very last date, and I'll email you the last date that I know that we've um discussed and approved. I I I don't remember which meeting in April, but I remember it was an April meeting was the
last one we've discussed. And then maybe we could just go through the files and find the approved minutes for before that. >> And then I guess there were minutes that were approved back in November, right? When I I wasn't at that meeting, but the November meeting before the holidays there were meeting minutes that were
>> Yeah. >> Right. Which which does anyone recall which minutes were approved then? We we can look >> some. I think that was part of what we just Oh, that was >> we double approved some. Okay, >> Mr. Chair, I think we just approved one of the I think the first because you went backwards in time. I think he
started with November 15th, right? >> Yes. >> Check the tape. >> Okay, we will go back to the November meeting and check. But I'm I'm sure that we will get the meeting minutes from March 2nd. Correct.
>> Right here. >> Right here. November 17th. >> Are there any motions, Mr. Chair? Motion to adjurnn. Second. >> Second. All those in favor? >> I I >> opposed.