This government meeting is brought to you by Eastworks and our local cable subscribers. Okay, everyone. going to call to order the meeting of the Southampton Select Board for March 26th at about 6:02 p.m. And let us first
stand and say the pledge of allegiance. We have a flag out the window. >> I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice
for all. Good. Thanks. And Jamie, why don't you come over next to Ellen or wherever you want to be? Eventually, we move around on the corner. Good. All right. And now we have a a finum. So, would you like to call your
meeting to order first? >> Call the finance committee meeting to order at 603. >> Okay. So, we are called to order. So, uh, tonight before we start, um, I just wanted to let people know that we decided to meet up here tonight, and I appreciate you squeezing into the chairs. We've tried to put in as many as
we could, uh, without violating any laws or something with the fire chief. Um, but we tried to leave enough of an aisle, so hopefully it may not be comfy, but I'm hoping that everybody's able to move around and and uh, at least hear what's going on. Uh the reason for
coming up here tonight is we generally have found that we like better to have discussions like this around this table which is easier to talk to each other and face each other rather than that long monstrosity of a table that you saw downstairs last time if you were here.
Uh and the acoustics downstairs because it is such a large room is very very hard. So somebody at one end of the table is very hard to hear the other person. those microphones on our table really are they're real but they don't do the job because it it really talks into the camera rather than anything else. So we will um get going with
citizen speak in a minute but I would like to say that you know the the idea of having the meeting up here too is just to increase our able to our ability to discuss and have a bit more collaboration in kind of a almost a round table format even though it's not exactly a round table. Um but that's
that's the intent. Um we will Yes. Do you want to preview the agenda before you? >> Yes. Thank you. I will. Yep. So, we will >> She's working solo tonight. >> Everybody wants to I'll I'll turn it over. Um so, we will get to citizen
speak in a minute. And I have a signin sheet. So, I'll go in order of the um the actual signin sheet. Um and then once we're done with citizen speak, we have uh one tiny small business item to do with uh our town clerk. we have to resign the uh the caucus warrant and
then we will get into the actual agenda items which will first be the budget task force recommendations. Then moving on to the FY27 budget requests of which we have to start off with is the all the budget requests that came in from all
the different departments. Uh there is then a base budget proposal and then that's what's the catastrophe budget if you would call it that I think. Uh and then an override budget proposal. So those are the three things that we'll be looking at tonight. Uh our members here
have got them on the table, but everything will be projected on the on the screen as well. So that'll be kind of the order of of discussion. Okay. And our goal tonight is to leave here with budget numbers. We must leave here tonight with what our base number is and what our override potential number is.
Okay. So that's that's the plan. Hopefully we can have a orderly discussion and get through it all. For the purpose of citizen speak, uh because we have the microphone here and only one camera which is facing this way, I'm going to ask that people that that have signed up to speak when I call you, if
you could kind of come and stand between John and Ellen a little bit, so it's close to the mic. We catch you and we'll we'll shift around a little bit, but that will at least get something going. And Scott, we are recording, right? Right now. So this is not live. Well, yeah, it's being recorded. It will be
picked up by East Hampton Media in the morning and it should be posted by tomorrow. They turned around very quickly. They know that we're recording tonight. So, I'm pretty sure you'll be able to see it sometime by tomorrow afternoon for sure. Okay, that is one of the disadvantages of meeting up here is
not not having the live recording. Okay, first up, um Margaret Larson. >> No, sorry, Margaret. Are you doing the the um >> Okay. All right. I'll >> do that when we get to >> Okay. I wasn't sure if I was calling you twice. >> Security blanket. No. >> Got it. Okay.
>> So, I did ask you >> Yeah. Okay. >> Okay. So, I'm Margaret Larson. I live at 9 Street. >> Y >> and I wanted to address a comment that was made last meeting about um the lack of capital planning.
So, I've been on the capital committee for 13 years, and over that time period, I've worked with three town administrators. The first two were vaguely interested in a capital plan. Um
I think that's putting it kindly and we would as a capital committee come up with some plans and present them to fin present them to select board and at every occasion we were essentially shot
down. What we were told is there is already a funding mechanism for capital which is free cash. So, the problem with that is that over the past decade, um, the amount that we've been able to secure from free cash
has ranged from $1,700 to $300,000. That lack of consistency has made it very difficult for us to do any kind of planning for us to be able to afford debt to afford any of
the all of the requests that have come in and we were always picking and choosing and pushing things off down the road. So that has resulted in deferred maintenance. It's result in buildings that are having issues that we can't
repair without now spending a lot more money. As we all know, if we all let our cars go too long, the bills just keep going and going. Um the other thing that has done, so I'll give you a specific example. >> Three minutes marker. >> Yeah. Getting close.
>> I know. A couple years ago, I um tried to get a capital account at Hampshire Regional because they have a lot of deferred maintenance as well. Every other town said, "We're not going to fund that because we already have our own capital accounts." And here we are
in Southampton. If we get a hit from Hampshire Regional, we have to go into debt to take care of that. So, I just wanted to provide a little bit of context for what has happened with capital planning over the past. And I think uh Scott's capital plan is the
most robust we've had since I capital. >> Thank you. Okay. I neglected to say I'm allowing three minutes tonight per speaker and I'm asking Stephen to do a little timekeeping for us. >> Okay. If there's a way to um Yeah, that's good. Thank you. All right. Next
up, Jen Johnson. >> Sorry for all the gymnastics, but a little bit closer to the table if you wouldn't mind. Yeah, thanks. >> Jen Johnson. I live at 57 Rattle Hill Road. Um, good evening. I have a few things to speak to. First, I implore you to let the voters decide whether or not
they want to fully funded the town. That will hopefully buy us a few years to let the state get it together and decide to fully fund the education system they pride themselves on. Allow the town to see all of the numbers, very specific cuts associated with each level of funding so everyone is on the same page about how this town will be moving
forward. Second, I would like to thank you for making the switch out of the insurance trust and into the GIC. To clear up any confusion, the Hampshire Regional School Committee voted to do the same. But unfortunately, the HR EA did not approve the memorandum of understanding orou that would have sped
up the prep steps for the 32B and allowed them to move into the GIC. Due to time constraints, that move was not able to be made. Lastly, since the Hampshire School Committee meetings are not televised, though I thoroughly believe they should be, I wanted to shed some light on that budget. At the initial budget meeting, a level service
budget was presented that was 12 11.2% increase over the FY26 with an assessment to the towns after the revenue subtracted would have been 9.4% increase over the FY26 budget. That is divided based on enrollment due to the individual towns. There were many failed
votes that night on that what that Hampshire budget should be and level services was never one that was put on the table. By the end, a 5.66% budget was voted on to go to the budget hearing. With those budget numbers, certain cuts were made and those were the follow following restrictions of
supply and tech declines, changes to laptop programs, elimination of admin assistant, elimination of a wellness teacher, elimination of an adjustment counselor, elimination of a music teacher, elimination of late school bus uh late buses, increase to athletic fees to offset the cost of JV sports, and AP
exam fees would be paid by families which previously were paid by the school. While the budget hearing while at the budget hearing on March 16th, after much and sometimes heated debate, additional funds were added to the 5.66% budget to bring it to a 6.75% increase
over FY26 with the added money to reinstate the adjustment council position as well as the music teacher position. This decision was not done lightly as there once again were failed votes and amendments made. I think it's important for the general public to know that even though we can't change the Hampshire budget like we can other town
departments, the people in charge of final finalizing the budget did so with their own town's finances in minds at all times. Those that attended the meetings as a member of the public I think will attest to that. While Norris took a devastating cut last year, I would like to point out that Hampshire has taken cuts as well over the past few
years, such as FY25, math teacher, and an academic indiv interventionist was eliminated. FY25, a wellness teacher and academic interventionist was eliminated. FY26, school librarian, art teacher, and a half reduction of a business teacher.
With all this said, I once again implore the select board to accept the Hampshire Hampshire budget as is and put the 6.75% budget to the town to vote on its entirety. Thank you. >> Thanks. >> Next, and Bowman.
>> I'm Ann Bowman and my address is 202 Palmer and Meadow Road. I would like to select thank the select board and finance committee for their work on this town budget. I support a fullervice budget requiring an override. I believe
our town government, our library, our schools, our senior center, and all town departments need to be fully funded. Yes, this will require us to approve a 2 and a half% override. How can the government of Southampton
continue to meet the needs of our community if it is not fully funded? My hope is that the residents of Southampton will vote to fully fund our town. Thank you. >> Bruce Bowman, >> Bruce Bowman, 202 Pomeroy Meadow Road.
I'm here tonight because I support our community. I support the override. Without it, Southampton is unsustainable. I cannot it it cannot continue to function at a level residents expect and deserve. Essential services will be cut to the point where
they are no longer functional. This override is about preserving three core pillars: safety, opportunity, and reliability. Public safety services, fire and police are fundamental and not optional to protecting all of us. Our schools prepare our children to become
productive members of society. The library provides access to information, technology, and resources not only within our town, but across the entire state system. Our senior center is equally essential. It reduces isolation, fosters connections, and provides access
to health programs, resources, and nutritious meals for older residents. We depend on reliable, well-maintained infrastructure, roads, public works, essential services that keep our town running safely and efficiently. We depend on those every single day, often
without thinking about it. These are not luxuries. They are found they are the foundation of a healthy community. The pillars of safety, opportunity, and reliability are what keep Southampton sustainable and safe. Um, supporting the override means supporting all residents
of this town. I encourage the voters of this town to pass the an override. >> Thank you, >> Kathleen Barowski. Good job on the last pull down here.
>> Hi everyone. I'm Kathleen Borowski. I live at 9 Pitch Farm Road and I'm speaking tonight in support of the override. I am also requesting that it be presented to voters as a single question vote because what we are really deciding on is not what individual departments deserve funding, but rather
what kind of community we want to be. Across every department, the message is the same. services are stretched to the limit and have been slashed year-over-year already. Without this override, we are not making small adjustments. We are facing real losses at the Norris School. A $500,000
reduction would mean eliminating an assistant principal, losing reading interventionalists, cutting paraprofessionals, and reducing critical supports like nursing, occupational therapy, and speech services. This is in addition to the devastating reductions already enacted from last year's failed
override. These services are not extras. They are core infrastructure that our children need to succeed. At the library, the situation is just as stark. Three out of four staff positions would be cut, leaving a single director to run the entire operation. That means all library programming would be eliminating
eliminated, including all youth programming and playgroups, summer reading and tech assistance. The hours would be reduced and we faced the very real risk of losing certification, cutting our town off from shared library resources across the state, including the loss of ebooks and the Libby app. at
the senior center. The elimination of four part-time positions, program, volunteer, and outreach coordinators, plus a part-time admin, would leave one full-time person to deliver daily programming, manage van transportation, and public benefits counseling to more
than the 2,300 older adult residents in Southampton. In addition, this one employee would handle appointments to any Medicare and SNAP eligible individuals in Southampton. In public safety, demand is rising, not falling. Police activity is up 14%, reported
crimes up 21% and felonies up 86%. Officers are responding to hundreds of medical calls and thousands of service requests each year. This override is not about expansion. It is about maintaining the bare minimum ability to respond to emergencies in a timely and highquality fashion. Our highway department is
already operating reactively, handling storms and emergencies while falling further behind on road maintenance and infrastructure, all while operating with aging equipment. Complaints about road conditions and facilities upkeep will continue to go unressed if they continue to operate as they have. These are not separate issues. They are
interconnected. Each of these departments supports who we are in Southampton and what we are trying to build for ourselves and our future generations. We cannot and should not pit them against each other. Splitting them into multiple questions forces impossible choices between essential services that are already at minimum
capacity. This override is about preserving the foundation of our town. education, safety, infrastructure, and care for our most vulnerable. If we want to remain a community that supports families, protects residents, and cares for people at every stage of life, the path forward
is clear. Please support the override and present it as a single question vote. >> Thank you. >> Next up, Nilda Cohen. It had me at a disadvantage cuz I had vertigo >> and I didn't think I was going to have
to stand up and so my delivery >> we can hear you from here. You may not be fully recorded but >> I I felt it was important for me to be here because >> I have been following the meetings. I was moved by the parents that showed up
at one of the meetings and I I'm everything that anyone has said here tonight I support. You have to fight for what you believe you need and you want. It's all a matter of cost. My biggest
issue is that this select board and employees in this town have not managed the finances in a manner that has prevented this crisis.
And you know what I'm talking about. There's been a lot of missspending and you need to kind of come clean with all that and tell the people that to 2.4 2.7
is not going to fix everything. And I come to meetings, I write emails, I ask for public information, they go to Scott. The town clerks forwards my request for public records
>> to Scott. Am I being tracked? >> Can I speak? >> I'm a voter. I'm entitled to have information. >> And yet that's a red player. You don't give me reports. Something's cooking.
>> And this board is very weak. The finance committee has made very bold statements. We are in trouble. We need to do something. I respect them. And they're new to this town. The other people
around this room other than John who has spoken very candidly. Everybody else has voted it down. He has been the only one with the knowledge and
the backbone to say it how it is. I've been involved with this town for maybe over 20 years of my 42 years here. I've been on finance, select board, renovation of the north school. I have
paid my dues and I will die here. But I wanted to stay the town moved in, the town that I moved in. And I wish you all that you speak up and say what you feel. I am told that people are afraid there's
going to be retalatory action if they say something on Facebook. When have we had a town administrator that makes comments to people on Facebook that is inappropriate? He is an employee
of the cabin. >> Your time is almost up. No, >> that's all I'm going to say because I have three pages and I appreciate you gave me the platform here because as I said, thank you very much and thank you
all of you for giving the time. >> Thank you. Robert Floyd next. Robert Floyd College Highway speaking as moderator. Our moder meeting is going to be May 2nd, Saturday. So the warrant
needs to be posted the latest by Friday, April 24th. But I also want to give a heads up. I'll be appointing three finance committee members and I plan to appoint them in May. Anyone who has interest, please send a letter of intent and resume to
town moderator at town of Southampton.org. Have a good evening. Cheers. >> Thank you, >> Erin Sims. >> Hello, Aaron Sims of 42 LeadMine Road. I'm speaking tonight as a part of grow a growing group of residents who are
actively organizing to support a successful override. There is real momentum and building on in the community and we are working to mobilize residents to vote in favor of that override. As we started organizing, one concern has come up consistently. We
believe that structuring the override as a single single comprehensive proposal gives it the best chance of success. When funding needs are split into multiple questions or categories, it can unintentionally divide support. Residents may agree that the town needs
investment overall but disagree on individual components which can lead to the entire effort falling short. A unified override allows voters to consider the full picture, including schools, services, and the overall future of the town.
