Welcome everyone. This is the finance committee. This is Thursday, February 19th, 2026. It's 6:31 and I'd like to call the meeting to order with the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance >> to the flag to the flag of the United States of the United States of America
and to the republic for which it stands nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Under Mass General Law Chapter 30A
section 20F, this meeting is being recorded. On March 28th, 2025, Governor Haley signed into law a bill which extends the temporary provisions pertaining to open meeting law to June 30th, 2027. Specifically, this further extension allows for public bodies to continue
holding meetings remotely without a public quorum of the p public body physically present at a meeting location and to provide adequate alternative access to remote meetings. This language does not make any substantive changes to the open meeting law other than extending the expiration of the
temporary provisions regarding remote meetings from March 31st, 2025 to June 30th, 2027. >> Well, hello everyone. Um, >> hi. >> Thank you for being here on a Thursday.
Feels out of sorts here. Um, I'm going to start off with uh who's here tonight. So, we need to do uh just a notice of of who's at the meeting. So, we have Duncan Law as members. We've got Cindy Brown,
Alise, >> Zach Brew, Morton, Christopher Thrasher, >> I think I got every and myself, Karen Ross. >> So, that is who who is here presently. So absent at the moment is Nancy Stanton
Cross and Gary Guerrero, >> but we do have a quorum, so we're we're ready to go. >> Um, so we're u the first item we had on the agenda was actually a request for transfer, but since we do have um Chris
Vatitali, our town administrator here, I don't want to take his time to talk through that. So we can um if everyone's okay, we can just skip to the second item on the agenda, which is to talk about the fiscal 27 budget.
>> Okay. >> Hi Chris, nice to see you. Thanks for coming again. >> Tom and all. Good evening everyone. >> Hi. >> So we're closing in on some some coming to some conclusions or at least of a
first round of a budget, right? So, um, just to give everyone an update, um, I think the select board did did take take us up on the opportunity to to buy use a little more time so they could, um,
extend their time to really think through the budget. So, is that scheduled for next Monday? Is that right, Chris? So, next Monday, >> that's correct. Yeah, the board is scheduled to approve >> and um
so just to to let everyone know, so Chris, the chair of the select board and myself had got together a little bit about a week ago to to review the budget and review what are our options, what are some things we can do. Um Chris had
some great ideas and um I think he's has started to incorporate those and he uh did present his options to the select board at the last meeting and the select board seemed to be inclined to be in
favor of those. Um >> so and Chris forwarded us um that presentation as well. So that's in the drive if everyone's had a chance to look at the latest version. >> And just to clarify, I think Chris, what
you sent us was the same presentation that you had discussed at the select board, not incorporating yet the changes that that you were going to adopt in the in the numbers, right? >> That's correct. Yeah. So um you know the
budget that was provided to the board was a balanced budget you know not utilizing one-time funds on any department lines you know um the figures that were discussed took into consideration the revenue changes you know from the state um and those updates
in state aid as well as uh incorporated you know what the school department had approved as their budget. So, you know, the discussion with the board at their last meeting was, you know, how do we address the variance that was there? Um,
you know, obviously, um, similar to prior years, you know, utilizing the onetime funds, the free cash is part of that. Um, also, you know, as Karen mentioned, I also just looked at other options, you know, other things within the school budget, you know, where, you
know, we may be able to assist or we may be able to um, you know, as an example, move it out of the budget and maybe put it aside as a separate article um to help reduce that gap. So um you know the proposals on those different options
that I provide to the board at their last meeting um you know they have tenatively um you know agreed to those. I think they just wanted to see it all uh put together and take a final vote at this upcoming meeting before formally
submitting it to the finance committee. um you know but you know the changes in that presentation um you know more or less is going to be the difference between what was presented at the last board meeting and what you'll see here at the upcoming uh
meeting on Monday >> right and just to um I just wanted to highlight too so when when the school came in and did a presentation of their budget and I think the question was asked on on where where where the school
number stood in relation to the town budget and the school was asking again for the 480,000 of free cash which was the same number as last year. I think there was a little discrepancy in that number. So at the the number that the school I think at
that time had received from the prior town administrator was a higher number than what actually was working in the budget at that time. So there was there was a discrepancy of about 250,000 that wasn't identified in the school's
presentation at that time. So as as Chris was saying when Chris did the present the budget update there was a in assuming the same 480,000 would be uh neutral there was still a $250,000
gap. So that was one of the reasons that we needed to you know discuss what you know how do we you know what what are some options to address it and Chris did a terrific job. So, one of the, you know, one of the items that
we've talked about here for a long time is is really um local receipts and budgeting. And we've been relatively reasonably conservative budgeting at 80% of what the anticipated revenues are.
>> And so there's always some risk when you increase when you increase I think somebody's got some noise going on. I'm not sure who >> Duncan, could you mute your microphone, please? It's your your background. That's all right. Thank you. >> Thanks. So, one of, you know, it's
certainly always an option to increase the revenue, but then what happens is if if you think you know what 100% of the revenue is and you budget at a higher amount and then the revenue isn't what it is, you've really squeezed your um your numbers and that will you might be
able to get by in the current year, but it's really going to hurt you in the future years. >> So, there's a balance between that. And um I think Chris and Chris's numbers um made made an estimate to go up to 85%
of of the local receipts. So really, you know, getting a little more aggressive. So that will mean in theory less free cash coming through and we're utilizing those dollars to actually fund the budget. So, um that you know that puts a little more risk into next year's budget
if things uh you know shrink down a little bit so you you have more exposure. But I think that was one of the changes Chris that um you put through and then when so now there's additional
revenue and I think there's a little additional revenue that came through from the state state aid had produced some numbers. So there was a little little more revenue that came through there, not a lot more. And so rolling that all through the budget um really
helped uh along with um talking with the school about and that's a separate conversation about what to do with the school number, but that helped flow some more dollars through not only to the school but to the town side as well.
And so one of the discussions was well what what to do with the additional funds for the town. And so the the in this budget I believe is going to be um adding a police officer as a proposal to help utilize the extra the extra funds
that came on the town side as one of the positions that had been discussed that were short. So, so again just not not making any comment what those of whether or not I agree or not. I'm just trying to present um what's being
proposed. So then we can all also talk about does you know how do we feel about that and do we think that >> uh makes sense or do we have any additional comments on that? I think those were the main highlights right Chris.
Um yes. So I would say just with regards to what the board will be considering on Monday, um there is going still going to be a variance um you know of 135,000.