We have also found that many residents do not yet fully understand what is at stake if the override does not pass. For example, my understanding is that the library would no longer meet the requirements of the regional system, which could result in losing access to shared library services. And I don't
think most people respect uh or understand that. Clear, specific communication about these types of outcomes will help residents make informed decisions. Our goal is simple. We want to see a successful outcome that reflects the needs of the community and provides
stability moving forward. >> Thank you very much. >> Thanks. >> Uh Amy Vera. >> Hello. My name is Amy Vera and I live on Lime Street. I'm surprised to be up here speaking at a select board meeting in front of a crowd because I don't
consider myself an activist or a public speaker. At a time when everything feels so divisive in our country, I am drawn to do what I can to rally besides those who are fighting to keep our our town strong and whole. I moved here about six years ago at the beginning of the
pandemic with my husband and daughter. My daughter is now a thriving and happy first grader at Norris despite the loss of art class because it is a nurturing and safe environment. I believe that a big reason the school has these attributes is because it is located in
Southampton where kindness and community are ingrained because they are so important to the fabric of the town. We are at a turning point in this town where we could choose to make devastating cuts that leave us without functioning without a functioning library that help helps educate people
of all ages, provide free community support and entertainment and bring people together. Without a school that can provide a rounded education for the varied requirements of the growing population of children who attend. Without a thriving senior center that
can engage and assist the aging population that accounts for oneif of its residents. Without a welle equipped highway department which allows us to safely use the roads, sidewalks, and infrastructure and beautifies our common spaces. And without a fully staffed and
equipped fire and police department who keep us all safe on a daily basis. I encourage the board to do what they can to stand up for this community by valuing our quality of life, our jobs, our safety, the values of our homes, our children, and our aging adults by
keeping this vote as clear as possible, and keeping it to a single issue, the funding the town needs to help take care of people who live here and keep it a place that people want to call home. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Jessica McConnell.
Jessica McConnell, 24 High Street. There is an article up for Town Warren to decrease the CPA funding from a tax levy of 3% to 1%. On a home valued at $478,000, this would decrease the property tax bill by $100 a year. I have been told
that making this change is a bad idea because it lowers the matching funds we receive from the state. This is true, but the current CPA account has approximately $1 million in it and would continue to grow. As a homeowner, if I was saving for a luxury item and my
grocery funds were running short due to high inflation, I would decrease the amount of money I was adding to my dream purchase account in order to afford necessities. In this example, the luxury item savings would be the Community Preservation Act levies. and the necessities would be the operational
expenses we need to run the town, police, fire, highway, library, council on aging, etc. This article is intended to appeal to voters who know we need an override but need financial assistance to make it happen. Maybe by reducing one portion of their tax bill, they will
invote they will vote to increase the portion of their bill that goes to the necessities. There are voters in town who will vote to maintain the 3% CPA tax and vote yes on the override. To those citizens, I say thank you. There are Southampton voters who will vote to
reduce the CPA levy and vote no on the override. To those households, I implore you to think hard on what you'll be losing and make sure you and the town can go without. This article is a compromise with Southampton citizens. Compromise is something we all used to
know how to do. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Heather Pellerini. >> Hi, Heather Pellerini. 76 Crooked Lech Road. Um, first of all, I just want to thank both of these committees. I know this is a really hard job you got to do. Um, and I'm going to disagree with some
of the folks that think that the one line item off full override is the best call. I've been here almost 20 years. We've had a lot of requests for overrides and when they're all dumped together, I think people um, well, they kind of get suspicious and a $350,000 capital fund with some kind of
questionable uh, comments made about its usage. Um, I don't know. I think that's one that's going to raise some red flags with some voters. And again, the trust factor is what's going to get this passed. Um, that's just my two cents. My item might have a better chance of getting passed.
>> Thank you. >> Um, Alice Baker. Sorry for the gymnastics. getting my workout in. Getting over here. Um I am uh my name is Alice Bataker. Um 3 East Street. I have lived here about 11
years. Um I'm a volunteer on the parks commission. I volunteer as a youth sports coach. I also volunteer with um the Council on Aging Pickle Ball Group. Um I come here as a concerned citizen of Southampton. And again, I don't see myself as someone that comes and talks
publicly on these kind of issues, but here I am. Um, my son has purchased a home here. My daughter and son-in-law have purchased a home here. And now my grandson will be a future student at Norris School. My daughter is employed as a paramedic here. Our youngest son
attends Norah School here. My spouse and I are educators. My first um the first comment that warranted me speaking is that um I had heard on one of the recordings an official um that had stated it's all debatable how employees
should be in the how many employees should be in the school. I can't believe that removing five to nine employees is going to be devastating as people said. As an experienced teacher who has taught over 20 years and my spouse also losing paraprofessionals, arts teachers,
occupational therapists, speech teachers is devastating. It is devastating to the students and to their families. Many families rely on the expertise of these teachers um when they meet with them and they talk with them. Our son received speech services from kindergarten
through third grade. He needed that service. I have also said in my classroom that I'd welcome politicians to come in and do what we do every day. Have any of the board members ever visited Norris School and see what would be eliminated firsthand. To eliminate
reading interventionists will have an absolute devastating effect. If you do not correct and/or identify disabilities in reading by third grade, you will face higher numbers of children failing reading levels in the upper elementary grades. The cost to the student the cost
to the students and the cost to the to educate them further down the road will increase dramatically in future years. I read town members posts um about cutting paid positions at the senior center. The senior center is a place that town members can go to socialize, improve
health with active programs that are offered. The senior center supports Norris school with supply drives and coat and mitten drives. This is a community that helps one another. Our town has a large senior population. We need to provide services for this population.
As for cuts to the library, I really can't imagine it. Um my spouse is the type of reader that has three books on the counter. books on Libby, books for our son, and where we went. The first day our son had to do a report on Samuel
D. Champlain. All the librarians know them by name. I read some, but you're more likely to find me at the pivotal ball courts. Someone posted, "Why did the town choose to to uh to build pivotal ball courts or splash pads?" My point is that there are
varied ages and and needs in this town and as a community we must consider everyone as we hear budget and place votes. I hope it my suggestion is to list the cuts clearly on the vote choices so that people can consider and
understand what they're voting for. Consider ideas about the CPA accounts. Some Southampton should be a town that people want to move to or stay in, not move away from. >> Thank you. Thank you, Ellen.
>> Next up, Bruce Gomes. Bruce here. >> He changed his mind. >> Changed his mind. Okay, thank you. Tammy Wunz is Tammy Wunis, 298 College Highway. And you've all seen me up here. Oh, we stopped.
First, I'd like to set the record straight specifically for the housing authority committee that at the last select board meeting, I did not ask for the CPA accounts to be closed. I asked if the 3%
sir charge that is taken out of every taxpayers's bill be applied to the budget to help with all the cuts that were happening. You did not tell me it was not legal just to remove the one the percentage
and redirect me to the correct loss. It was Fincon that provided an answer to that question where I then asked if the percent could be changed. That is when John Lumbra had pointed out that the 3% could be changed with the citizens
petition. So, let me gnaw on this a bit more and let you know that this isn't a dead end and I will follow it through and dottedly attack this
project going forward. Also, I did not take the town to court, but should have since it's now 5 years since Red's passing, and there is still nothing done with a senior center like
the will had asked. You did not put me on a more productive path with your with a project. So now I put together a petition with over 50
signatures only to be informed it wasn't on the correct petition form. And I had to get another additional 10 plus names on that corrected form. I
believe that 1% of the citizens from this town should be enough to have this added on the warrant. I also submitted this to the town clerk 58 days before our town election
when the law states that needs to be at least 42. I want to know what else you're going to throw at me to prevent me from going on the warrant as an article for the annual
town meeting on May 2nd, 2026 at Norse because waiting to put me on the agenda until March 31st and knowing that the deadline is April 1st is a really shitty thing to do to a member of the
committee. If >> I may answer that. >> Yeah, >> it is actually on the agenda for next Tuesday's meeting. >> Good. >> Thank you. >> But it is the 31st with a cut off the next day. >> The 31st is the next meeting and that's
when we close the warrant articles is April 1. >> Right. >> That's correct. >> Yeah. >> Last one up. John, I'm sorry I can't quite read your last name. Perella. >> I'll pass. >> You'll pass. Okay, fine. Okay, thank you everyone. That's everybody who signed in. So, thanks
everyone. Much appreciate that. Uh, first up, we will have actually um the let's see, we have our town clerk Lucy Dalton has something for us to sign at select board. Sorry. Want to just tell us what it is?
>> Um, it's a resigning of the caucus warrant. Um, I noticed a typo on the one they previously signed. there is enough time for it to be posted. So in transparency I am telling them they have to resign it
so it can be posted. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So the >> go ahead. >> So the only change here is typos. >> Yeah. It was just um I was writing out the seats and park commission was included in there and there's no seats
up for >> Okay. Thank you, Lucy. >> All right. I think then our first order of business. Sorry, did Stephen sign that? Y. >> Uh first order up then in terms of our agenda. Um, new business.
Get the right one here. Hold on. >> Yep. Yep. Will be the uh budget task force recommendation and I believe Margaret's going to be delivering that to us. Thank you. >> Hi again. I uh am representing the
budget task force uh that was put together in order to make some recommendations regarding the override um town meeting articles etc. And um I will say that we because these are complicated issues that we did not always come to a unanimous agreement. So
in this document it specifies where we were able to come to a unanimous agreement or if it was majority only. Uh there are several piece people from the task force here that are happy to answer questions once you get into the thick of it, but I do have to read this into the record. So I apologize for the time.
>> Just speak a little bit louder perhaps. >> I shall. Um okay. Uh background Southampton TA budget task force was created to have discussions, review options, and provide guidance to the select board and county administrator on the FY27 budget. The budget task force
recognizes that a robust FY27 budget requires a potential override and engaged in in-depth discussions around the amount, the impact of citizens, and what would be necessary for the town to continue to provide basic core services. As part of this effort, the task force also developed recommendations for town
meeting articles and ballot questions. We met six times beginning in February and will meet again to planformational sessions regarding the override. task force consists of the town administrator, select board chairperson, superintendent of schools, chief of police, two town citizens, and
representatives from the finance committee, capital committee, nor school in Hampshire regional. So the situation is all Southampton town departments and school committees were asked to submit budgets for FY27 that total 24,484,896.96.
This number also includes $350,000 for capital projects. Revenues are projected at 22,155361, leaving a shortfall of 2,329,535.96. Revenues are conservatively projected as actual funding will not be finalized
until May and June. Here's our recommendations for the override. The task force by majority recommends an override of 1,938,947.80. This partially restores the asks for North school capital library and fire,
eliminates the land use planner position, and reduces e- permitting and inspection services. The task force believes this to be a responsible number that retains town services um but could be approved by the voters. This number also includes approximately $65,000 for
Hampshire Regional, which reflects the difference between the preliminary and final Hampshire Regional budgets. On average, this represents a poverty tax increase of $768 a year. Town meeting articles. Task force unanimously recommends that two budgets be presented
at town meeting with the goal of getting both passed. An all department-based budget and an override budget by majority. The task force also recommends that the Hampshire regional budget be presented as a separate article separate from town departments. We recognize that
any of these articles can be amended on the floor. Uh the first article, budget a the non-override budget that ensures we meet statutory requirements for an approved budget. This includes town administrator recommended reductions to all town departments and is a barebones budget
that reflects drastic cuts to our services. This budget does not include the line for Hampshire regional. Next article is the Hampshire regional budget. The task force acknowledges that it's important to offer our citizens some agency in approving the Hampshire regional budget. The group discussed but
did not reach a conclusion regarding the budget amount to be presented at town meeting. The options we discussed were to A request the full ask for HRHS or B request $65,000 less and incorporate the difference into the override as a
contingent approval. In the event the select board approves the latter, it is reflected in the proposed override number prepared by the town administrator. Desi, which is Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, considers t contingent approvals based on overrides to be rejections until the
contingency occurs. If the override does not pass and one other town rejects the budget, Hampshire Regional must prepare a different budget for a future vote at a special town meeting. The task force further acknowledges the complication that if the Hampshire Regional budget is voted down on the TAN floor or an
override that includes Hampshire Regional does not pass, but four other towns approved the budget, Southampton is obligated to fund the full ask. This would require a special town meeting to approve a line item transfer within the approved budget. Finally, um next
article, budget B is the override budget for inclusion on the May 19th ballot. This includes all departments and the request for capital. As the task force believes, we should present a single budget representing all the town department needs. Again, note this budget is $390,000 less than the
original department requests. For the ballot question, the task force unanimously recommends that the override be presented as a single ballot question. This avoids departments being pitted against each other and establishes capital as a dedicated fund to support all town services. Regarding
the capital account, as noted above, the task force unanimously recommends that capital be appropriately funded and included within a single override budgeted to be presented at town meeting and as a ballot question. Over the past decade, the amount allocated from free cash for capital has ranged from a few
thousand to over $350,000. This inconsistency prevents responsible capital planning and has resulted in years of infrastructure neglect, deferred maintenance, and an extension of vehicle life long past their recommended service. This has been submitted by in alphabetical order,
Trish Coulson McGomery, Hampshire Region Middle School Committee, Christine Fowl, Select Board Chair, Doug Hamill, Finance Committee, Chief Ian Illingsworth, Chief of Police, Margaret Larson, Capital Committee, Art Lawrence, citizen, Dr. Dito Peron, superintendent of schools, Bob Riggs, citizen, Kim Shot, Norris,
school committee chair, and Scott Cac, town administrator. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you for reading that into the record. I think uh do we need a motion to accept that or uh I don't think we do. I acknowledge that it's read into the record publicly
>> with appreciation. >> Yes. With >> we we've never had this level. >> Excuse me. Could we Yeah. Yes. Go ahead. >> I just want to express my appreciation this budget task force coming from all
different perspectives. They put in a lot of time and energy to help the town figure out the least damaging way forward and I appreciate that we're moving in the right direction. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. So, let us
move into the actual budget discussion tonight. As I mentioned, we have basically three three budgets which I think we will have >> sorry if I could. Yes. Um I know that at least to the committee >> chair. May I interrupt the meeting? Would it be possible that handouts of
this budget? I can't see that screen. >> It's also online. So there >> but but we're at this meeting now and it would be helpful if we could follow the line. >> We could certainly send a copy to you. We don't have enough copies for everyone tonight. the information.
>> I'm sorry. The idea was not to have everybody have a copy because it's online and it's or and on screen rather and it will be online as soon as we've made our decision, but you may have a copy from one of our members here tonight. Thank you.
>> So, if I could I think the um >> I think the committee you know the committee finance and select board have had these copies for a couple days now and it's not the first time we've seen them. So I wonder if before we jump into I'm sure
a very lengthy process maybe we have a general discussion. We might be on consens consensus already on certain things and then we can just figure out what we're not. >> We could yeah I was going to have Scott to show us what the what the full ask budget was but if you want to have a discussion before that is that what
you're saying? >> I mean the full ask was the 24 million. We were just going to show what that >> No, I'm sorry. total budget >> the the full ask I mean would you rather not have that up on the screen or >> it just so >> you're the chair >> well just so that people can see what
we're talking about so this was the full ask that that people >> I can just do the process I can just talk about the process really quick >> if if you'd like whatever whatever >> and then open it up >> yeah okay we'll come back to John's point I mean I do we I I think it's hard
to figure out if we're in a consensus if we don't know >> with everybody sharing what we're talking about. >> But I'm not necessarily I'm not talking about jumping right to the numbers. >> Okay. >> But do we right right now? Do we all agree that we are not looking to put a
multiple overline department by department by department on the ballot? Right. I think it's it's a now I I would say it's a department >> the town budget numbers >> and I believe that Hampshire Regional has to be separate and we have no choice
but to vote on the number that includes the $65,000 and I think that's a statute. >> Mhm. >> So I think that question has to be by itself. But I think that number with the 65,000 has to be in every single option we have. >> Like we don't have a choice in the doomsday to cut it down because the law
doesn't allow us to do that. Mhm. >> So, I personally think it should be Hampshire Regional. There's a number that they put forward. We vote it up, we vote it down, or we pass on it to a future meeting, which gets us that two weeks out to see what other communities do.
>> Mhm. >> Or and then the town as a whole, here's a budget. Now, it may be the full, it may be the something in the middle. It might be the D. It's not going to be the doomsday. Mhm. >> I think that's where we can spend our time talking. >> Mhm.
>> But does anybody disagree? >> Well, let's get some other points. Yeah. >> I I think that's that's has to be a topic for the next meeting about how the warrant is organized. >> Well, I I would like to understand that now before I start getting into settling on a number. >> Yeah. I mean, we we weren't going to get
into how the articles and everything was going to be arranged. We were trying to figure out if we could come to an agreement with a budget tonight. both the base budget bottom line figure and an override number. So >> third bullet point that we're going to get to right now says fiscal year 27 overwrite budget proposal. This this is
proposing. This is how we're proposing to put it forward. >> So it's clearly on the agenda. >> The um the organization of the articles is on next meeting and it could be an open meeting violation because it's not on the agenda. >> I'm not talking about what the article is or the wording >> not the content of it.
>> Yeah. So, >> okay, Reggie, >> I just wanted to um the last couple years that I've been involved, the town moderator has taken it upon himself really to
break things out line by line, which is not what you're talking about. So, I I just want to make sure that that doesn't happen. >> Can you all make sure you're speaking loud enough for people in the back? >> Yes. Thank you. >> Yeah. So, so the the question is whether we break the town moderators in the past
has broken up the budget and had us vote on separate pieces of it, which I don't think is correct and I don't think that's what we're what we would like to see. >> So, I wanted to get the select board's >> Mhm. >> thoughts on that. >> To Yeah. To my knowledge, I mean, last
year, I don't believe we went you meant by department by department. >> That has happened in the past. I think last year was at least one of the years where we did not do that. I think we're looking not to divvy it up, but here's here's a bottom line figure is is my understanding. I think that is
the simplest way to to present it. But again, we'll get into how we present the budget articles really more next week. Yeah, >> I'd rather not get into that discussion today. Tuesday night, we'll be talking about >> that kind of detail. Okay. >> We we we had issues last year. >> I know. And that was because I think we
tried to combine too much into one question. So, um, this year I think we want to try and be sure that we separate it out and have it very clear in terms of what the actual budget is, what the base budget is, >> and then what a an override budget is, and the implications therein.
>> Okay. >> And then I have a general comment. Um, we're talking about a fall back, you know, full ask and then a fall back. >> The fall back is very close to the full ask. that I'm just >> Well, that's where I think we're going to spend time on what are those numbers
because that's what we have to decide tonight what that is. But I >> So So I mean I I would suggest that we don't even do the interim step if you're if it's so close to the full ask that you're going to confuse people or you have a an interim that's more like halfway between the two numbers rather
than >> right the top number. But whether we do a full ask and a secondary ask or we just do a single ask for an override, I would suggest that it is all town departments together. >> I agree with that. >> Yeah, I think
>> I would also echo John's sentiment um and the recommendation of the budget task force that um the individual town departments including Norris are not split out into separate asks, separate override items. um you know that at least in respect to Norris and the rest
of the town departments which we control unlike New Hampshire regional assessment um the town is the school and the school is the town. So I would be in opposition to multiple override asks for individual departments. >> Mhm. Understood. Okay. And what I'm
hearing is that the town departments would be together but you're still recommending that perhaps Hampshire Regional be pulled out? >> Well, yes I am. And again, I go by this select board, this finance committee has no um governmental authority over the
Hampshire regional. A separate independent body has done that. We can only take their re we're required to put their recommendation before the voters >> and and it is what it is. I mean, we can make recommendations and speak to it, >> but we have to put it in there. And if the town's people, the elected the
legislative body, which is the town's meeting, >> Mhm. they vote to support it, then we've got to figure out how to do it if they potentially pass for a future meeting, which has the same effect as a failure. And in the
meantime, one of the other four communities does it, then we can address it and we'll get our vote on the override and we'll be in a different seat if our override passes versus if our override doesn't, >> right? versus if if we keep it in there
and our override fails and no other community votes it down to I think it was Margaret we've got to find some we've got another we've got to have a special meeting anyways to find another 65,000 somewhere in here to move it through which is why I think it's those two are separate items
>> to if I may to expand on John's point so the the mechanism and I forget the actual statute but it's 16B for approving the budgets for regional school districts relies on appropriation. >> By including the entire ask for
Hampshire Regional from their their last final approved regional school committee vote in the base budget, it functions as a automatic approval if the base budget, the budget with the reductions is approved. So that speaks to what the
difference is between having Hampshire pulled out versus in the base budget. um the base budget which I have not been part of the town meeting that hasn't been approved. If the full certified amount is in there as an appropriation,
the Hampshire regional budget is being approved. >> Mhm. Okay. Yep. Okay. Other other points that people would like to just discuss in terms of consensus and where where people's heads are in terms of >> Well, I'm also I'm also in >> I'm also in favor of putting forward an
override number. Yeah. Whether it's one or two. Correct. putting something. Yeah. Well, I'm just saying. >> Yeah. >> There's nobody here saying no, we're going with the no overright cut budget. >> No. Okay. I'm I'm hearing that, too. Yeah. That I think I think it's >> I'm not sure. Ellen, any any thoughts? I mean, I I'm not hearing from other
people around the table before even and even in our last meeting, it was seeming like we were heading toward an override. I mean, I think that's been a large part of what the what the task force was focusing on much more so honestly than the base budget. you know, we took a
look, I think just procedurally took a look at the full ask that had been presented and then started figuring out, you know, can we manage that and if we can't manage that, where do we trim and how do we get to an override number that might be reasonable. Um, and so that
that's kind of how we've the task force, I think, ended up with a 1.9 at this point in time. Madam Chair, >> yes, >> everyone has been concerned about what the citizenry can afford. We don't have any polling. We only have
our own instincts. And I'm not convinced of the magic between what's differential >> 300,000 >> 300,000 >> 390,000 I believe or something like that. >> The the initial request >> the maximum override
>> Mhm. was with some adjustments in approach essentially level services approach. >> Um little bit different here and there and approach to different challenges but
um I'm worried about kicking the can down the road. >> Mhm. Okay. I'd like to let Scott tell us a little bit about the process though on on the on the on the full ask that we're looking at. So we have the full request. >> Yep. So, I I presented to the uh psych and and the fincom three uh packages. Uh
the first one is the request budget, which was a little bit over 24 a little bit under $24.5 million. And that's that's not like a wish list. That was really a a conservative request from all of our departments. There's not a lot of
additions to it. Um really the main additions to that budget were like the health insurance mitigation fund which we're going to have to pay the runout claims which we may or may not have to uh pay and we have a 5year period that we're going to be able to pay those out per state law. Uh like the part-time
inspectional services for like $16,000 part-time library technician. Uh the collective bargaining agreement funds to resolve any outstanding collective bargaining agreements. uh and the capital funds. Um one of the things is you know the impact uh I think that there was a concern with the budget task
force about the impact on the taxpayers. So with that uh the impact on an annual basis would be about $900 on the average uh homeowner. Um the other issue I guess with any uh type of um Proposition 2 and a half increase is sustainability.
um our our revenues are not going to be growing over the next couple years. The state is not going to be saving us in the next couple years. Uh a lot of what is in the budget um has a lot of incidental or soft costs that are associated with it such as you know health insurance which can range
anywhere from$25 to $30,000 per employee. Uh retirement cost, insurance costs. Uh so it's pretty significant. And when you look at a $2 million override just as a rough number, um when that's added to the tax levy, that's only going to be able to be increased
about $50,000 per year. So one or two insuranceances in that, you know, insuranceances within that $2 million override would essentially wipe that out. And then you have all the other soft costs and the costs associated, which would be a negative towards our revenues. >> Um so with that, we came up with the uh
the middle budget, which was a $ 1.9 million override. Um Scott, just before you get that, could we just can you verify or validate the $2.2 million number that is in the requested budget?
>> It the two 2,239 is there, but the report is 2,329. Is is it three and two inverted? >> It might be. >> So I I think it's 2,329,000. >> 300. Sorry.
>> And just to say too, I mean, I think once >> there are there may be errors. So, >> I mean, I'm juggling three Excel sheets. So, once we get a final budget, then Bradley and I are going to go through with a final. >> No, I think I think that's the go. I just want to be clear on that, too, because I think we've, you know, we've we've seen different numbers, but that's a very good catch.
>> Once we come out with actual budget numbers, this this will stay exactly like this tonight. I mean, Scott and the town accountant have got to sit down and go through and make sure that every piece of the workbook links up all the all the math errors. I all the math formulas rather link from one basic
workbook on the back side that all rolls up correctly. So that will be the final you know a finding fine-tuning that has to happen after we get through with the basic idea of where we're going tonight. So >> So the middle one was um based on some
of the guidance from the budget task force to to look for under $2 million um for the override. Uh with this the average taxpayer increase uh in Southampton would be um about $768.
Um again this is kind of uh looking towards the future and sustainability. Uh some of the positions that that were cut on the municipal side. Now with the school side the town does not have any line item authority over what the schools get. So, it's just one number
that the town would provide to Norris School and New Hampshire Regional. >> Um, but on our side, looking at positions that may carry benefits like the, uh, vacant positions like the land use planner, um, the youth librarian, the fire department, um, things like
that. Again, being a little bit more sustainable and and reducing some of those other soft costs. Um, it was able to get we were able to increase it from the initial right around 1.8 eight and that was adding um mostly money towards um North school. So that brought up the
funding to 11% for this year. Uh and then obviously the um non-override which has often been referred to as the uh apocalyptic or catastrophic budget and there's no >> ways around it. Doomsday budget. It
would be significant and there's no easy way to make these types of cuts. It impacts services. it would impact people's lives both on the employee side but also on the citizen side. Um and obviously
it would really it would really impact and and and this type of budget would really just be about preserving core services to the town. We're not talking about anything extra. We're talking about being able to get tax bills on time, having police officers, and trying our best to fill potholes with no
equipment. Um, basically it's the the bare minimum to operate what a municipality could be. >> And you know, we can obviously that, you know, the cuts can be changed, but the the unfortunate part is most of on the town side, most of our costs are personnel costs.
>> Um, and that would, you know, that has a pretty big impact on everything. >> Um, so for the most part, you know, there there's some significant cuts in here. um to get to that number. Um it would definitely impact the the quality of life and and moving forward.
So just to give you an idea, >> that was to cut nearly $2 million to get down to the something that would match the revenue that we're anticipating. And again, the revenues are not fixed in stone yet. There's a lot more that's still moving. This is our best guess and
the best conservative estimate of the revenues coming in that we're trying to get to. Uh knowing that the governor's budget's not set. We've got various other things that are still not, you know, inked in on paper, uh like how people will choose their health insurance, etc. Those are costs that are
still got to come in. So, >> all right. So, that's kind of the overview. Yes. Ready? So I wonder can we have a discussion about the middle column and whether that could be something else or is that >> already happened? Sure. >> No, that's tonight's meeting. >> That's tonight's meeting. Yeah. So
tonight's meeting is, you know, I think I think it's it's up for discussion in general. So like I said, we did not go through the the no override cuts in in as great a detail as we did at at the task force. I'm speaking from the task force as we did the the 1.9 cuts. uh
because at one point we were probably closer to 1.7 as the override and then um ended up trying to figure out how we could build some money back in and that's where it got up to the 1.9. So that is still there. Um and I think we were trying to share what the uh the
impact would be tax impact would be. So that was what Scott got related. Yeah. >> If I may. So talking about the middle budget. So with the Norris being cut you know there's still a short blob 201,000. What does that mean? So what would be reimplemented though and what would
still be short? Because I'm tempted to by looking at this I would say you know the capital the 50,754 I mean that would be with a full capital of 300,000 but you know we had talked before give and takes on different things. So I mean if if we cut that
capital at 50,000 and fund Norris with it now their shortfalls only 150 but capital still would have 200,000. you know, we're on the assumption of the 300,000 for capital and that middle number is just cutting it by 50. >> So, I I I think that there's discussions
to be made as to what what is that 2011? How does that still leave Norah short? I think that's the flavor of >> Yeah. >> So, for reference, the the full restorative budget would be about a 14% increase for Nor school. Um this is 11% and
>> it's the 14% in the first number though. >> Yeah. The request budget. That's correct. And this would be an 11% and then obviously the uh no override would be I think 3.5%. Um and just to give you an idea >> with those recommended cuts.