Um you know the way or as it's currently proposed within the school budget um I know that they were looking to fund some new positions there. uh social studies teacher, career pathways coordinator and I think a fund uh some funding that was
partially going to be supplemented by opioid funding. So part from the school and then part of the you know I think the personnel salary would have been from the opioid line. Um I have not heard from that committee in terms of
allocating the funds and I I'm not aware of any other warrant article that's going to be put forward on that. So I don't know if that um would materialize for this fiscal year. Um you know but I think to offset the
new service you know one of the things that I will note as part of the school budget is um you know they are offsetting the new salaries with some restructuring that was done. So um you know there is funding there for I
believe one of those positions you know one of really the two that are being requested. Um you know so that I would say is the only variance of what we you know just looking at the the numbers um we weren't
able to uh before as a recommendation at this point in time. >> Great. Thank you. Um Hugh go ahead. you've got your hand up and then Christopher. >> Yeah, I I guess it's sort of pushing things around on the Titanic, but I'd rather
not expand the amount of estimated revenues used in the budget, even though that requires more use of free cash because if you do that, you're basically stealing from free cash, but it isn't so
obvious that you're doing it. And so when you put to the to the free cash item the next year, it'll be less than you may have been anticipating. Going to come out the same way. Money's money, but I'd rather keep the percentage that it's used for the estimate or not to a
tenth of a point, but basically the same percentage and the deal with free cash and the next year and things that need to be covered at that time. Thank you, Hugh. That that it that that is a great point. And so, you know, as
as once it's in the budget as revenue, then the spending will rise to that level and then becomes a permanent piece of the budget, >> right? >> Where it's harder if when that happens, if the revenue in future periods does
shrink, then you are looking at true cuts, right? So, um, yeah, so there's a balance between that, but thank you, Hugh. Um, go ahead, Christopher. >> Chair, uh, first question that I had was regarding the actual numbers that we're working with right now. So,
>> the presentation that's in the folder that was given to the select board on the 9th, are those the numbers that we're talking about with the adjustments that that you're referring to at this time? >> The numbers are before the adjustments. So the the
numbers that are in the that Chris gave us were what he presented to the select board and then in memo discussion discussed here's some options but so we don't have an after budget that reflects those. >> Okay. So so at this time we don't we
don't have the actual numbers that are going to be presented to the select board. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> Okay. All right. Well that's worth noting first off. Uh my second question just >> which is a little harder to have this conversation because we have to be without seeing it in front of us. So
that you're it but >> well that that was my exact question. I mean is it if if it's not possible to have those numbers tonight then then you know for one thing I understand they need to discuss it but it's hard to do it without uh without the numbers right in front of us. Uh the
other question that I had was regarding uh what the uh free cash allocation uh list as it stood right now. Um uh and this and again if if the numbers are different, this math is not going to hold up. But by by my math, unless I'm
doing something terribly wrong, which is always possible because as I like to joke, I went to law school, so I didn't have to do math. Uh I'm looking at about 463,000 and change of free cash that's not allocated uh currently. Is that is that still an accurate figure based on the
the adjustments that have been made? >> Uh >> um no. So I know that the board is still um you know going to be discussing that on Monday with regards to the allocation. However, um you know, we are
I would say just under 30,000 in terms of remaining free cash allocation after you go through uh the warrant articles, the capital >> allocations to you know that we've done historically to the stabilization fund.
Um you know, but ultimately the board will have to you know take that vote on Monday. >> So forgive me for cutting you off. I just want to say so are there additional allocations that are not that were not in your presentation on the 9th or are we talking uh the adjustments that have been made to all the allocations that
were presented then? >> So uh hold on I apologize. Give me one moment here. And while you find that, Chris, Libby, um one one other item that um I think is part of free cash was the discussion
>> um on the capital improvement committee where the highway department had a a vehicle that the CIPC felt that if there was free cash, they would recommend. So I think that's also factored is being factored into your your numbers too.
>> That that's correct. So the presentation provided the board and and they had discussed it at the meeting um was two things. Number one is on the list provided um you know they did want to add an article there for the capital stabilization fund which is something the town has you know historically done
and as Karen mentioned uh the dump truck was the other. Now just um you know again just based off the discussion at the last board meeting um the allocation to those articles um you
know I think they still have to take a a a vote on that um you know but obviously part of that's just going to be based on the policy that's in place uh for a couple of those funds. Is it is it possible for you? So, I'm just trying to
figure out understanding that these are not the exact numbers that are going to be voted on on Monday. I'm trying to figure out how we went from 463,000 to 30,000. Uh be even because I mean the So, the dump truck is is included in
here um in the the previous numbers you had already given. So, I'm just are we talking just capital stabilization fund uh funding or or how I'm just trying to figure out how we we made that jump. >> Yeah. So, you know, uh capital
stabilization is typically at 5%. So, that'd be 182,000. You know, on the top of my head, I believe the dump truck was 157,000. you know, historically the board has um has uh increased the funding to the
special education stabilization fund, you know, so the proposal at 2.5, you know, I think there was still some question of whether or not that wanted to go up to 5%. So that like I said that final allocation, you know, depending on I would say those
few different stabilization articles there. um you're going to be either have to take something off of them just to you know you not exceed what the available free cash allocation is or depending on you
again how that falls it's going to be very close to like I would say probably that 30,000 >> um >> so that number that's going to be discussed to me on Monday >> okay just forgive me for pressing so the the dump truck is included in the in the figures that you presented on the night.
So, what I'm just I'm just trying to figure out is this we talking 44 430,000 for stabilization funds alone or were were there any other adjustments that were being made at this time? >> So, I am not aware of any additional
adjustments outside of um you know the conversations on the stabilization fund and exactly how much they want to allocate to those. Um and obviously when it comes to the final amounts like I said um
part of that is going to be the school. So it the 352 that I think was in the presentation you know wasn't approximate. So that might adjust by a few thousand as well. So, you know, again, unfortunately, I don't have the the the breakdown of each of them, but
that's the discussion that took place at the meeting. And >> and Chris, not to interject, but I think in your >> in your um presentation to the select board at that time, you didn't have the capital stabilization listed, right? So,
then that that did get added to it after afterwards, right? I think that's a piece of piece of your Right. >> Correct. >> Yeah. I I so it again by forgive the math here but I do have Excel to aid me here a little bit. So even if we're talking about 500 or 5% for the uh
special education fund 5% for the capital stabilization um that still leaves 189,000. So I'm just trying to figure out where the jump is is is >> Yeah, man. Yeah, I mean I guess as a followup I'm happy to provide the table with the
breakdown along with you know um you know what's discussed by the board. You know I think you know obviously I want to make sure that the finance committee has a clear picture of what's available there um in terms of uh you know free cash availability you know as you
continue your discussions. Well, were all of the were all of the articles funded at that point too in the original discussion? So, some some of that some of those funds also were attributed perhaps to some of the article funding. So, there's the first
article or it's like the second or third article now for the original stabilization fund and that was bumped up to $182,000. I don't recall us ever having a that large of a sum available to be put in
there. So, that's a good thing. I'm not saying it's a bad thing. So, I think there are some things in there that are funded um higher than we perhaps are used to. Uh and that perhaps some of
the warrant articles were not funded. And so once you start ticking off the boxes of funding various warrant articles that came down. There was a $100,000 that got moved or 80,000 that got moved from the school budget to the warrant articles and that came out of
free cash. So that was kind of a tradeoff there as well. So that was the article for the computers. So, I think if you go through some of the article listings, you'll pick up nickels and dimes that quickly start to add up to some of those
differences. Um, I'm I'm just I'm I'm estimating here that that's where some of those dollars start to come from. I I agree with Christopher that I think it's probably premature for us to discuss this in a
lot of detail tonight until the select board has kind of given us their budget approved and then we will have something to >> work with and actual numbers to work with. >> We could go through warrant articles.