>> Yeah. So for Norris increases just to give you an idea of how much each one is. Um it's roughly about 65 to $70,000 per >> Sorry, it's kind of crude, but yeah. So
it's about $65,000 60,000 per 1%. >> Scott, your models when you make changes to the number of employees, does that fall into benefits? Because I was looking at the three choice the three columns and the benefit numbers are
basically the same in each of them. >> Mhm. >> Why why would that be? Wouldn't they as you add positions back, wouldn't you have more benefit expense? Well, we won't know until the end of open enrollment what our actual um benefit costs are going to be. So, we might have
some people come in, some people come off, >> but you're your first the the request I'll call it the requested I'll use the heading out there. The requested budget >> assume I'm I'm asking if this is correct. Is the assumption correct that as far as benefits goes,
it's who's on the census roster right now with a multiple in there of what you 3% or whatever you think it's going to be. So that's in the requested but in the 1.9 >> I think there if any of them and there got to be well not the land use plan
because there's nobody in that role right now but if that middle column the 1.9 cuts calls for a reduction >> in staff by either knocking them out of benefit eligibility and or eliminating position >> right >> I think you you would expect to see a credit
>> I I would expect differences in >> these are all vacant >> for request Okay. And on the over on no override cut though, >> except for I don't know if that's entirely correct. The youth librarian is is a filled position. Um that
>> it's only it's only not a filled position because our director retired in January and our and our children's library, >> but compared to last year's services and so the what this reflects is putting it down to a halftime position so that it would not be benefit eligible. And
one thing I do want to stress is that we will have to revisit the budget as a special town meeting probably in September or early fall to make adjustments because we won't know what the exact insurance costs. We don't know what the employment cost and the other things that are going to be out there that we're going to have to make adjustments for. >> Just to to close the loop on the benefit
piece. So what I understand is the 201,000 for Norris even though we don't have the details here and the 849 in the catastrophic because we're not restoring any positions. There's nobody currently
accepting benefits. Therefore there'd be no benefit savings >> for the cut budget. I'm not sure how Norris would make the cuts. So that would be kind of up to Norris to do that and how it would impact. We wouldn't know. >> Well, it's
>> Yeah. I mean, the positions are all vacant now because of the last budget. >> Mhm. >> Right. I mean, they're just not going to >> So, if you added nine positions, I would assume there'd be benefits from nine positions. >> Yes. Absolutely. >> And there would be a big difference between these numbers, >> which is why
there needs to be a credit over on the other side. >> Yeah. And I think just just from a comparison point of view. >> Yeah. Okay. And I think these are the in in the budget, the lines that were in yellow were the ones that are still in flux. And that's I assume is that reason that these >> all ended up being pretty much the same
or not necessarily? I don't But if the requested budget passes, if we get the $2.3 million override to pass, >> we're not taking into account restoring >> 9 10 11 positions >> filling the librarian position that's
currently vacant, which I'm I don't know, but I'm assuming we benefit eligible since it's being discussed. >> Like there should be an X factor over that that would actually increase >> that would increase the 2.3 ask. >> Mhm. to cover for the benefits should pass.
>> Right. So, >> and as I mentioned, the sustainability of it. >> So, so the 2.3 is is without really reflecting the full the full benefits assuming that a lot of people would go back on the payroll. >> Yeah. >> So, that could be an even bigger
>> right now. What is the family plan >> for which which plan? >> Uh the health or whatever the the $47,000 a year. Hampshire County or >> the GIC that might enroll. >> I just had it. It's the be about 18 or
$19,000 contribution per year >> per person. Right. So if we're thinking they're >> 10 200,000 for simple math. >> Mhm. >> Correct. So we need to the 2.3 needs to be >> 10 >> because if it passes and we're able to
restore the 10 posts. >> I mean I'm I don't necessarily think all 10 would take the family plan. I think there's maybe a number somewhere in there. But >> we should put it in there. >> Yeah. >> I may be jumping ahead to to that point.
The the no override cuts also don't reflect the give and take between the loss of benefited positions and the unemployment insurance that we would, you know, as a self-insured >> uh municipality going for. >> Right. Mhm. >> So, right now, you've just kept the benefit costs, the employee benefit
costs stable across all three budgets. >> Yeah. >> Because it's a moving target at this point in time. That's what I understand. Okay. But, >> but I I >> I would suggest that the requested budget number be increased by at least $180,000 for employee benefits.
Again, I'm of the belief that this is the number, and I want to get to the comment in box number eight there in a second, but this is the number that just for the most part keeps us whole where we are. There's very little extra in there. I
understand there's 16,000 for a support person in the board of health >> and the 61,000 for the, you know, um, land use planner, which was in this current budget. we just never filled it because of that hiccup. Um, so that's not necessarily new, but really the the
only other things in there or the only new things in there that I'm aware of is that part-time person in the board of health and and um building commissioner spot for like 16,000 and change. >> So, right. >> Yeah.
>> So, would you like to pull up the the full request budget and just have that upset? I mean, just put in the whatever you're suggesting and just see where we are with that. Can you do it in the Excel form or no? >> Um, I can try. It might be a little glitchy. >> I mean, I'm I'm okay with doing with the
200 as well because you're going to have FICA and you're going to have the the benefits and then if there's the ancillary benefits and then the ret I mean, it's going to come somewhere there. It may not all fit the benefit line item, health insurance, I should say. while Scott's doing that because I I
think part of the messaging is Yeah. >> this this maximum ask is to keep us whole. >> Yeah. >> Where we are. >> It's not really. It's to reinstate >> from last year. So, it is a 14% increase. >> Yes, it is. >> In in school spending,
>> not including benefits and benefits are going up, >> but >> because there's an increase there as well. So, >> Right. But there's also an increase in in the the benefits across the entire town. >> Correct. >> And the retirement contribution, correct? Right. >> But it's still 14% increase. >> Yeah.
>> So, okay. So, if you were to add that extra into that, you're talking closer to Sorry, whatever that was. >> Go back to >> Yeah, it's unfortunate screen. Yeah. >> For some reason doing it like this. So,
>> but the where would it be in the employee benefits part? >> Mhm. >> Just go if you go to view >> go to the tab view >> up top >> the top doesn't do with the other ones for some reason
>> and select normal >> normal drive. >> Oh, thank you. >> Free of charge. >> You can't afford one person. Yeah, >> especially tax side. >> So, the employee benefits budget.
>> Yeah. >> Same same. >> Now, the the 1.425 that's also a little on the higher mark. It depends how many people are going to be migrating to either Wellpoint or H&E. So, there could be some savings on that. And I think the
estimate was a little bit lower in the 1.3 neighborhood, but we won't know until May 1st. So there could be some additional cost savings on that. I >> mean that's part of our challenge is that all those things in yellow are still unknown. So we won't know until the last minute. So
>> but you said the estimate was 1.3. So we were super conservative and putting 125,000 more in. >> Mhm. >> Until until we have our numbers in. We just we don't know. I mean a couple extra people. You know, the difference between the plans are 18 to 19,000 for
Health New England and 27 or $28,000 for Harvard Pilgrim, which is a $9,000 $9 $10,000 swing. So, five or six people that might, you know, take a higher cost plan would be 50 or $60,000. >> We're trying to educate everyone as much
as possible so that they responsibly purchase a health insurance plan that best fits their needs. Is is that 1.1 million in fiscal year 26 budget the budget that passed the county meeting or the special does that include the additional funds we had to >> that's the original >> Yeah. So that number is really
understated right now because we already had the 20% increase. >> We had the increase earlier. Okay. >> So to 220,000 is about that. >> Yeah. So you have an extra like 125,000 in there as a placeholder.
If if we can't Yeah, I can't I don't know. Yeah, it could be could be more. I don't know. >> Oh, >> technically it could be. >> But if we work this backwards, we we know that on June 30th, our budget was
1,153,000 and 45 days later, we had to increase that by 20%. Right? >> So, we can we we can do the math to get that number. >> And then the difference is whatever that number is and the 1.4 is the estimated placeholder you have. whatever that is.
>> Well, that was under the Hampshire County Group Insurance Trust. So, it it's me it's figuring out where the migration is going to be under their GIC, which is different because it has eight different plans and it has lower cost options and we've never really we've never had a choice before in
Southampton. >> So, are are you comfortable leaving that at 1.4 and it passes and we reinstate 10 people and they all take the Finland plan that you'll have enough money in there? Well, it depends if they reinstate supplies as well. So, I don't know how many people are currently benefit
eligible that have been reduced. I mean, I think that some of the people >> What do you mean supplies? >> Well, the Norris Elementary had their in total supply budget cut last year, >> not just >> Yeah, there there's the the there are there are 10 position or how many
positions? It comes out to it's nine full-time equivalents >> plus and so nine making 70,000 a piece you know that's nowhere near the 800,000 >> but but supply I'm just saying for health insurance
>> like supplies aren't going to hit that I I think that number needs to go up by something >> in the event that the full ask passes because then we don't want to have we don't want to have the full ask pass and then have to turn around and say Well,
we we don't have enough money for health insurance now, so we need another one to go with it. >> Is there is just like we're going to forward the full request? >> I certainly >> Well, I think that's where we have to talk about that's what we're trying to talk about tonight and we haven't got to
that point. I mean, whether we do a full request, a override request that's at at the middle level or the full level, I think I think we're in agreement of an override from what I'm understanding. But I heard the task force recommendation was >> one one number. >> No, I heard it was both to put through
the full the full and then the reduce. >> Did I miss here? >> Oh, well then >> it was only only one because we didn't want to split the vote. >> Yep. Can we Well, we can get to that later. But >> yeah, >> for the purposes of discussion, can we assume we're going to go with two and then when we get to the discussion, if
it's just one, it's one or do you want to talk about that now? >> No, I mean it's okay. I mean, I don't I don't mind if you wanted to change this right now, but that's fine. But I I think we've got to be looking at tonight. We've got to be sure which one we're going to go if we're going to go with two or one. But I personally I'm
I'm much more comfortable with one myself rather than two. >> If it's going to be one, it's got to be the right number cuz Exactly. >> So I I will say this, if if we are only going to do one, I'm voting for the full ask >> and I won't vote for anything other than that. If we're going to do two, then the
full ask and I have no problem with whatever number everybody else feels comfortable with with the fall back position. >> But it but I feel that we need to put forward to the citizens and let the citizens decide and and if they vote it down, they vote it down. But it it's not us. We we're giving them the
opportunity. We're saying this is what we need. Yes, it's 14.4%. Maybe it's going to be more now. >> I would second that. That's where I'm at. >> The only thing I'd add from the strategy point of view is that are you going to get it approved though? I mean, if it was a smaller number and you only have
one option, >> is it more likely to be approved? Because nobody wants to have the the the fall back position, but you're almost forcing them to the fall back if you don't have somebody >> at a lower level. And >> I think that was the that was a concern
I think of the task force that you risk diluting the boat because you're giving people two choices of an override >> and that what we heard was this lower override if you will this middle budget right was around $760 tax impact which is a lot for a lot of people. That's
that's the median. That's not for you know everybody. And then anything over the 2 million was I don't know if you had the exact numbers there but it was something like >> what' you say $900 or something. So that's a that's a you know 150 bucks difference basically for >> that much more money and I don't know I
mean that I think that's a hard >> throw a number in >> uh well yeah so what did we have the the um got one >> let's make it 244 to see where it is >> I mean I think it's a hard pill to
swallow firstly but >> it's hard to know the dynamics of how people >> it is I mean we don't know about two choices. >> This is the average and then the average would be right about here. It's about oh right in between here would be our average as well. >> Yeah.
>> It's not a small it's not a small number. I I do but I don't I just think I think I would feel better as a voter knowing that the pain is being shared by everybody and if everybody gets what
they ask and that's the only number that's put forward. If I'm a voter, I'm going to say, "Well, you know, I don't know." >> But but if but if there's give and take and it's a number that's less than what we're talking about, >> but I don't know how other people will
think about that. So there's no way to know about >> I view it this way. If if we decide on lesser than level services and and I think there's probably some, you know, nitpicking as to is this a little more than level services at the full ask and
there's probably, you know, Collectively, we could come to a position that, you know, it would take time, but we're going to actually make this level services. It would be a small difference in the numbers, but but to to take that amount and then decide on a
lower amount, we're removing that choice from voters. We're we're assuming >> if that's the only option with >> if that's the only option. We're we're assuming that there's not the the capacity or the appetite um to support
full level services for the town. >> We're assuming people's financial positions and and this absolutely I want to acknowledge the the $200 difference or so will be meaningful for some households. We're making a decision for
the voters in advance. where, you know, it there is a give and take. There's the complexity of explaining and educating the voters on, you know, how the override would function. Um, given two two different amounts, a a full amount
and a fall back amount. Um, but we're also giving up and making a decision for the voters about the potential override. Um, we didn't do pool polling and I I think it's hard to say which way is more advantageous and which one has more
barrel. >> I I will say I I don't want to be South forward an 11 million over. >> No, >> for the record. >> Yeah, for sure. >> So, there is a ceiling. >> Yeah. No, but I think what I think I'm hearing, Doug, is is that you're sort of
advocating for having two two separate override amounts. Two separate questions on two override questions. Is that what >> all right >> rather than a single a single override question I'm hearing a super full one like this whatever that amount was which is that $950,000
$50,000 $950 impact and then the perhaps the one Nish one >> so that would be a fallback but you need to present both choices to to the voters and I guess I yeah Steve anyway my thought is just that I'm concerned that that would really dilute the vote and you risk not having
>> the majority that you need to pass the override if our goal is to try and pass the override. My concern and it's my personal concern. It's just that that that may be a a breaking factor for some people, but
>> I I think when time did I cut somebody off? >> No, go ahead. When time permits, um >> you should look at the stuff that Doug sent out earlier today, and I know it was today's meeting. Yeah, >> this is what we're talking about on 31st. But >> there's a there's a way to flow it, water flow it on the ballot. Question
one, full. Do you support yes or no? >> Go to no matter how you vote on that, you go to question two, >> right? >> So you can vote no on the full ass, vote yes on the bottom. Or you can vote no on both of them. >> Um and if they both yes
and and if both pass >> by more than 51% >> then you it's question. Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah. So there there is that that's the tiered approach rather than doing this straight up and down with one vote. So originally the the idea or not the the idea from the task force I think
was to have an override budget and a base budget. So we may now be talking about a third one and I don't know I I'm willing >> from an educational standpoint it's very difficult to add another layer to that. >> So what >> I'm sorry did Margaret say that they
only wanted to have one? I believe that was their recommendation. That was recommendation. So they wouldn't have the full ask. They would just have the the compromise. >> Correct. I believe it was the 1.9 was the >> because that's really their ch that was their charge. That makes sense. >> So that was their their recommendation. But the the idea yes was only one not
not two choices. >> I would also I mean I would go that we don't need to put forward the base budget. Let's go to the ballot and we have enough time to go to the ballot and if they both if they fail if the two we just do the two overrites both overrites fail we have enough time to reconvene
figure out the cuts and then go back >> because we may have to have a special meeting anyways because depending on the Hampshire regional phone calls through the four five towns >> be interesting >> again I mean I get the education piece I
get it completely understand it the faster we can resolve this communicate we can get because the other things we should be talking about whenever you want to allow the discussion to happen is whether we pick up the citizens petition or we put forward our own question on the CPA. The second thing is
educating the votes that we took last year on adjusting the senior the senior credits wait raising all those levels up so more people in town are eligible to get an abatement on their taxes. um all leads into this because you know those
are going to be some of the folks that are going to >> be concerned about. >> No, that's definitely the educational point that has to happen. I mean, no doubt about it. I mean, there's a whole >> a whole lot of education that has to go on in public outreach over the next month for sure. I mean, no doubt about it. That's why I want us to get down to the actual figures now because we can't
go out and talk to anybody without having >> a real budget in in in place for tonight. And Jamie and Ellen, I'd like to just hear any thoughts that you've got on this. I mean, I'm just going to say $1,000 a household is $250 a quarter and we've been talking
about how 60% of this town is over 60 and can they afford 250 more a quarter? So, I think that there's going to have to be I'm worried that it won't pass and then we get the doomsday. So, we have to make this palatable. >> We have to make it at the best shot to
get it passed. So the town has services. >> Yeah. >> I think that the the idea of the full putting the full ask there is is what I initially would be leaning for. Let let them decide. This is what it takes.
>> Um >> but I'm not sure that that figure will be like you said I'm not sure it'll be palable. >> Yeah. I'm not sure that we can do just two override figures and not have a base. You got to have the base. So, I think that's not even if one passes, great. If number two passes, we got
that. Otherwise, by default, number three becomes the budget. >> Yeah. But, I mean, normally, you would build on the budget, right? You'd present the base budget to the voters saying, are you okay with this? And it's got all these drastic cuts and they're going to say, "No, I don't like those cuts." But you need to vote something so that we walk out of town meeting with a
budget in hand. As bad as it might be, if it's only the base budget, >> we have to let people know that that that is the foundation upon which then in my mind you add the idea of an override and say, "Okay, we've got our base. Would you now be in favor of doing
X more to restore certain services and that's your override budget." So, I think you've got to go back. >> I agree 100% with that at town meeting. >> Correct. >> Not at the ballot. So, I get what everything I was just saying was at the ballot. >> I'm sorry. Okay. Yes. This would be town meeting in my mind. I'm sorry. Yes, I wasn't at the ballot yet. I'm sorry.
>> Jump right to the >> madam chair if I may. I guess to the point of educating the voters, I would say that you know >> I don't want to sell sell short our voters. What I want to say the real lesson from last year should be is you
know lessons learned from the select board from town administration broadly about in advance you know letting people know how the budget questions operate or how the how the town meeting articles operate um preparing ourselves
>> um I I don't think the takeaway from last year's confusion is that you know the residents were unable to understand. I my personal takeaway was that we didn't prepare sufficiently as an administration. >> I think we made the question very complicated last year.
>> Well, we we've never had legal counsel sitting there with us. >> Yeah. So, >> and last year we really did not do a lot um to explain the upcoming word articles in advance >> in terms of the impact. Yeah. No, I don't totally. >> As far as that goes, we're way ahead of schedule.
>> Yeah. Shannon, and I think that we will have a much better informed election. Um if you just look at you know the the grassroots organizations that have been formed up you look at the upcomingformational sessions. >> Yeah. No I think it there's definitely
been a more uh involved uh town >> perspective. I have one more question too and Scott maybe this is for you. Where are we at with home evaluations? Like when's the next cut of that? Because that's a piece of this, too. When we're talking about two, you know, $1,000 on the average household, if half
the town's going to get reevaluated next year and and it's going up, that's >> that's for consideration as well, too. >> I believe they just completed, >> which would be the best thing. Wonderful. >> Reassessments have been completed to I think we're on a on the next cyclical
thing. So, I think we've done best case scenario, I think. Yeah. But >> but I would just add one thing. So my only thought would the with going with the full amount I mean in my mind >> so aside from the tax impact which I
think is significant for many households in town. Um, I guess I'm concerned about kind of, you know, wanting to wanting to provide everything that everybody expects, but then knowing that we're
kind of compounding the problem in my head that these costs, the insurance costs are not going to be any less next year. State aid is probably going to be less. God knows what's going to be happening with our fuel and utility bill costs that we're already
seeing right now and what that's going to look like a year from now. I'm just I'm just concerned that by doing all this and having more people come back on the roles and all these ancillary costs that come along, we're going to be in terrible shape next year. And so I'm I'm
just trying to look at it from a responsible budgeting >> perspective that this this has already gotten us pretty close to what the what the request is and it's a reasonable number that I think we can
hopefully provide the information so that people can make their informed choice and support an overdrive. >> That's my thought. >> I agree with all that. But I I think I think we deserve it to the citizens to let them decide not to limit their
choices and only give them one option. This and and part of the communication is this 2.3 or 2.4 whatever it's going to be >> is just to keep us for the most part where we are. It's not we're not adding fluff to this. This doesn't mean
>> you are adding >> how everything we cut last year. You're putting back and then you're adding on top of it. >> Okay. So, >> so it's not accurate the way you're describing. >> Well, I wouldn't call it. We're re re >> we're restoring the cuts to Norris.
Everything else in all the other departments remain as is for all intents and purposes. Agreed. Agreed. >> And that's it. That doesn't mean that a year or two or three when our state aid ch you know chapter 70 funds keep going
down um and we're not able to meet the 100% net school spending cuz one of I think it's the middle scenario gets us to about 102 when the state average is 126 and you heard everyone's not everyone's
but you heard the majority of folks saying you know there's a there's they are speaking out for Norris in the education system let's give them the choice Yes, >> this first and this has to get past town meeting first which is 75 2/3 >> right >> majority to get to the ballot box. >> Correct.
>> So I I make a motion that >> without identifying the numbers yet that my end goal would be motion would be that the ballot assuming they pass at town meeting be the full ask the requested budget and then whatever that
middle column number ends up being >> as well as the base. Well, by default, if those two fail, it becomes the base. Yes. >> So, you're presenting three three budgets essentially >> at town meeting. >> At town meeting. >> The ballot is the remaining two. >> So, let's have let's have a second and
then discussion, please. >> Second. Okay. So, discussion. Yeah. Question. >> Well, just make sure that John's motion is clear. >> Um, at town meeting, you'd have to explain all three, but only two at most would
proceed to the ballot. the two overrides. >> If either of them pass that the higher we go with, >> right? >> If they both fail, we've already passed the base budget town meeting. It's not a ballot item.
>> Correct. >> Because we only have to go to the ballot for an override. >> That's right. No, I get that. No. And so again, the when you need two3 I mean it's very different and we've had that experience of you know what town meeting does versus what happens at the ballot box, right? often times we've been
somewhat successful at town meetings but then it fails at the ballot box and so you know we have that twothirds majority that we need at the ballot box and when >> I'm sorry at town meeting um we have two/3 majority we need at town meeting
and so again I I think my only concern is that we really are there's always going to be a certain number of people that will vote no I'm I think we've seen that you know repeatedly that there's certain people that just don't like overrides. They don't understand the concept of it. They are just opposed to
that. And there will be that percentage that will take a share of that vote at town meeting. And that leaves, you know, a lesser piece of the pie to be divided up between now two questions. Well, we also have to make sure that people do not assert that the overrides are
additive in some way and we're suddenly doubling or beyond doubling the budget because there is ample opportunity and some motivation out there to just stir the pot. >> So, we have to be really clear about >> what we're proposing.
>> And again, we're go we're shifting back to articles which >> Yeah, I know. But at town meeting you get the you get the the uh here's the base. >> Mhm. >> That goes through. >> Now we now I would I would suggest the next one be the requested budget. Here's
that number and but there has to be a conversation. We have to be telling folks that we are now about to whether it can be a a single article, >> which we probably can't be, but we want we want to bring in the next two articles and let's talk about what it looks like and how it gets there. If if
if the moderator will let somebody do like a little intro, >> then we get into the actual articles so that it's clear that, hey, if I vote for this one, I can still vote for this one. They're both going to make it to the ballot and everybody get and if it dies at town meeting, it dies at town meeting. But
>> Mhm. We need that intro. >> Mhm. >> Before we get to the elemental vote, however it gets arranged, >> people people need to be very clear. Yeah. >> Well, >> yeah. In terms of what their vote means, >> we need the ascent of the moderator >> to do an introduction that speaks to
more than one article. Mhm. >> And I take John's position that we need to lay out the landscape for people >> for all the educational material we might put out when it's time to vote. People are like, I don't have my paper.
>> And it might and it might be that we word Smith a paragraph or two and give it to the moderator and ask him to bless off and read this into the record before he gets to the next article. >> Whatever it takes. >> You know, that way he's the voice. he's controlling it and it's not.
>> We need people to really really understand what's on the table. >> Yeah. People have to understand what their yes or their no vote means. >> Um because the you know the wording of the question eventually and we'll get into that much more on Tuesday um is
very important though and I think that that is crucial at town meeting. Okay. So I think we have a motion on the floor to consider two amounts. Is that what the motion was? Two separate amount. two >> two distinct amounts for override the
full ask and then >> the one nine or something right around that if we wanted to go and tinker with that anymore >> hold you to that particular number but fall back >> yeah the numbers are it's a full ask and then something in the middle >> so we need to still figure out exactly
what that full ask is though right >> correct I don't have a quibble with it but you know that's not a huge difference from the full ask >> if on reflection you want to give a bigger differential. So I think people will if they
understand be in awe of the catastrophic question. >> Mhm. >> So giving them as many opportunities to say yes to something better. >> That's where I'm at. So yes, that's what I seconded.
>> Mhm. Okay. >> All right. So I think we have a motion on the floor for two choices. the full ask and the middle budget the 1.9 as both choices. So there would be two >> something middle budget. So we we'll get to the numbers. >> We'll get to the numbers something around
>> essentially adopting like two budgets. Correct. Correct. And then we got to go to the base budget if exactly okay so motion on the floor. >> All those in favor? >> I I Okay. Um
>> I'm a bit reluctant honestly. Um, I'm gonna say no. So, three to one. Motion passes. Okay. Next up then, you want to take a closer look at the 1.9. >> So, it might be good to go through the
uh or the base >> the base budget and talk about that. >> Figure out how because there's some these were just cuts to trying to get I mean, >> honestly, I think this this reflects much more the math to get to the number, not necessarily looking at the wisdom of the different cuts, right? I mean,
you're trying to just make the math work to get to the bottom line. So, yeah. >> I mean, the cuts the cuts on the no there's no surgical precision about it. It's massive cuts. >> Yeah. But it Right. But I mean, I'm just saying it's like this and this gets us this math item and this math item. It
wasn't so much >> comparing this item versus that item. It's like the math gets us to the bottom line we need is the way I'm understanding. Should should we be be should we be factoring in the $64,000 cut to Hampshire regional? >> I I just feel that we
>> we don't have the abil I mean >> in a perfect world. Yes. But >> I mean that requires us to vote it down and another community to vote it down in order to get it out. >> Mhm. >> But it wouldn't I I would say it
wouldn't be in the cuts, right? because it's what you're advocating, John, is a separate a separate >> Well, yeah, but right now is line number two. >> Right there. It's there. So, >> if we didn't have Hampshire region, we'd have to find still 64,000 somewhere else. Right. >> And and my I mean, obviously, I don't
want this base budget >> for the record. But if I had to deal with it, >> is there any way just to make Norris zero? Because this is a negative two, right? Uh >> three and a half negative 3.5. Yeah. >> Yeah. I
>> Why would we make Norris a negative number if we have more money than the year before? >> We used we used last year the school committee exhausted all its one time emergency funds. >> Yeah. >> So that's that's that's like $199,000
that is causing the 14.4% to come up because there was a there was 120,000 one time. um >> co Yeah, co pupil money >> and also the town put forward $100,000 for ambulance stabilization >> ambulance fees too. So there were a
couple things there that that helped get through last year, >> but then the the negative 3 whatever percent reflects further cuts from last year's cuts, right? So that's where that comes in. So if that if if Hampshire Regional weren't in there, I mean it at
some point in time if we didn't have it in here and we we lost the override then what do we have for for New Hampshire regional where that budget is? >> Well, assuming all the other towns and we'd have to do an adjustment to the budget, >> right? >> You need all if all other four towns
pass right >> the number that includes it, which it's more than 65. That's just our piece of it, >> right? If they all pass it, then there's nothing we can do. We have to figure out where to come from, right? >> The hope has to be that at least one other community >> does something similar. Now, timeline,
>> I believe before our meeting, >> West Hampton's having a special meeting just to vote on their override. >> It's about a half a million dollar override, >> right? So, if that doesn't pass, they have to vote down that. So there's the two and then >> yeah I I I would say it's semantics
because if we include it in now um we're going to have to cut it from another department at the end of the day without an override we have to cure the deficit. So it's you know it it's it's just a dist distribution um you know elsewhere.