Um, but I guess what my question was to Chris, um, was you started out your conversation by saying you still had a gap of $135,000, right? >> So,
yes. So, I think there was what the school proposal was, right? And there was assumptions in there based off of, you know, anticipated revenue and >> Okay. So, you're talking about the school budget. You're talking about the school. Oh, okay. I thought that our
town budget still had a gap of 135. Okay. >> No. All right. So, the proposal go to the board. Yes. Yeah. >> Okay. All right. >> Thank you. Um Nancy, >> hi. Thank you. Um Chris, I just want to
when you changed these numbers, you said that it was based upon um new information that you received. What was that information that had changed that caused you to go back in and change these numbers with um expected monies
from the the the uh state budget? >> So are you talking about from December to now? >> Yes. So, you know, back in December, um, you know, Jim had put together, um, a
more or less a table of possible sources of revenue. And, you know, I think just based off the information he had the time, you know, a range of what we may be able to get for additional revenue through uh, kind of what we talked about this evening, increasing
um, local receipt estimations. Uh I think he gave a range for state aid and you know with the school budget it was based on the assumption that we get more revenues than we actually did right at that point in time from state you know I
think from like state aid and I and unfortunately I don't have it in front of me but I think it you know his estimation was as high as we might be able to get like 2.8% state aid you know we got 2.3%. which you know when you go down the line you look those different options you
know it it adds up pretty quick. So I think in the budget that was proposed through the school and again I apologize I don't have the exact number in front of me but it was I think 200 plus thousand um in anticipate new revenue
and the state aid came in at 66,000. So >> that yeah that's what I'm trying that's my qu So you said based on the updated revenue projections is that a preliminary cherry sheet that you received because the governor's budget just went in two weeks ago. So was there
another there was the preliminary budget that came in. >> So there's the cherry sheet estimates and then there's the governor's budget. This budget is based off of the updated estimates from once the governor's budget was released. So you've based your change of this budget was based on
the governor's budget that came out two weeks ago, right? >> Correct. Correct. >> Okay. And um my understanding we know that that's got to go to committee and work its way through and we don't know what it is. Um and ba and based on that
so what I see and tell me if I'm wrong um the money the net new revenue that Jim projected >> um who's always been conservative was reduced by you increased the use of that to 85% over
Jim's estimated 80% but you decreased the number of the pot >> so that that those figures So if if Jim's numbers were used and we used 85% I know that the schools presented their
budget. It was directed at this board of um Mr. Jendro um how would you suggest we fill these gaps and he said well you can increase what we take in as a percentage to you know he suggested 85%.
And that's in fact what we heard before the select board recently that we took that into you took that into consideration and did raise it. But on the same hand, you lowered what Jim said. So you shrunk the pot but up the percentage.
>> So I I guess uh I I think there's kind of two different discussions here. So I think one is you know local receipts you know in terms of how we track that from a revenue standpoint um that 85% doesn't touch
state aid. So I think state aid in terms of a funding source year-over-year um it it's separate. So on one category you know we look at local receipts that we obviously we set the you know the fees and you know that you know is largely
based on economic conditions year-over-year. You know state aid you know is obviously variable also based on economic conditions but also um more or less we it it's separate. So the
so the two aren't related. the 85% and the the state aid aren't related. Now, when Jim put together his figures, he gave a range for what he thought the state aid increase could be. >> And I guess based on his uh his, you
know, best educated guess at the time, it was not at the high end. It wasn't at the low end, but it wasn't at the high end. Um, so hopefully >> your best educated guess, your best educated guess is based on the governor's budget to have changed these numbers. Did I get that right?
>> Yeah. >> Okay. So, I guess my next question would be >> suppose as it goes the these meetings go through as they do committee whatnot and we get more information like we said we don't have enough information tonight. Suppose we get more information and your
estimates which are lower than Jim's are different and they're maybe more uh more looking like Jim's numbers. Are we going to adjust the numbers at that time? Is that some Karen's nodding, but I'm >> Yeah. And
>> I don't want to answer for Chris since he's he he's >> Well, I just Yeah. Do we adjust the numbers? >> Yes, absolutely. So, so what'll happen is the select board will have to make a budget based on the most recent information that they have, which would
be the governor's budget. So, so nor typically the select board budget wouldn't project state aid different than the most recent information. So, um we all keep our fingers crossed that as we go down the line there'll be more
revenue. Um so, so it'll come over to us in a in a way that the select board needs to balance the budget, but the finance committee is going to hold. We have another month before we really have to approve the budget. So, we're going to hold and hope that another
round of cherry sheet will come through and then we'll, you know, we always go back and work with the town administrator and and figure out well what what makes sense and if there is funds, how do we flow that through and then uh we would certainly try to work
together on that as well. So, yes. No, I'm learning an opportunity. >> Yeah, I'm trying to say obviously if it goes up, I'm learning as I go. As rough as it may seem, I have a whole new appreciation for the finance committee. I will say that >> there'll be a point in time, Nancy, that
we'll have to approve the the budget as it we as the warrant needs to get done. So, we can't wait forever, right? >> Um but but we'll we try to wait as long as we can to get the most information that comes through. Usually, if the next round of cherry sheet comes through,
that's probably going to be it. There won't be another round. Um so the way this the state works so slowly. So um >> okay the only the only other follow-up question I got one more Chris and this is um your new growth that you have is
significantly lower than the growth in the last six years. That number is much lower than the previous year. Um and then if you go back in the six years it's it's lower across the board. Um, we
have numbers of 2022, 691,874, 2023, 846. This is I'm looking under property taxes new growth number three in case anybody doesn't know where I am because I have to flip through all this stuff. Um, and so I was looking at I'm like, okay, 679 the next year, then 736,
then 627. You've you've gotten that you've put that down to 400. So you're $227,473 lower on this new growth line item. What is the rationale for that? >> So
you know this is something that has been a practice. Um so this is not I would say any different than what we've done prior years when it comes to estimating new growth. Now, you know, as you can kind of see the most recent years, you know, new growth is variable based on
economic conditions. And so, you know, similar to what we do with local receipts, you know, we put in there um a a you know, I would say a conservative estimate to ensure that we don't go in
the red in terms of what we're anticipating, you know, which again, you know, there is an economic slowdown, you know, and so that is something where, you know, if you do look at, you new growth over the last several years.
It's variable, right? I mean, the actual FY22 to FY24 and so with >> no no variable dumped down as low as you have it. There's the percentage is much greater from your from from the last year to this year. And I didn't know if
there was a driving force for you because even if you say it's the practice, the percentage that you dropped >> the new growth, I didn't know if there was something from left field left field that came in that caused you say, "Oh, this is the reason I did that." The
practice is the practice, but as demonstrated across the last six years, you're even lower than what the town has been doing. And I'm not saying that it's not you got to do whatever you got to do, but I'm saying If that number if that number does not come as low as
projected, then that would make up for the shortfalls that we have on some of the budget. >> Yeah. So, and just I guess clarification on I believe the table that you're referring to. So if you're looking at that, you know, you're looking at actuals, but at the time that the
budgets were developed, >> you know, in all the fiscal years, at least in recent memory, um, you know, the down the town, you know, similar to local receipts, um, you know, has, uh, taken a conservative approach there
because, you know, again, if we were to budget, you know, I'm just going to use an example to 650,000. Well, you know, we're if if I were to equate it to local receipts, you know, we'd be at 98%.
And if there is an economic downturn um or stagnation, you know, that puts us in a very difficult position to try and make that up elsewhere. So, um you know, again, that's kind of why I say that this has
been um something that the town has done. I highly highly recommend that um you know as part of any budget I would put would put forward that that number stay the way it is. >> So the new growth numbers for 22 23 24
25 and 26 are actual those were the numbers that actually occurred is that what you're saying >> 26 is budgeted because we do not have the actuals for this fiscal year. >> Okay. So that's not So if we looked at
to analyze this then I would need to see what was the new growth that was projected and versus the actual that was received to do the full analysis. Would that be the way to look at that? >> Uh yeah I guess if you want to see what
what we estimated versus how well the market did year over year. Yeah. Well, when you're talking about st when we're cutting things or we're not supplying money to the budget and we're using estimates, my only concern is is that we have a basis for that. We can all say there could be stagnation. There could
be the I get all that and I think that that's been people that came before me and before you had some type of methodology to determine that. So when you come down from the previous year in the manner that you did and then you're saying
those are actuals, I'd really like I'd be interested to see what was projected like how how how risky has the town been? How conservative has it been? That that was my only question. So that's why I was looking at it that way.