So, you know, I if we if we assume that we are um you know, in a position where four towns approved the budget, >> we're looking at between direct school costs and Hampshire um increase of 284,000. Um and then you start going through all
the cuts. >> Mhm. >> So, at least when I, you know, this isn't on the screen, but maybe this will help directionally people understand how we got to this almost $2.4 $4 million deficit. So direct school costs in
Hampshire regional assessment is $284,000. Um increase in employee benefits and share town expenses in the no override budget. >> Will it help to have those budgets up on the screen? >> Yeah, >> it may if I can get No,
>> I don't I haven't seen it. Yeah, I don't know what the numbers are. >> Aren't you reading the exact numbers? >> The numbers from your figure are just tallying up for everyone. Okay, >> so Norris would be a reduction of $25,000 the town contribution year-over-year. Um
further cost cuts to their total budget. >> Um we would be looking at other department decreases. So public safety combined 180,000, library decrease 127,000, council on aging 56,000,
highway decrease 5,000. other departments um about 63,000 town administrative GQ is 42,000. So you're looking at between Hampshire regional and direct town direct education and the benefits that's
increases of 700,000 and then everything else is cuts. So, >> um, other department decreases 475,000 and we're lucky in the sense that we got a debt service reduction this year of 137,000.
>> Um, all in all, it's a net decrease in town spending of $104,000 $104,000. Um, our property taxes compared to last year's annual town meeting was $237,000
increase. Um there's an increase of 38,000 of local state aid and grants. And then we get into the revenue decreases. Altogether, there was another 382,000 of revenue decreases compared to last
year's annual town meeting estimated revenues. So revenue is actually down $100,000. >> And that's basically roughly that difference between the override and the full ask. That that's the challenge. I mean, So, what are what are we saying with with Hampshire Regional on the on the no
overrides cuts here? I mean, I'm >> Is it only the 64 that comes out or it's more that comes out? Just the 64 because that was the >> correctly that was the that's the new assessment for Southampton based on the budget they voted the other night. >> That's a certified budget >> that went up from about >> certified assessment
>> 5.6% to 6.75 or something, right? Okay. So if that were not in there as >> restoring the 64 to Hampshire regional >> I don't think we >> would that is that what because if we took it out of the cuts it would take out of the increase for Hampshire regional that is not the entirety that Hampshire region is requesting. No,
correct. Yes. No, I understood. No, that's the the additional assessment that was, you know, the impact of the 166,000 or whatever that was voted at the meeting, Southampton's portion was 64,000 um to that >> because the the number that includes the
64,000 is a number going out to all the other communities, >> right? >> So again, be because two have to fail it, you have to you have to assume it's going to pass, which means we can't we can't We can't print forward a budget number
that is less than >> has to be it has to be that number. Um, so again, I would say with zero to 64, I would make an argument that north shouldn't go negative, but and then the
other items on there is I'm curious if on the no override cut uh down after the council on aging, there's a line I think two or three down >> right there. the firefighter from 5965440. And I understand that that's the um
personnel account number that matches up with the position, but in reality, I believe that's the paramedic. >> Yes. Paramedic. >> Well, okay. >> It was a combination position. >> We we approve, right, wrong, or indifferent.
>> We approve the permanent hiring of two paramedics. We've been able to hire one. >> Mhm. So I I just think instead of firefighter, it should say paramedic. >> You're I think you're right. >> Yeah, that is correct. >> We're getting we're >> Yeah, that is correct. >> Suggesting we get rid of the paramedic. And then in the middle column, it's the same thing.
>> That fire department uh 57,000 is the paramedic that is currently open. >> That's correct. Okay. >> So like if we're getting rid of the one, we're back on zero, right? No override. We're we're only getting rid of the one
that's actually employed and we've restored the 57,000. Correct. >> No, it would be the middle budget, the middle column plus that. >> Gotcha. Okay, that work. >> So, we would get rid of the one who's empty right now in the middle. >> I'm with you. I'm with you. So, >> and then the second one. >> Yeah.
>> Right. So instead of all that, we currently have 138, $138,780 and2 that we pay for the on call firefighters. >> So the Thursday night trainings and when they actually get called in.
I I would rather fund paramed paramedics and go to a pure volunteer fire department. If if we're on doomsday, we should have the paid fire chief try and get the two paramedics so that we can have ambulance coverage where we
can. We're going to rely heavily on uh mutual aid and we it looks like and we're not looking to touch the admin that's split between both departments. >> I I I did talk to the fire chief about that and and he would recommend I don't want to speak for him, but I I I voted
that he would recommend against that. We have a very difficult time already getting firefighters paid as it is um to sign up for for that. If we switch to all volunteer with a month and a half planning that would be a very very
difficult situation um and I think that would be coming in way too close for public safety. >> So I don't know why what we're trying to again the ter the terminology is important because a firefighter wage only gets utilized on two occasions. Mhm.
>> for Thursday night trainings. I'm assuming it's still Thursday night. And when they actually respond to a fire alarm, >> right? >> Not paramedics because there's another $415,000 plus the paramedics. There's $600,000 for paramedic services and in the zero override budget ranges,
>> right? So, in that, yes, I do I do understand the struggle of getting people to sign up and be in station available to call. >> So, >> if if the chief is concerned about paramedics, I'm with him on that. But when when and let's be clear, I don't
want to make this cut, >> but when you're looking at everything else on there, you know, how long did we go? It was at least three years cuz we started getting fined $500 a pop with East Hampton coming over to cover our ambulance service,
you know, mutual aid. >> Yeah, but the ambulance service is different than our firefighters. Look at the number of fires that we've been having around town with the various >> calls. We do have some paramedics. Most of our employees are paramedics or firefighters. We have some that are paramedics and firefighters that will
respond both to firefight fires and paramedics. We have some >> that are dual that will only respond to ambulance and they don't want to fight fires. And we have some employees that are just firefighters. >> And then so it gets very complicated. >> For those that hold an EMT or a paramedic certification, we have
$600,000 in the budget. to cover that for those that just hold firefighter class or license >> or who choose to respond as a firefighter? >> No, I I I would just I maybe maybe but if if they choose to only respond that
way as firefighter there's 138,000 for that. So we're not touching the paramedics. We're not touching the paramedics that have both licenses. >> Mhm. >> They they would continue to get paid because they're staffing the ambulance 24/7 when we could have full coverage. >> My concern is that people would without
the pay that the firefighters that currently respond would stop responding and that they wouldn't volunteer and then the timing of it is only a month and a half to make that transition from May 19th, which is the special which is the election to July 1st. >> Right. But we're talking about the
doomsday budget. I know worst case it it's an idea. I I'm not sure that that's the only idea. I'd like to you know I think let's explore some other options too. I mean I >> public safety is one that I I would hate to have to crimp on that much if we did
that. You know I mean >> I don't again I don't want to I don't want this cut to happen. I don't want anything on I mean >> the runout claims that that cut can go but everything else I I would argue that we need it. But down below there, we're cutting $90,000 from overtime at the
police department. That's going to put one officer on the street by themselves on an overnight shift, >> which now what's a higher risk of having a problem? Somebody that's out there 24/7 or somebody that's responding to a call when other departments can respond in an assist it.
>> Yeah. >> And I think the chief said that the um police officers have their a level of um medically trained as well. They're first on scene most of the time until >> many of the police Mhm. >> Yeah. >> Back on just for just to explore a couple of other lines. Y I mean that's
that's one idea. >> What I know it's somewhat reserved. Sorry for that. But what's under the select board wages? Sorry, >> that 80,000 reflects the potential um
arbitration costs, right, for for >> our Yeah, we the chief would have to stay within his budget for that to fund any arbitration cost, >> which for the record could be translated to mean what? >> That's first, >> right?
>> So, yeah. So that if if we used say that 80,000 toward this budget, sorry, to um sort of replace the Hampshire regional idea there, then that 80,000 wouldn't be available for arbitration. And it would also mean though that probably it would be an actual police officer cut.
>> Mhm. >> Correct. >> But we're already cutting it. You're already using it. >> Yeah, we already cut it the 80,000 >> line. >> Yeah. And the street lighting we're cutting by five. And two budgets ago we when Ed was here we cut it by 20,000.
>> We can cut it more. I budgeted 25 if you would like. >> No because there's already a report out there of how many lights >> are deliberately turned off and how many dark intersections there are. And the next question well >> the next question would be what's correlation to incidents because we've
turned off the street lights. >> That that would be the question. >> Yeah. Yes. No, I know that. >> What about the health consultant line? >> Uh there's $10,000 left and I I would just advocate keeping it because we have open cases. >> Health consult.
>> So that's >> Oh, that's the board of health. That's >> the Yeah, the board of health. >> They're essentially I mean hopefully that would be enough to get us through the existing cases. It wouldn't add anymore. >> So these are some of the um >> whatever trouble properties. >> Yes. Trouble properties and so forth. Yeah. Okay.
I mean I mean there's other I mean so are we trying to cut the 64771 from Hampshire region or are we trying to change cuts? >> I well I guess again I'm going with all things being equal and and we're
forced to accept this budget. I don't think we're going to have a choice. We have to rely we cannot rely we cannot build a budget >> on the assumption that another community is going to fail. New Hampshire regional one. >> A B
I don't want I'm not going to support something that causes Norris to go below zero. >> Mhm. >> On a change. >> So, how do you get Norris back up to zero and >> and I I understand that I may be out out voted on these issues, but that's where I'm coming from.
>> Yeah. >> But to put Norris back up, you need >> quite a bit more. >> What What is 30? I mean, was it 65,000 for 1%? >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. >> And it's 3 and a2 give or take
260. >> I I do struggle a little bit with the with this approach of looking at, you know, the with and without. Um, but I did go through the budget and you know it I I want to echo John's sentiment like I don't want any of these cuts but
some of them I I raised some questions if we are stuck with this you know drastic impact um you know can can the distribution you know better better impact the result you know better drive the result here. So you
know there's just some notes that I had questions about. So, we're eliminating under the cut budget two, you know, the one unfilled paramedic position, the currently filled paramedic position, yet we're keeping the administrative aid that's shared between the fire
department and and the police department. So, you know, that's a trade-off of, you know, one actual currently filled public safety position versus an administrative position. Um, I can't speak for the two chiefs, but, you know, as someone weighing in on this, I
question that. um the library reductions um we're not going to be able to fund the library at a level that will you know keep a certified library and I would argue even an operating library. So you are leaving >> scroll down a little bit
>> in the override budget or excuse me no override budget state budget you're leaving a a position out there a benefited position with a nonfunctional library I would argue in a library that is descertified regardless >> right you'd have the director and that's
that's it >> yeah and that's you know I don't know that you would maintain the current director under those conditions and I don't know that you could really keep the library open um at all and town residents will continue to lose the
ability to, you know, use CW Mars, you know, um, library services across the state. >> Um, you know, so we have drastic cuts and then there's some line level service increases, right? And we get to the point where they start adding up to, you
know, potentially, you know, half of or a full-time equivalent. So, we have election upgrades in there, um, which were the poll pads for $5,700, but we're slashing, you know, everyone else at the town clerk's office except for the town
clerk. Um, and I'm I'm really getting nitpicky here, but we have, you know, an increase in services at the cemetery for professional development and record software. That's $2,000, right? that's not level services despite drastic cuts
across the board everywhere else. Um maybe you can expand on this, Scott. Um the town IT costs on the e-ermitting line item. >> Um I I don't know how much of that is, you know, just inflation in the subscription and how much of that is additional services, but that's a
$10,000 increase on that line item. >> The town it c the managed services costs. Um there's going to be some inflation, right? every year there is but based on your presentation we are bringing on additional consulting services that were pitched to us that's
$10,000 um >> who are the additional consulting services >> the managed IT services the number >> the number that's in the cut is not only what the services were provided last year with some you know inflationary increase but there's actually additional
consulting services being brought to bear there um And that's it for kind of the line item, you know, kind of nitpicking that I had. Um, and there's some other give or take. So, um,
you know, I'm not sure and it didn't jump out because the way we presented the departmental, you know, presentations, but one of the field highway department machine operators jumped up 20% in the budget year-over-year. Um, so you're you're lowering, you know,
you're cutting full-time positions that are currently filled and yet we have the jump in the filled position of 20%. I'm not sure the driver there. >> No, that was the uh part-time. So, we only funded it for 50% of the time last year and then those are union positions as well.
>> I would say the the part no the the partially funded one is eliminated here um in the cut. So >> these are the two that are vacant or what is there more? >> So those those were fully restored under the restorative budget. The the one that
was cut last year and then the other two that were cut as well. So that was fully restored and then the BPW the highway those are two highway operators. One of which was 4 million mechanic. >> Yeah. The the mechanic positions on build. So that was switched um to the
machine operator and that's uh that's 55,000 there. But the the partially budgeted for position that's also unfilled that's being cut as well. So you have two of the unfilled machine operator positions being cut this year. >> No, the highway department was fully
restored under a restorative budget, >> right? Speak up. >> The the highway department's fully restored on the restorative budget and so those two highway were cut full time. Mhm. >> But when I get when we're looking maybe the disconnect is the budget the
previous year's budget number didn't >> partially funded. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> So does that account for the 20% delta? >> Uh it may be that I'm lining up the positions incorrectly. But what I have that's remaining
after these cuts in the state budget. I mean highway expenses have stayed pretty much the same from last year to the >> Yeah. So, so in so what I see remaining is three machine operators.
Scott, do you agree? >> In the no override budget. >> Yeah. But I see one when I look at last year's budget to this year's budget, one went from um a $24 an hour rate to a $29
an hour rate this year. Maybe that's just under the union contract an increase in step. It it could it's also not person specific. So a person could leave the position and get hired at a higher rate. >> Yeah. I'm not suggesting we reduce that. It just was something that jumped out at
me and wasn't explained. >> So are you having a recommendation as to something that could be cut from there? Just pointing it out to understand. >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, if we had everybody on board, you've got 10 10 positions, which
isn't really true right now, right? >> Yeah. Okay. Anybody see any other I mean I don't know if it's helpful just to bring up the override the no override budget the pedestrian budget and see if there's other places where if we have to try to figure out
>> I mean if if >> something with Norris >> I can certainly make up the Norris number. I can talk to Ian. I can talk to Rich. I can talk to to Randall and we can trim you know 10 15,000 on maintenance. I can definitely get that a little bit more on legal. That's not that won't be an issue. it of course it
impacts things more and more but I mean we we got to find it we got to find it and I would try to do so without impact we can't impacting more positions at this point >> right >> so if you were in the say in the highway maybe could you maybe just put a I don't
know a red marker or some some color marker to say these will be the ones that need to be looked at but I mean we still we got to come up with a figure tonight >> the um I know it's a small number, but the water abatement trust debt service.
Don't we recapture that from the water department? And and maybe you have an offset on the revenue site that cancels it out. >> But it just it's the first line in our shortterm I think short-term debt. >> Um >> yeah, I'd have to talk to Megan about
before I touch that. >> Yeah, I I might be wrong. I just it a water department debt service on the town budget just looks odd to me unless there's a receivable and the revenue that offsets it.
>> I thought you were talking about a water I mean a board health program. So I can't match up to what you're looking for. >> Yeah. Okay. I'm going to say this again and it sounds stupid but as we're if we're looking for $67,000 I really would like to see the breakdown
of the departments. what are the dues and what are the licenses required because it's huge numbers. Nor's got no office supply budget but individual departments have 4,300 you know 5,000. I I I I do understand that there's some
professional licensing required but it's it's $20,000 under office supplies and it's just too broad for me when we're going to start slashing. >> We can't we can't increase the number of budget items that we have and start doing that. We just physically can't do it anymore. Well, you don't have to increase it, but if we had a breakdown
of what professional licenses are lumped into that number so we can >> look at it. It's just it's it's $20,000 under office supplies. It's broad. >> Where are you talking about? >> It is broad. >> That's like I'm looking at the um the no override budget. So, assessors um dues
and office supplies 4,300. Um >> 5,000. >> I don't have the time to go through individual things like that and not balancing three budgets and doing override. I can't break those out and I can't have the department's job. We don't have the time for that. I >> mean, in some cases, they would have gone into the level of detail when they gave their budget presentation to us.
>> It was broad then, too. I brought it up then. And it's just $20,000 lumped under office supplies. And if we're looking at, you know what I'm saying? Taking $67,000 out. >> It's just very broad and it's not transparent. >> You're looking for the details.
>> Well, yeah. Like, so I know that some people have renewal of licenses. you know, RAW needs a license and >> so finance committee has the author has the statuto authority to make a formal request to the town accountant to provide the detailed transactions for
those line items. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> And I mean then you could sit through and go through the >> Are you talking about the assessor's budget? Is that >> everybody? every departmental budget, $5,000 for office supplies. And I I get the professional licenses, but we said we gave Norris no money for paper and
pens, but we're going to fund a a town of 6,000 people $20,000 in office supplies. It just seems wasteful when we're pulling things apart like this. >> Norris doesn't have to send out auto exercise,
>> real estate bills, or water bills. >> So, I get it. and work for a municipality. So >> all of the departments have looked into that and that's not to say Norris hasn't hurt. Norris has but I think that um
there was a level of granularity at the department level. Could it be improved? Yeah, perhaps. But we have some unusual costs in doing all of our own billing in house. So I I guess right to to also my
personal opinion agree you know aligns with of with John in the sense that you know I I really don't want to see Norris go beyond zero. I think there was a lot of pain experienced last year and it is um you know if you look at surrounding
towns um the per the per pupil um you know funding at the town level is not in line and also the educational offerings are not equivalent but you know I so getting stepping away from that you know
you are you know we're cutting a an actively filled paramedic you position yet we are increasing highway expenses um by over 20%. Um 23%. So you know that's an area where you know there's
going to be if if neither override option passes there's going to be you know huge you know reductions in services across the board. Should there also be you know a reduction in that line item for example. Um, I would argue the the increases in services that I
pointed out earlier, um, those should be off the table. If we're losing public safety, we're losing our functioning library, um, I would say that we tell our, you know, manage IT services that the additional work that they pitched is off the table. All we can accept is a,
you know, an inflationary increase in their services and we should fight that. I >> I would definitely disagree with that. We've come a long way in our IT infrastructure and if something goes down, we don't get any work done here. Period. So once we have once we have we have a vulnerability and we've had it
many times before and we've corrected a lot of that. If we have a virus or if we have something like that, tax bills don't go out. This this entire building does not function. >> So what's the increase though in the managed services? I don't understand. >> It's uh for some of the firewall and some of the other things,
>> but dollar >> uh like $9,000. >> So, it's improving some of our cyber security. It's like some of this is too >> the um well, and just on this one subject, this just we haven't gotten to it yet. I don't
know if we're going to get to it, but it's the whole capital. It's it's >> you're right and you're right, >> but we just by habit have gotten in this pattern of deferring everything >> correct >> and then we got the lockdown and everything happened. But I you know it
also gets to I don't want to rehash the motion since it already passed but it it's why it's this is the number and we as a community have to decide what do we want out of our community and I just want to be clear you know the zero the zero at
Norris I I think is is the absolute floor for me because a zero is not a zero. It's going to be a negative hit because the union contracts the I could be wrong. >> They're being negotiated. >> My guess is they're not going to agree to a threeear 0000.
>> So there's something's going to come up which means we've got to find something else in there to cut. >> And Norris just like the town the other departments because they're all the same departments is bigger in scope, bigger employees.
It's it's going to there's a bigger number there, right? I mean, it's 60 some odd percent of the entire budget. >> They also have the second highest paid teachers in Western Massachusetts. We don't have that on the town side. So, there's a $7,000 difference from Ammerst, which is number three, which is
$89,000 per teacher, to Norris, which is $96,000 per teacher. >> We don't have that. >> And and and I would say we put that to the voters. If the voters support paying their educators that, then that's what we continue to do because they've supported all all along coming up to it. >> Except Except for that. Yes, you're
absolutely right, Scott. >> Thank you for that comment. But if we want to get anywhere, I mean, that's where I am tonight. I think cuts need to be made. It it it's going to be drastic. I want it. I want, you know,
260,000 restored to Norris. I want the I we got I think Hampshire Regional needs to be zero and find other things in there. And I I'm going I'm looking at big. We can look at 10,000 a year and that but the big number is the paid on call fire department. Put that out
there. Let the people know that if if every this is what's going to happen. >> This is the risk. >> Exactly. >> I mean this is so that that 260 or whatever for Norris and then the 60. So you're talking another 320 >> that we've got to find to get >> something restored.
I mean, nibbling around the edges isn't going to >> No, because pretty soon we're going to be into who who are who who are the high >> let's look at the wages because all all it is is staffing >> and then we you almost go in the opposite direction not the $16,000 for the uh
>> health department person but what >> there is no fap >> there is >> I mean police department is two person per shift >> you know with the exception of the day when when when the chief's on okay fire department it's the chief Y >> and if we can fill paramedics highway
department, Randall hasn't been fully funded, but I will give Randall credit. Um, since I gave Ian credit at the last meeting, you drive through the towns for the most part. I don't know about the dirt roads. I haven't been up in the hills, but the pop I mean, he does good for what he has in resources. You go
into Westfield or you go into East Hampton and it you're losing your shocks driving down those roads. >> Um, >> yeah. Well, and it's clear too that, you know, even though that there's, you know, he's doing the best he can with it, not a full force. He's got at least two people >> that are there. That means that
>> and it's been that way the six years I've been on so >> what has and it means that every year that compounds, right? And every year that means more services that he should be doing. >> Y >> whether it's paving, whatever it may be, >> it gets pushed off and pushed off and
pushed off and it's not dealt with at all. So then we have this giant need to get something done. So >> and normally his winter shortfall which is somewhere sitting around >> $15,000 negative that we got to find somewhere >> we do this year for winter wages. I mean
winter winter expenses. >> Do we think we're going to have free cash? >> Well, not sure where we're >> because if we're going to have free cash, that doesn't mean we have fat in here. I don't I don't think we do. No. No, I don't think we do. >> And we're going to have a big bill on the winter winter wages. So, an
extraordinary winter. So, what was the uh the firefighter number again? The fire department number. I mean, I think what you're saying is that this would be put forth as >> this is the worst. >> Here's here's the shock people. This is this is the reality. This is the the big place to cut it. God forbid if we get
there. >> You know, none of us want to be there. It's >> it's 138. >> What is it? >> 138. Yeah. And and to be clear, that leaves 415,000 for EMT
or >> and an EMT could be a paramedic for a firefighter. >> Yeah. >> And I think to Doug's point too, we have to look at the library. If we're looking at the worst of the worst, if it's not accredited, it's not, you know what I'm saying? Like that might be the best solution. Like we have to shut
the library down. And if we're going if we're going to go that far, then the other the other position the only other department that I'm aware of that has a paid support staff is concom >> I thought I thought I got added back in in the middle >> in the middle one but in the third one >> it's got to be in this this one I
believe. >> Yeah. >> So if we're presenting a picture of the worst of the worst it's it's the fire department. It's the library and and if people vote on this this is what they're voting for. We're talking about education. This is This is it. When you vote for this, this is what you get.
>> Yeah. >> So, with the Can we just do a quick calculation? Go. >> It's still going to fall short, but >> we're a lot closer. >> You moved his calculator on. >> 38 708. And then if we delete the Well,
library, if we're going to close library, we get rid of the books and materials as well. >> Mhm. >> Weren't they already on that cut list? I thought they were. Um I left 10,000 in it. So 10,000 in library director >> 67831 >> 67831
+ 10,000 plus 138700 >> gives you a 216500. >> Well, you may as well cut some of these other small things too like >> Oh, we need you. We still need to pay utilities. >> No, no, no, no, not there. But like we've got open space committee. We've
got odds and ends of, you know, a thousand bucks here and there, but I mean, >> yeah, >> that >> I know it doesn't make a big impact, but I mean, it's, you know, >> it's it's almost after those cuts can totaled up to get to the number that we're looking for. >> Maybe the better picture is, but this is
what'll be left. >> Yeah. >> Department by department, there will be one town clerk. I mean, I don't want to. So, Stephen, so that brings us do we look at
altering I'm just going to say this, but I'm I'm not saying I'm in favor of it. Do we do we make town hall a Tuesday through Thursday office 3 days a week, 8 hour shifts? >> No full-time. You're going to get a mass exodus. >> I would I would definitely not recommend
that just because I would keep at least one person full-time in the department who's professional, who knows what they're doing. It would mean that they would have to limit the public access hours. So like the town clerk for example wouldn't be able to fully staff it because they need time to do work. So it might be a couple of days open. >> Well, aren't we aren't we assuming
doesn't doomsday say it's only the elected official town? >> Yeah. It's not an hourly spot. I mean it's >> Well, I mean another one I mean Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. I don't >> I mean I I I would rather I mean there's other things that I mean if we're going to go full doomsday I mean I take $50,000 from Randall's uh building
maintenance. I at that point there's no trucks and they're falling apart anyways. >> I mean they can buy extra duct, >> right? But doomsday means we're not getting the capital campaign, >> right? I know. Exactly. So I mean >> we're on life support, >> right? So I mean we what are we going to
do? Put a coat of paint on a rusty >> truck to hold it together for a day >> and then not pick a fan favorite, but transfer station one day a week. I mean that's that's got to still be in deficit mode. We haven't started talking. >> Uh, well, no, that's that's I have the
budget for that. That's level fun. That's self-sufficient now. >> After the one time. Okay. >> They were breaking up. >> All right. May I >> let's keep Wednesday. >> May I just clarify what the goal is, Madam Chair? What What votes do we need
tonight? >> And I do think that you need a vote on the Norris number if that's going to be controversial whether it needs to be reduced or not. >> Yeah. >> Before we go through all these cuts. >> Well, that's true. So right now we have the Norris number that would need to be to get this down to what we're talking
about and to get Norris to zero rather than >> three and a half% that difference was a couple hundred thousand >> 65 per%. >> So yeah was it 205,000 >> somewhere around that. So 65 or 70 per
>> 205,000 >> $25,000 for that would get them back there. Well, I would just say it being equitable across the board, the town's taken quite a big hit. >> Well, you and I go back and forth on
this, Scott. I would argue that it took the hit last year. >> So, two 205 even give or take. So, I would move that the Norris Elementary number be no larger than
604 and that the Hampshire regional number be zeroed out. >> And that whatever that creates for additional identifications that need to be made. >> John, I'm sorry that 604 is off the ask
that Norris made, right? Speak up if you want. My understanding is 849639.37 is last year's budget number minus 3%. 3 and a half% below last below existing budget from the town
>> except for the 849 is comparing to the full override ask. >> That's what I'm saying. I think that that 849 is compared to the 6.7 that school committee approved this year, right? to go into next year >> when you look at it not from Scott's approach of of the full ask versus the
doomsday um what is currently in the doomsday is um so last year after you correct for the DLS presentation last year we're at a town contribution of 5.8 million 5.8 you know 8005,859,000
right >> um what's in the doomsday budget is a town contribution of 5,654 it's a reduction of 205,000 >> right >> right so if I reduce the 8 whatever the 849 by 205 >> yes
>> you'll get to >> that gets you back to this 58 5859 >> this was last year's town contribution right right Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So that gets you down to that gets Norris fully restored basically.
>> No. >> Well, no. That's zero last year. >> What they had last year level services. >> So there's still cuts. >> So they're still still gonna buy that Powerball ticket.