>> Okay. Thank you. And just to um Chris, Nancy, just to um in previous budgets, Jim has always left that number at 400,000. So, as as Chris was saying, that's that's been been the
practice a little bit. Um so, just to reiterate, that's that's been always been the methodology. >> So, okay. So, the 400 is kind of across the board and as what the projected has been and then we're looking So, then then we get the actual. So if I looked at So if I do this right, if I looked at
2023 and it was $846,000, we projected four, which then resulted in $446 some odd thousand of additional revenue. Correct. >> That would be Yeah. >> And if that happened, is that the money that goes into free cash because we
haven't used it in our budget? Is that the way that works? >> That would be part of surplus revenues. Yes. That would then go into free cash. >> Then that's that. Okay, now I now I have a very clear understanding. So considering if we do four across the board and what we've earned
percentage-wise, I would just respectfully suggest if we're looking for money, that could be another area that we might maybe increase the 400 a little bit um and we could have um potentially the money that's necessary
so we don't have to have uh that we can have a town meeting without any competing motions is what I was suggesting to think about. But I'm done. Thank you very much. Thanks for the education. >> Thank you. No, absolutely. That's why I want to keep making sure to answer the
questions in many ways to make sure that you and everybody else um gets the information. So, um Al, go ahead. You've been patient and I know Christopher's already for a bit. >> I have a comment and and Nancy stole my thunder, which which was good. My
comment was that uh a couple of meetings ago we were um and I've been in touch with Dick Brewer about getting the list of the 1, three, and fiveyear uh list. I haven't heard back from him. He got back
to me via email. So, I'll reach out to him again uh and and get it to the to the finance committee as soon as I can. My other question which which Nancy brought up is the is the is really the question about see I have I have very
little faith in the uh pardon me the state funding anything locally other than their crazy little uh jump. So, I was curious what the uh uh what the new growth number was um in the town, which Chris,
you you um said it, you know, the the the number that was plugged in because that's really what we can rely on. I mean, other than some incremental increase at the state level, um it's really the new
growth. And the new growth, I believe, just from driving around town, this is anecdotal, is slowing down. Doesn't mean it's it's it's dead by any stretch, but it is slowing down over the last four, five, six years. I don't I I
just don't see the um you know, and and there was an earlier question and then I'll I'll end it there. What has changed over the last five or six years? Well, uh one of the things is co you know, people aren't coming in the way they used to. People aren't tricking
out their homes, buying homes and and whatnot, but that's here and there. We have to deal with the revenue sources that we um you know have in front of us. So, uh anyway, the the main point was uh I'll be getting back to Dick Brewer
again tomorrow to get that information. >> Great. Thank you, Al. Uh Christopher Thank you, Madam Chair. I just had a brief follow-up question regarding uh strictly talking about percentages with regard to to local receipts. So, I know
Jim, as as late as maybe not last, if the year before, I think it was down to about 74%. Um, my my question is, so Chris, on the local receipts, what percentage are are you operating on right now for the the current version of
the budget? the I'm sorry. So the the one that's going to be proposed for Monday or what is going to be proposed you said 85%. >> Yes. >> And that and that's local receipts not not including state aid. That's my my
question is specifically to local receipts. >> Yep. >> Yep. Yes. And just out of curiosity, when budget memos were sent to departments, uh either either from Jim or from yourself earlier this year, what at what
percentage were your were you starting from, I guess, when you were building? My question is, what has the change been from where we started with the budget process this year to now as far as the local receipts go? So I I mean I'd have to go back and look at Jim's memos to department heads as to
what he estimated. I guess I'm maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're asking. >> So my my question is has as part of your uh adjustments and the and the ideas that you've you've put forth um that's
going to be discussed on Monday. I >> it I'm of the understanding that you have increased the percentage of local receipts from your previous budget. Is that correct or is that incorrect
>> of local receipts? >> Yes. So now now we're you now the budget is at 85% of local receipts is being utilized for this budget. So what what was my question is what is that increased from from when you began the
process? So the so the variance for local receipts is 308,000. So that I that I guess as part of this upcoming proposal, you know, give or take 60 something, you know, is going to be applied to the school, you know, based
off the presentation. um you know based off the 5446 revenue split with the remaining going to um you know the town you know as Karen mentioned to um you know look at you know potentially
an officer you know again based on board discussion here on Monday. >> Okay. So so if if the variance is 308,000 my question is percentage-wise does that mean you had started at 80 or below? I'm just trying to
>> I I think it was about 82. >> About 82. Okay. >> Yep. >> All right. That was it for now. Thank you very much, >> Chris. Christopher, just to um to in the fiscal 26 budget, Jim increased local
receipts to 80%. So the 74 had been in fiscal 25 and older. So in fiscal 26 they they already that already accounted for a bump >> as I recall it was at it was at 74 in
fiscal 25 then 20 and then originally I think he had it somewhere around 77 78 and then it ended up at 80. So that's okay. Thank you very much. >> Great. Thank you. So so just to to wrap up my my only comment um Chris and thank you for for
everything that you're doing. I know you haven't presented the budget to the select board, so we we appreciate uh just kind of poking some holes and kind of having a discussion, but so my only concern my concern about the budget will
is as always when we increase our our revenues to to be more aggressive. that really that balances the budget this year and makes it seem great but and helps this year but it puts a much
tighter burden in future years. Right? So, I'm um I can support going to an 85% of local receipts, but with that, I would have an expectation that free cash
that's used in the budget would be lower than the 480,000 that was used to support the budget. I wouldn't be in support of increasing revenues more aggressively and maintaining the same level of free cash. So if you're going
to take the opportunity to increase revenues, that's the opportunity to to start to bring down the need for free cash. So as long as as long as the revenues go up and we're using less free cash, then I think that's a good
balance. If we increase and get more aggressive on revenues and don't decrease free cash, we're adding to a budget problem. We're increasing our issues. That's my comment.
Um, go ahead, Nancy. >> So, have revenues gone up? >> Well, so by by changing local receipts and estimate to be become 85% of revenues instead of 80 that is going to increase revenues in the budget.