>> Still get them further up. this. >> So, I can't imagine that we're going to all agree to the decimal point on the tradeoffs among these options, but we've thoroughly ventilated them. I would move
a figure of 2.4 for the high full house and 1.9. >> You're not going to second the motion I made. >> You're trying to Well, there's a motion on the table. >> Did you put numbers? >> I did. I'm sorry. Did 20 did 205 for Norris be found somewhere else? That the
849 be dropped by 205 >> in the zero over the zero override. >> So no more than 645,000 will impact Norris and that Hampshire region will be zeroed out. So adding those two numbers together. >> So 275,000 we have the final 275
>> 275 and I'm okay. >> I'll second that. But I'm >> for discussion. >> For discussion it is and the What I what I did hear from Scott and the chair is they would probably prefer
that we don't do the cuts by committee that we entrust them to go back and find other alternative sources. One may or may not be the 135 at the fire department. I get it. But find it somewhere else in the budget, but those two numbers are locked. And we I mean we
know we have to end at 22157752. >> Mhm. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Well, we hope so. >> Well, >> yeah, >> for the purposes of tonight to us again, you know, it's not. So, >> yeah. >> So, that that is the that is the base
budget right there. No matter how we get at it. So, the internal mechanics of it >> and then we can shift to the middle column. >> Yeah. >> Well, right. So, John. >> All right. So, I think we have a motion on the floor >> about the mechanics of how we get the >> doomsday budget. >> Right. And so these were all various
suggestions that came forward. There's various options, >> right? >> None of which are that clear. Um the the biggest amount that I heard raised tonight was related to the the um the firefighter wages out of that whole bunch of things to take it from that to
be volunteer rather than >> and both. Yes. >> So the motion would essentially say I have to find $275,000 on municipal side shifted from the schools to municipal. Yes. And I made it that way specifically because what I heard for feedback is you
would prefer the two of you find those cuts versus the committee. >> Yeah. >> I think it would it would be a a longer night tonight. We've still got more to go. So I I'm >> and we may have to we know that this is our our
>> I guess I would amend my motion, >> okay, >> to do just that. Find $275,000 in additional cuts by adjusting those two line items. So you come out with the same bottom >> bottom line and um represent those findings. So the select board >> so level fund nor requested budget
frame. >> Right. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> Right. And then do whatever magic you're going to do in the middle there. The operation. Well, it's not the butcher >> and give us those results back. >> Well, we'll have to work on that before >> we need a actual like
>> No, the number's not going to change. >> Yeah. Timing wise, but we need to like get a budget proof today. So like coming back getting the number approved. >> Okay. The base number we definitely need to get a budget. >> No, the base budget is that is that it's just more
>> like that that mixture of that list >> hypothetically. What I what I just want to double check. >> You're not going to do this. >> But I want to make sure the solution isn't coming back. And you know what? We just close the highway department. >> I mean, that's not going to be the answer, but I just want to see what the
answer is before. >> Yeah. No, it would be preserving the very basic core services. >> So the motion on the table is about the mechanics of what's in the doom state budget question. >> Yes. I mean to to cut
>> define rather $275,000 that doesn't reflect Norris or Hampshire region. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So okay, that's >> detailed direction to the >> right. Correct. No administrator I guess with with my
>> you are agent outside of meetings >> I guess so um and we would need to bring this back by >> I'd like the details before that before the time you don't know >> before the that's what I'm saying it's not going to be by Tuesday night I just want to clear that that that is not the plan for
>> I suspect two weeks because because we're going to want we're going to want to build communications around it >> for sure >> but within two weeks. >> Yeah. So okay. All right. So we have a motion on the floor. All those in favor? >> I no. >> Oh yeah. >> Two nosy.
I'm just saying it would be a rejection. >> I know. Look, >> I you know I'm trying to figure out Yeah. 9. I'm not seeing where we find the cuts on the sound town side, but um
I'll go ahead with it. We'll vote yes. Three to one. >> What we my no vote is I don't want to be down in the weeds. I think it's really great to provide advice from counsel, but I can't
do the math live like some of my colleagues. And what we need to focus on is one or two levels of override. So I accept your >> Yeah. And then Scott and Chris will do will get in the weeds without us.
They'll just submit their final findings to us. >> So most of this list would look the same with a couple of changes for obviously Norris and and Hampshire. >> Now, right? >> That's why I voted no. I >> All right. So, >> I I like the approach, but I don't want
to tie the hands. >> Yeah. >> I think it's going to be a challenge to find it. So, anyway, let's move on to the uh the middle one. The 1.9. So, >> I move approval for override. >> The only question I have >> Hold on. Well, no, that's fine. Go ahead.
>> Did you want to have >> Well, I can do it under discussion on the motion. >> I I again, I don't want to um get bogged down in the weeds. I'm going to leave the people who know the numbers the opportunity to correct them and review them. And so I I I can't offer
much help here. I appreciate all that's been said. Um so I think that's the fallback number unless strategically you throw out the analysis and say I
don't know the number is 1.5. Mhm. >> So, my only I mean, it's not my only feedback, but my feedback on on this middle >> column is again, I'm going to sound like a broken record here.
We we've deferred our maintenance forever. You know, yes, we should have had a capital plan a long time ago. Two years ago on the capital committee, we put forward a process which ultimately triggered removing the investment accounts from the treasury to put it in
because we wanted to maximize the money that we got for free cash and time got away. Town administrators changed. It just it didn't happen. You know, other priorities came up. So, I would love to start the capital campaign, but reducing
it by 50,000 there leaves 300,000 in there. Again, I'm going back. Why are we cutting $200,000 from Norris >> to start the capital campaign? >> Because the capital campaign will also serve Norris. >> Absolutely. No, I get that. >> You know, I I honestly No, I I'm sorry.
I'm I'm very much >> but I'm just I'm just my view here is >> we're going to go we're going to buy assets in a year when we're saying we still need to reduce Norris by 201
where I really don't see any other department with the exception of of the library that has that vacancy that that's going to take an impact. >> Just to stress that that 2011,000 is still in funding nor is that 11% increase from this. >> I agree 100%. I'm with you on that. I
am. But there's no there's no reduction except for the UN again two other positions that are up there. Well, I don't know about the library tech technician. Nobody talked about that. >> That was a new position. I like new >> So, right there
there's no touching on highway. There's no no other departments are being touched staffing wise. Yeah, it's it's a mix of >> so one unfilled position at the fire department, but >> both of the both of the all of the
unfilled positions at highway remain. Um the the ask for the police department remains it's the full ask. >> Y >> um you know board of health is actually I think >> they're adding a position. >> Yeah, they're adding position and there's the salary increase for the new
health agent, right? >> So I would The consulting ask is >> I would assume the salary increases for all the non-UN people are in the budget. >> Yeah. >> Or or we cut it down to 100,000 in capital. You know what I'm saying? When we looked at that list that was presented, a lot of the things were
under $10,000 anyways, which don't even actually qualify for capital under our law of the land. So, we would look at the list of the capital asks and pick a couple that make sense for 100,000. And >> that that's not the point of the capital. I mean, we're going to be
borrowing for an ambulance, which is going to be $130,000. >> We got to put that down payment down now to get it two years from now. So, I mean, I, you know, it's not just small change. We've got some big ticket items that we really have to able to buy. >> Exactly. We have very little in the capital fund that's remaining and
there's going to be no free cash to put into it this year. >> So, I trust the process. I trust and appreciate the feedback that we've gotten from >> all of these people. And there's motion on the floor for an override out
>> 1.950. >> Yeah. >> Are we allowed to comment? >> Yes, please. I'm just not catching >> I'm still coming back to the fact that it's a really big number and there is room to cut it back both at the school
and at the town so that it's somewhere for people to land between nothing and a pretty big number. and and we're not giving them at, you know, at 1.9 we're not giving people that option. We're giving them a little break, but
they're there haven't been hard. >> It's $150, $200 impact per taxpayer per the >> on a million on $1,000. I mean, it's >> Yeah, >> I understand. >> Yeah. I mean, it's trying to keep as many services as we possibly can depending on what we value in this town.
Education, the >> library is still up 11%. It sounds like there are other positions that are being added. >> More things could be cut. It's such a difference between the 1.9 and the and the no override. Such a big difference
>> because we're cutting everything to get to zero, but 1.9 is a is a is a long way from it. I mean, I think if we came in at $1 million >> and gave them that option. >> Sorry. I have to say I mean the budget task force went through a lot come up
with their recommendation and this is this is the number that came up >> we were we were the right number >> well yes I'll I'll agree with that they did they did yman's work and this is the first year that it was done >> um we were not necessarily in the crisis
mode but everybody you know Scott saw the wave coming and and jumped out in front so to that I applaud but at the end of the day the eight people here or seven for Becky's absence are are the the back stop. They're the elected body. >> Um
>> but to to Reggie's point, if we're looking at even say a one 17 or a 15, the difference between shouldn't it be persuasive to for people to vote for the full override then? You know what I'm saying? So, like if you're thinking about rationale here, you have a a
doomsday. You have somewhere in the middle. The middle and the top number are so so back to the whole splitting of things, they're so close that, you know what I'm saying? If we're looking for an override to pass something, you know, >> the average taxpayer would be paying $2
a week extra with the override. >> $2 a week. And we are pissing and moaning about this. >> Come on. finance company is looking for some other >> I'm so sorry I'm I'm sorry
>> in your letter >> I think we have >> motion on >> motion on the floor I think I heard one did I hear one did it get seconded I don't believe it >> the number 1.9 >> 1.95 or 1.938 >> he did 1.9 >> 1.95
>> 1.95 so rounding it up essentially is that what you're trying I did. >> All right. I amend my motion. I'm going with the dollars and >> Well, I'm just ask No, I mean, >> there's there's been some >> discussion about priorities,
>> and my approach is to leave that to the town administrator, >> but clearly set the number >> to vote the numbers. >> We have to set the number to whatever that number is. Again, I move that the uh middle override amount be set at
1.938 million 947. I didn't do that right. 1 million 900. You should see me read the warrant. Yeah. >> Yes. The number that's on the screen. One
>> the number on the screen. >> 1938 947. >> I don't hear. There's a motion on the floor. Do we have a second? >> I'll second it. All right. Any further discussion on it? >> I'm not in favor with the way it's spelled out right now.
>> Okay. Any further discussion? Can we take a vote? >> I'm going to call the vote. All those in favor? >> I >> I >> I
>> with leave. No, we're changing the the detail. Well, now see that's different. That's different. I'd be okay with the number if we put some caveats in there, >> but if we leave tonight, this is >> that's >> Yes, it passed, but under discussion. >> Yeah.
>> Right. Point uh point of order. >> Okay. >> We didn't put any guardrails in here. We did. We put guardrails over on the other side. We had a discussion about it and we figured out and we get marching orders. Those numbers aren't going to change. They're going to stay just the way you see them right now. And I'm not
okay with that. And that's my feedback. I can't see creating asking the people to throw $300,000 into a capital campaign when 300,000 if we just got rid of that, there'd only be a $90,000 adjustment through the that whole number.
I'm sorry. >> I personally feel pri that priority is wrong. >> I hear it. >> Okay. >> So, >> I believe we voted. The motion passed. >> Absolutely. >> All right. Three to one. All right. What else do we need to do? >> I make a motion that the requested
overwrite budget be 24,684,897 be the total 246 84 89 I'm adding the 200,000 for the >> for the salaries for the adding the >> people back in. >> Okay. >> So if you want the override number to be
just add 2.529535. And that extra 200,000 is meant to represent the additional >> benefits >> benefits FICA retirement contributions. >> So 24684 >> okay that it
>> that that be that be the max. Now, if through Scott's analysis, he feels that we don't need $200,000 in the benefit section, I'm okay with it coming down with supporting documents. >> Okay. >> Cuz it could because we have about a
$175,000 placeholder in the other line. Correct. >> By time we get by time we get to town meeting. >> Yeah. In our in our we won't know what people are taking for insuranceances until the day before town meeting. So that's that's >> so that's where it could get amended on the floor. >> Yeah. I mean town meeting's on a Saturday.
>> Last day is a Friday. Um we're dealing with the state government agency. We hope >> we know we know >> a Friday afternoon. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's true. >> We're not open on Friday. >> And I don't know if we I well >> the benefits people the benefits people the treasurer and the town administrator
and the county definitely are here on Friday. >> They're just not to if I'm understanding. So the the request budget then goes up from the 2329 to 2529. And that's what we're suggesting is the request. Is that right? >> That number. >> Yeah. >> Sorry. >> Yeah. Hold on. He's He's fixing it. You
got to >> Which one? >> It's 24 million. >> 24. There you go. >> There you go. >> There we go. >> There you go. >> Is that it? >> Yes. >> Okay, we got save those numbers.
>> Take a picture quick. >> 84. We got one. >> Yeah. >> In Scott's fairness, he did not bring his coffee. >> He usually has a big coffee. Trying to come down. >> While we're having a picked the wrong
time of year last night. >> Say what? >> What? >> He's glass. Oh yeah. >> There we go. >> He bought me a bigger keypad one with this on
board. Okay, we got that subject now. >> All right. >> All right. Is there any Does that >> John, did you want to restate the motion? >> Yeah, that >> we didn't actually vote on this. that the um
budget titled request budget be for a cumulative $24,684,897 which represents an override asked of 2,529,535 which is made up of the override put forward by the task force committee with
an increase up to $200,000 to account for the benefits if it passes and the 10 positions are recalled or refilled or whatever. >> Okay, I think we have a motion. We have a second. >> I second the budget number of
$24,684,897. >> Okay, any further discussion? All right, call for vote. >> Those in favor? >> I I >> I said I motion passes. Okay. All right. So, I think we have our three
numbers tonight. Anything else that we need to do tonight that I'm aware of? I don't think so. >> So, >> thank the public for their time for the uh people listening at home. >> Select board meeting. >> Yeah, I have a select board meeting. Thank you for that. Next select board
meeting is March 31st, Tuesday, and then again, April 14th and 28th, our regular select board meetings. And all the ATM articles are due. We closed the warrant for the ATM for the annual annual town meeting. We closed the warrant on April
1st. Okay. >> So those that uh >> are you deliberating on the budget further Tuesday meeting? >> Uh depends on how far we get. We're we have to get into some articles at this point in time. >> Would you like to come? I think is welcome to come if
they are so free to do so. if they want to have I'm fine with that. >> I'm not sure how much we'll get into, but we got to do the article part that's really much more. >> Thank you. So, I'll take a motion to >> I'll take a motion to Well, you guys
want to adjourn? >> Well, I don't know. We can do >> that. Spin gun. What do you want to do? You want to adjourn? Go ahead. >> I'll straight a little bit if you you appearly on Tuesday. You guys decide to adjourn.
>> Okay. Move to select. >> All right. I All right. We are adjourned at about 9. >> Oh, sorry. 8:42. Sorry. We at 8:42. >> Thank you everybody. >> This government meeting is brought to you by Eastworks and our local cable
subscribers.