>> No, I understand that. But like I don't know if that but what happened is you you talked about it being aggressive to to move that number. But on the same note he lowered the number of the the aid in revenue estimates. So it it so
you lowered the so you up the pot but you lowered the pot and up the the number. So it they kind of worked in concert with each other. So it did give a little bit of a bump, but so I don't think it was aggress you can call it aggressive if he would have stayed at
the numbers that Jim started with and said it's 85. But when you lower the numbers from what Jim said and then you up the percentage, it's kind of counterproductive on both sid. >> Yeah, there's there's a difference. So they're two separate there's two
separate pots of money. So the state aid is budgeted at 100% of what the state is going to give us. So the fact that that number is lower is because the state's giving is lower, that's very independent of looking at local receipts and
budgeting them. So if all overall revenues down, that's that's a reality from the state. That's we can't offset that in that way. So it's two two completely separate conversations. So state aid is is low or not as high as Jim
anticipated. It's not lower. It's not as high as Jim initially had anticipated. And he was just making an assumption without much information because it was very early in the process. So revenues aren't being lowered that they're being
lowered from an estimate that was made very early. Right. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Go ahead, Chris. Thank you. Yeah. Um I guess I just wanted to comment on you know the
overall budget philosophy. Um you know as part of the proposal like I said um you know what's going to be before the board Monday. Um you know when it comes to you know free cash supplementing the school budget you know it's significantly less than what it's been
over the last couple of years. You know, I think um you know, my understanding of the conversation to date is that you know, the goal is to have an off-ramp from utilizing the free cash that is not
impacting the existing operation of of the school. And so you know how do you do that in a way where you know it's not cut us right to programs to you know existing class you know teachers class
sizes etc. So you know I think that is uh the goal here. you know, I think um you know, obviously, you know, in you know, as we get, you know, a better understand, you know, better finances, you know, we get into a better financial
state, you know, I think the idea is um you know, just like we do in other areas of the budget. um you know we we want to be able to support you know the schools as much as possible and hopefully um you know I know it's been a short time with
my involvement but you know a place where you know long-term you know the the full amount of the new revenue coming in you know it you know isn't being um hit by last year's you know
free cash right so hopefully you know we can get to a place where we, you know, catch up and that the school can fully realize um, you know, the new growth we get, you know, the, you know, full benefit of the revenue that the town receives. Um,
you know, and you really start to plan out for, um, you know, I think long-term strategic goals that the school wants to see. you know, I think, you know, that's not something that unfortunately is going to get accomplished during
this, you know, condensed process, but, you know, that's one of my priorities as we go into the summer months, um, to hopefully facilitate that conversation. Um, you know, so that again, it there isn't much discussion at when it comes to time of town meeting or
leading up to town meeting. Um and then you know the other thing I would say too is that with regards to um you know updating and being a little more uh a little more aggressive I would say with the estimation of local
receipts um I I would still categorize you know our allocation is conservative. So, um it it is higher, but you know, if there was an economic downturn, there is still a buffer there that I feel more
than comfortable with um to ensure that, you know, we're not in the red on that line. So, um you know, with that being said, um thank you. >> Thanks, Chris. Um
Cindy, >> I'm lost in order, but >> um So >> sorry. >> You know, this this is always such a very difficult task because if you if you look back at some of the dates, I believe that Jim sent his his um memo
out, his budget memo out to department heads in October. >> Okay. So October is three months into the current fiscal year. The budget that the that the state set, the governor just submitted the budget two weeks ago,
1 of February. So there's such a lag time in between um and anything can happen in between and so it's always very difficult for any of us to try to get a good handle on what's the right figure. Are we having a
good year, a bad year? Um and it's it's impossible to know at that time. Technology has certainly helped a lot. We could get information now instantaneously. And I think if you look back on free cash figures from
5, 8, 10 years ago, you'll see that the town administrator previous to Jim uh Tim King, he was very aggressive with local local aid money and it was in the 90 92% if not 95% range and our free
cash numbers were very low then. Um and the state was having its share of issues and the state this year is also continuing to perhaps be a little bit skinny. I mean the governor has certainly uh had a very um large um
plate of uh of things to spend some money on. Uh people are exiting the state uh and things are not as rosy as they were three years ago. Uh and there's been distributions of of excess funds in in other areas. So, I think
that for us to be in a somewhat uh conservative year, if you will, from a state aid standpoint, as well as the 85% is is low compared to what we've had in
the past, but it's a good place to be. I mean, I think it's a good place to be that we have a little bit better handle on where the state is coming from and, you know, we're acknowledging the need for a little bit more realistic perhaps
um receipt of uh of local a of local receipts of local tax receipts. Um you know, people aren't buying cars as much as they were. I mean, there's a lot of things that go into that that local receipt package and um it it will it'll
be interesting to see how that does fall out, but I think 85% is a safe number. Um but it's a big guessing game. You know, we used to have a lot of special town meetings in the past, mainly to deal with a lot of these things. We have no idea what contract negotiations are
going to fall out to be and at some point we're going to have to pay for some of those in the next fiscal year. Um Chris is in the middle of negotiating with uh at least one of the unions currently, right? Is that right, Chris? You're in you're in contract
negotiations, Chris, with one union group. >> I apologize. Which Chris? >> Oh, you you the other one is Christopher. You're Chris. >> Yes. uh pending pending. >> Yeah. So you so you're negotiating
contracts now for next year. So we don't even know what the outcome of that will be. So there's a lot of factors that are going to come into play and there's going to be tens of thousands that are going to move from one side to the next side. This is far from over.
>> Right. >> Thanks Cindy. Um who's next? L, were you next or I don't know who was >> I I don't know, but I'll I'll I'll make it in my u
my recollection of CIPC. Some of the things that we need to also think about is long-term expenses. We need more cemetery space. I mean, that that that's a given. I mean it it's actually I believe a state law
that we have to provide that that's going to cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars. In addition to that we have equipment needs and and on and on. So this this whole discussion about free cash which everybody knows and I won't
rant about it is not really free cash really needs to be looked at in the context of one three and fiveyear and and and tuck it aside. All right. So that that's that's um number one of of of my rant. Number two, not rant but
just uh just saying it. Num number two, which I I' I've lost the chain of of of thought, is is simply that we we have contractual agreements going
to personnel. And I go back to the last meeting or the meeting before. Why is it that we don't anticipate personnel in terms of replacement cost
when it comes to this? I mean, Jim was making X amount of money. Chris is making Y amount of money. The next one, whoever it might be, and we don't pay the people that we have currently, whether it's in the school or on the
town side, what the current rate is. we give them two 2 and a2%. But yet when when we need somebody new, for God's sakes, we pay them 3, four, five, 6% more. So I think what we need
to do when we we're looking at this entire budget and free cash, we need to look at the future and not the current situation. I just don't believe it it is correct for the people that are currently there. I don't believe it it
is good for the people, you know, five years down the road when I'm dead, you know. I mean, it it just uh it it it's just not right. So, I'll leave it at that. >> Thanks, Al. Nancy, go ahead. Um, so I ju
I just looked at my notes on the school budget presentation and then I went to Chris's overview summary sheet that he put in with the budget and it said um there's a line item here um
about um how we going to proceed with the deferred or reduced new school services for $135,000. And so I'm going to ask Christopher because my notes indicate that the this
defer or reduce new school services makes it sound like they're adding to the staff, but my understanding is is that they were putting in my notes say a history teacher because the class sizes were too big uh to handle that. So that
was one and then it was the thing that um I think several of the board members agreed for the vocational career path as possibly a way for the school to keep more kids in district as that being a good plan. So I have that that line item
was for those two things. And I guess I was a little I'm a little confused and maybe Chris you can confirm. Is is am notes right that that's what that Christopher is that correct? So, I can certainly said shed a little bit of light. Uh, this was actually a
concern I heard earlier that I was a little concerned on on on the framing of of quote unquote additional services or additional positions. Um, in fact, with the restructuring and and elimination of certain uh administrative or I should
say shouldn't say so much re u elimination as reshuffleling and managing uh turnover, managing uh retirements. uh the so the quote unquote new positions were largely funded by savings within our our within the school
department's internal budget based on reshuffleling of staff. Um, the only the only true, I guess, brand new position would have been or brand new in terms of of of the the totality of the the funding would actually be a student
support uh position that is intended to serve uh per the the explicit purpose of of uh what what the opioid settlement funding should be going towards. Uh so that that's you know doesn't mean that it we were not expecting the opioid
settle settlement funds to fund that budget or fund that position in its entirety but that certainly was part of the uh part of the equation. Uh, additionally, when it comes to the career pathways uh, coordinator, uh, the the the reason the reasoning behind that
position is exactly uh, what Miss Cross was uh, was mentioning there is is that it's it's intended to increase the offerings, which in turn in increases the state aid, which in turn also uh, allows the opportunity to to gain more
access to grants and and have have someone full-time who's working on on getting more more funding for programming that will students in district uh without going to the general budget. So that's that was the the overall plan of action as regards that that particular position.
Nancy, does that answer your question? >> It does because the way it was presented in that letter, it kind of acts like, oh, we're throwing in new positions. And I I wanted because my notes didn't indicate that. And I wanted to be clear because we've talked about or for my
first time here about the need like the firefighters come in and they talk about calls coming in and that they have an increase in calls. Um the ambulance calls we have an elderly population. It's growing. Obviously uh that goes hand inand to an increase of calls. So
when they need to put new paramedic firefighters on, you understand that, right? The calls are increasing. The needs of the town and the aging population is requiring those calls. Totally understand that. And I just for transparency on the school side, when we
have more students coming in, the class sizes have to stay a certain level by contract. And so sometimes you have to bring more people in to deal with increased student population. on the same hand as you do for your other
services on the town side when the when you have a need everything increases. So it's not sometimes people look at that and feel like oh the school is because I heard it when I was on the school oh you're throwing more positions and you're grow you're adding positions and a lot of it is just filling the needs of
what the population requires and a lot of that is under the collective bargaining agreement that we can only have classroom sizes of so many students on that side um from from my experience over there. So you you kind of get stuck with that. So I I was just looking at
that line and I just I get the the the side on police and fire and you know uh you know the building department everything that we need and the health department they needed a part-time clerk because they've got to go out and do more inspections. Now Al talks to me about growth being lower and that's what
he sees around time for 40 or five. He told the board that tonight but the health department is talking about an increase on their inspections. So I don't know how to gauge that. I really don't understand it enough to even talk about it. So I'm not but I I I just on on those line items my thing from the
school department perspective is a lot of that is they're kind of hands are tied when they have an increase in student population. So I just wanted to be clear on what those because I wrote those down specifically um because that's something that everybody always looks at. So I just wanted to be clear
on that. Thank you. >> I'm going to butt in just quickly. Nancy, do you have specific numbers as to a growth in student population? >> I I would not because I'm not on the school committee. I know that my notes reflect
>> Christopher Do do you I mean are we really growing the population and if so by how much and over how many pardon me over how many uh grades? >> Well, I don't think he's prepared to
answer that question on the spot. Al, I wouldn't have ever been when I was on the committee. He can answer for himself, but I think we should give him a little time. That's fine. But you you you made you made the statement >> and I just want supporting information. >> That's all I'm asking. No, I I made the
statement not because I serve on the school committee. Al, I made the statement because I have notes that say they said their student population increased >> and that was the reason for that position, the history teacher. So I'm only saying that because that's what was said in their presentation.
So it as for exact numbers I'm sure the system could provide and I know it's in the school budget themselves. I recall when I was there they always showed a chart of increase on student population is already in their presentation if I'm not mistaken. It always is. So that's
all I that but that I was using my notes from their meeting this year. >> Okay. So uh m I can certainly talk generally without having the direct numbers in front of me. I can tell you part of the issue like so so the need for the history teacher has arisen because this the student population
within certain grade levels is increasing. Uh and and what that you know some of that goes back to uh students coming back even after you know the whole um uh w with the with the uh
the new school and you had situations where okay maybe certain maybe the older uh children in the family were were had to go out of uh out of district and therefore the the younger siblings did as well just for the ease of the parents and as those even though the older older
students have now aged out. Uh those younger ones are coming back. That that is certainly a uh uh a situation. I think the So I do have a direct number from from 2020. Uh I think we were at 13 uh 1355. So 1,355 enrollment. Now our
enrollment is is 1511. Uh but the other thing that is really uh really crucial to consider is the is is the ability to keep students in district. So when we talk about this career pathways, career innovation pathways program and and
programs uh like that it that it entices students not to go to uh out of district whether it's it's uh vocational schools or other out of district placements. And the thing is those out of district placements can have a a huge impact on
uh even an outsized impact on the school budget as opposed to if those students if we we were providing the services in in district. Uh so that's just generally speaking yes there is a there is a trend of increased enrollment but again the qu
the the one of the core issues is is trying to avoid the out of district placements as much as possible because those really do hurt. So, so, so, so what we're looking at is 200 people, 200 kids >> over a six-year period of time over 12
grades. >> I mean, doing cocktail math, you know? I mean, I'm just uh >> uh >> it's it's an eb and flow for sure. The trend is up, but but I think again when it comes to out of district placements, you're talking about spending a whole
lot more per student than than we would if they were in district. And that that that adds up. And if you look at our school, look at the school budget. You look at um you know, I'm not just talking about spad placements. I'm talking about in general uh the outflow of of monies uh because of of students
going out of district uh is is a very crucial part of of uh what makes up the budget. So >> Okay. All right. We need an offline discussion, Christopher, because you you and I have I I won't say a disagreement, but but
I've got thoughts. You have thoughts. So So why don't we just uh hook up at some other point about this? How's that? >> I I I would love to. I would love to. >> Yeah. Okay. Great. Not >> great. Thank you. Um, Duncan, did you have your hand up and then it's down or
did I And are you all >> Yeah, I I was just going to say that that you know, Christopher brought up brought up the the numbers, but you know, the these numbers aren't secret, you know, and as you all know and are
tired of hearing me say, I'm in that school twice a week. uh I'm in the classrooms and so but the the you know the the the number of students is growing and they're growing fastest in the uh elementary schools. So that
foreshadows what's what's coming and you know and all the efforts to keep our kids in district are going to enhance that even further. So these are no secrets. It's in the school committee uh presentation to the to to us. It's the numbers are everywhere. So it shouldn't
be a mystery to anybody. >> Thank you Duncan Hugh. Go ahead. And then Chris Chris Fatelli say that vocational lensing. Remember diamond is built into the system. We already pay for diamond and diamond shows how many
spaces we have for student to go to diamond. So that is one place where kids go out of district in the sense of not the Westport rule but doesn't cost anything extra because we already paid for that.
>> Thank you Hugh. Uh Chris >> Chris B. Um yeah, I guess just a comment on um you know the presentation of it and how it's you know um you know the it's been categorized. So
you know from what the town received from the school um you know I think the language was service delivery increase. Now I know obviously the nature of the roles that are being proposed and um you
know their importance whether to expand existing offerings or um to keep class sizes down. You know I think they serve a different purpose. you know, when you look at the three positions under that category based off of the budget that was, you know, sent and provided by this
school, um, you know, the total cost for those three positions, um, is 215,000. And right now there's $80,000, which, you know, based off of what's going to be submitted to the board on Monday, you
know, that 80,000 um is is still there, right? So, you know, that 80,000 could be, you know, as of now applied at the school's discretion to fund one of those positions. So I think from
um you know the standpoint of looking at those different roles um you know I think the discretion is there you know to um you know should the school decide they wanted to fund the um social
studies teacher or um the the other coordinator role. So, um, I just want to make that note. >> Um, >> Nancy, >> go ahead, Nancy. Thank you, Al. I appreciate that.
>> Try not to get into an argument with you, Al. Um, so my the $80,000 that line item that was pulled out of the budget was presented in the school budget originally and that from because I have all my notes because it the school is a
big part of this budget consideration, but that line item of the $80,000 was presented to be for technology to upgrade what they have on certain computers in the district, wasn't that
>> no. So that's a separate uh a separate line within the school budget. So you know if you have if you look at the table um that more or less gives you a breakdown of of the changes you know in additions for this fiscal year there was 81,000
that was for technology. That's towards the top of the page. Uh and then as you go further down um you know when you look at the you know service delivery increases you know there's the three positions that are
being uh proposed and you know there's you know if you I guess look at the totals there you know there's an $80,000 credit from the personnel reorganization that was done you know as as you know
Christopher mentioned to help support the cost or help offset the cost of those those new positions. Now, just based off of I I'll say the
credit that's there, you know, it's you know, you know, as it was mentioned, it's a sizable credit. So that's something where you know regardless of the 135,000 which you know unfortunately within um you know the recommendation that wasn't
something that um I thought our revenue supported um you know that 80,000 would remain as part of my recommendation to allow the school um you know to prioritize
you know if they didn't you want to move forward with hiring a position. Um, but that recommendation would stay in place like I said for Monday's meeting with the select board. >> Okay. >> I I don't know. Um, I'm still confused
because isn't the um the 80,000 that warrant is that funded by free cash? So I I think we're talking I guess again two different things. So the 81,000 you know rather than it appearing you know
for the technology the $81,000 >> um is being proposed as a set aside article. >> So what was from free cash? From free cash. >> Yes. From from free cash. >> Yeah. I'm just wondering why was it done that way and just not come out of the CPIC budget? Why was it done as a
separate warrant article? >> So I think you know I guess similar to you know the um the overall budget process starting very early you know the capital planning committee also started their deliberations early this year and
their recommendation was already submitted into the board um you know at the time that we got these numbers and you know started um deliberating to see you know what could be done. So um you know rather than uh it it going back to
CIPC to update the recommendation to go back to the select board um you know the select board does have the discretion you know to you know propose um a separate article. So that's what they opted to do here. >> Okay.
>> And I say they opted to do what I they anticipate doing. Um, >> yeah, I just was wondering because I saw it as a separate war. I just didn't understand it. But I will say one thing about what Al said and I couldn't agree more with you, Al. Um, is is knowing the
I have said it since I sat on the school committee. the five-year plan with interdep departments in this town and the collective bargaining that goes on like an octopus with all different arms not act in operating in different
directions without opera operating with communication and so to understand what's going on with all the unions is doing is not negotiating in the best interest of the town >> I think that every we did it in the
school budget. Um I I mean take Michelle Raposa, we've all know her. She's great. She wears three hats in that school system. She does transportation, she does the food, and she does the business management budget. And when you sit there and say, "Who are we going to hire?" Who are you going to
hire out there for what we pay her on a single line item of salary, >> right, >> to do those three jobs? Impossible. So, you have to look at that because she's not going to be here forever. You're not going to get those discounts. So, you have to look at your aging
personnel and look what it costs to replace them five years before they retire so you can start moving it into the budget. And I think that that we're very much on the same page, Al. That's a that's a business model that people use. It's it is something that the town
hasn't done. I don't understand why, but even when I'm looking at departments and we have, you know, we have capital improvements and that's great, but I think that each department should really would benefit from looking at their personnel and their equipment piece and
their technology needs and phasing it in to prepare these budgets moving forward because it's going to be so tight. No, I I I I agree with you, Nancy. And and you know, one of the problems is the general accepted accounting practice, GAP
accounting practice, does not include personnel as part of, you know, an expense line and it should. So, so I'll just leave it at that, but it it's it to me it's just flatout stupid not to include and
anticipate future cost regarding replacement cost of people, not a truck, not a plow, not whatever. Okay. So, so um so you and I are are are in agreement
with that for sure. the the other thing too which I um and I've kind of lost a train of thought again but but it was it was it was kind of important maybe I'll I'll stick my hand up again just to just to just to
make the point that um um um yeah okay go ahead >> okay uh Cindy I think you were next >> uh just a a quick point I think you'll see when we go through the warrant articles Um, of course, the town administrator
has attempted to begin that process to some degree of funding uh personnel uh future personnel needs. There is an article in the warrant that is for collective bargaining, but I think it could be phrased in a little
bit more broader sense. Uh it's a it's a new notion for us as a town and I know that Gary has brought this up in the past uh that we should use this because I know they've used it in in in Dartmouth. Chris is certainly familiar with it and so is Gary. um that uh you
start funding um a little bit each year for either uh collective bargaining um uh pay increases in the future or uh payouts of uh retirement payouts for people or it could be used if all of a
sudden you have a stipen if someone leaves unexpectedly in October. you know, we're already under the gun for that fiscal year because we've already budgeted for that year and so we don't have any any financing available for to
replace someone at a much higher level in that current year. We have no control, you know, as to when people may retire unexpectedly or for whatever reason. So I think that we are starting to see that a little bit and I don't
recall Chris how much you recommended that be funded with or if that was still up in the air but you might want to talk about that a little bit Chris Patel. >> Uh yeah certainly so that is something um that I am putting forward for
consideration for the board again on Monday. Um they haven't uh settled on a final number. uh I think it's going to be a little less than what that initial draft was. um you know but with that you know like you said um you know having
you know that as a mechanism and obviously when we look at um you know um you know collective bargaining agreements when we look at you know non-UN agreements um you know that that's certainly a goal right I mean I I
think we want to be uh competitive and we want it to be a place where people um you are getting paid for, you know, what they can provide us, you know. Um, you know, so this article I, you know, I think, um, there's been a lot of success
in the communities that do have an article like this. It does allow you more flexibility when it comes to, um, you know, uh, phasing in the cost of contracts versus it hitting any one fiscal year. Um, you know, there's other financial strategies you could utilize
it for. Um, it just gives the town options. So, um, you know, that's being put forward for consideration by the board. And, um, >> Chris, would you include would you also have it include though for unexpected um, you know, people that have
separations from the from their job? It's not just for negotiated salary increases, but it could be used in the case that we're short 25 $30,000 because we have to replace someone unexpectedly.
So, so we I we would handle that slightly different and I only say I guess to the point that you mentioned just with regards to you know the fiscal calendar um it's something where uh I don't necessarily know or I've had
experience using it to um because again similar I guess to you know um free cash these are one-time funds so you'd have Uh, it depends on timing, I guess, is the long and short of it, >> right? That's what I'm saying. That if someone left in October, you know, and
and you don't have enough budget in your current budget, but you can budget for it the following year, but you know, you're going to be short, say, $20,000 in the current year. Could that article be used for something for that purpose? I mean, that's exactly what we were describing.
>> Yeah. So I, you know, I guess theoretically you could have an article, you know, after the stabilization fund was created and, you know, you you had money within that account, you could make an appropriation from that account um, you know, for a specific purpose. >> Okay.
>> Um, yeah. Yeah. You know, depend again depending on what um the allowance is, you know, once the stabilization funds created. So >> yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. Yep. >> Good. >> Great. Thank you. Um, Christopher, go
ahead. >> Oh, you're muted, Christopher. >> There we go. Uh, so, uh, thank you, Madam Chair. So, just going back a couple of moments. I I also want to, uh, just concur with Mr. Lees and M. Stan Cross and others have mentioned. Um, it
is unfortunate that we don't budget, uh, for replacement costs. I, and when I hear, you know, talking about Michelle Roza at the school department wearing three hats, uh, there that that's the official titles. There's about 14 other hats laid on the desk as well as far as what she does and that's just one of the people uh that that really do uh go
above and beyond job descriptions. Uh the one thing I wanted to mention with regard to the warrant article that is has been pulled out the technology warrant article. So that original funding was included in in the school department's budget proposal. Uh and
that actually is part of the tiered uh uh replacement strategy that was implemented last year uh and and to some extent the year before that it to to start replacing uh technology on a on a cycle as opposed to having all all at
one all in one uh large large chunks. So, so that's where that that technology article that's been pulled out separately came from was part of that replacement. Uh, and that was, as I said, that was within the original budget proposal. So, I just wanted to
clarify that that one thing. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Hugh. Go ahead. Yeah, I just want to say thing everybody seems to be overlooking in this is we don't have the money to
anticipate this that and the other thing. And the second point I would say if you have a pot of money sitting on the table awaiting collective bargaining negotiations, you're going to
start from the amount of money in the pot. You're not going to end there. And everybody knows there's money available. You may also remember, it's not directly related, but some years ago we went to arbitration and saying we didn't have the money and
the arbitrator said, "Oh, you've got money in the stabilization fund. You can afford the raise." So, it's all nice and tidy and would be nice if we could do it. But we don't have the money. And it's putting aside money for future
expenses. A, we don't have the money now to put ahead and B, it tends to trigger higher future expenses through negotiations. That's said. >> Thank you, Hugh. You know, I was going to make a similar comment, but I saw
your hand go up, Hugh, so I knew you were gonna >> I have a reputation. >> I agree. I mean, I support everything that everyone's saying for, you know, for the needs and there's just not
enough dollars to go around to to reserve those dollars and all of the buckets and pots that we want to. And you know, Nancy, I support five-year plans. Absolutely. Not just in negotiating salaries, but full fiveyear
plans, full fiveyear operating plans, full fiveyear capital plans. you know, the the more dollars that are put into the budget and the budget operating budget gets tighter means there's less free cash that will be generated, which means that's going to put a strain on
capital needs. And if we don't have a good handle on what the capital needs are for five years out, that we're missing a lot of pieces. So, we're we're, you know, we're trying to spend money in the budget because that's needed today, but there's also money
that's needed tomorrow. And it's it's a very difficult balance, but as Hugh said, there's just not enough dollars that can go around to support all of the needs. So, this is a very difficult balance that we're in every year. >> Madam Chairman, what else do we have on
the agenda? This seems we've been working this over pretty thoroughly. >> I think I was going to let Al and >> I just have I just have a couple of quick comments. Hugh, I will I will I will respectfully disagree with you on this that I think that we need to
allocate so-called free cash in in buckets rather than going to town meeting and spending it all and then hoping for it next year. We need to reserve a portion of it for the stuff that we're talking about. Number two,
and then I will end it. The dirty little secret about the school department and the salary, we're talking about $80,000 for ABC, is that the dirty little secret is that about 30 to 35% of that salary
gets allocated to the so-called town side of the budget. It doesn't get it doesn't get pegged to the school. That is salary only. There's there's no insurance. There's no um um not
insurance, but uh retirement. There's no insurance. There's no ABCD. That's the way it has always been in this town. Probably most towns, if not all towns. But I I think we need to to recognize
that an $80,000 salary for a teacher or whomever is really taking away from money that is go that should be going to uh so-called townside.
I'll leave it at that. >> El, I just want to clarify what what you said. I think you're saying that the town side uh the town departments budget the fringe benefits for all new positions. >> Correct. Yes.
>> So you're saying when the school increases a salary, the fringe benefits on the town side also have to >> correct. They they don't they don't hit the school uh side of the budget. They hit the town
side of the budget. And that's the way it's always been. So there's a there's a there's a there's a deeper cost than just 80,000, 50,000, whatever the number is. It it it's immaterial. Um there's there's uh you
know, a significant amount, a third probably that that gets hit on the town side, which takes away from money to be spent on other um operating expenses. for the town.
>> Thank you, Al. Go ahead, Nancy. >> So, I kind of don't like the words of dirty little secret. So, there's it's not a dirty little secret. Towns traditionally all over the Commonwealth, Al, and stop calling them. Some do it on the town side of the budget, some do it
on the school side of the budget. All it would take is an allocation and then it wouldn't be it wouldn't be a 54 48 split, would it? Because the personnel on the school side is higher and therefore you have to cover that. This has been something that has been talked
about for years. We actually did an evaluation when Jim Hartnett was there as to out of the pot of money in the town and we took that money what you're saying the dirty little secret the pensions and the retirement and we looked at that number as well as the
crossover services between both both places and we got absolutely really nowhere with the with it. So it's not the it's not as simple as what you've stated that it is. >> The taxpayers of this town do not
understand that Nancy. >> Well, they don't understand a lot of other things on the other side, Al. So maybe me we'll have an offline discussion about that. >> Okay. I'm I'm I'm here and available. >> I got plenty of dirty little secrets. We can pull those out. >> Let's keep as Hugh said earlier, let's
keep moving it along. >> Yep. >> All right. Thank you. Okay. So, anything else in the budget and we can let uh and I don't it does it I think we've talked about the warrant as well. So, I'm not sure there's much at this point that
else we need to talk about there. So, anything else before we let Chris to go home and enjoy his evening? All right, Chris. I' I'd hit the exit button as quick as you can, but Chris,
thank we appreciate you being here. Um, I think this was was helpful to really uh so you can understand kind of where where we're at and um I think we're we're you're on a good path. So, we'll firm it all up when we see some numbers. So, >> sounds good. Well, thank you all. If any
questions um from any of the members, please feel free to email me. If not, I'll see you at your next meeting. >> All right. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Have a good night. >> Good night. Thank you. >> All right. >> All right. So, uh, we skipped the first item, so we'll move on to, um, the
council. I put this on the agenda, but I I didn't realize that it was meant for next week, but we may be able to to discuss it. So, this is the request from the council and aging for $5,74342 for the vehicle repair. Um Beverly Bish
had come in to us uh a few months ago uh with the need and we had asked her to to make sure she didn't was a had if she was able to have funds from uh to be able to use it and she's come back and
uh clearly indicated that she needs those funds that the vehicle repair. Yeah, the vehicle you'll if you recall the vehicle uh it's one of the transportation vans and the vehicle um did not pass inspection. So, she had to
have the require required um updates done to the um to the vehicle and the lift, the hydraulic lift um to get into the van um for uh wheelchair access was broken as well. and she sought out
additional funding elsewhere to see if insurance or some grants or something would cover it. And this is one of the few times where she came up empty. Uh so she has respectfully requested that we reconsider this. Um she does have to pay
that that bill and um would like us to consider that. We did we did tell her that we would reconsider at a later date. Hugh, go ahead. >> I just add to it. I do remember came in,
made a good presentation. We said, "See what you can do to find some money here and elsewhere, but you can come back." She's done exactly what we asked her to do. The end result is 5,000 and change to keep the keep the van on the road. So, I would move in favor of it.
>> I'll second that. Yeah. Go ahead. >> All right. So, we have a motion and a second. So we'll uh further discussion. So Christopher, >> one brief question. Do we have any idea of the uh what what the amount is in the reserve fund as of right now?
>> We um have not spent anything. So it would be the original budget. Um >> is that 150 that we >> 150? >> Yeah, 150 I believe. Uh I'm sure we're going to hear from the highway department uh soon for snow removal.
>> Yeah. Do you think >> you think they've blown their budget? >> I I would I would I would think so, but um we we haven't heard from them in several years, but I think this year might be one of those,
>> right? >> Always happened on a Sunday. >> Yes. So to Christopher, I don't remember the budget, but this is our first request to to to use any funds for that budget.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Appreciate >> uh any any other questions? All right. So, we have a motion and a second. Uh any other comments? Then I'll move to a uh a vote. So, I will start with Hugh.
>> Hugh Morton. I >> L >> Les I >> Duncan >> Duncan Law. I >> Zack >> Zach Lew. I >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown. I >> Christopher >> Christopher Thrasher. I >> Nancy
>> Nancy Stanton. I >> and Karen Rose. I All right. Great. Thank you everyone. Um okay. So uh the next item would be any committee and lay on updates if anybody had anything to share.
do not. >> Okay. And uh I'm going to ask to pass over the minutes because I'll sorry for repeating myself, but I did not get a chance to update those. So I'll try to do those for next Tuesday. Uh I have uh so the next item I have no
correspondence. Um our next budget items are on this upcoming Tuesday, February 24th. We have the beach committee, town accountant, and uh a representative from Diamond Regional School
next Tuesday. And um we should so the select board is meeting Monday to approve the budget. So um we'll see how quickly if Chris is will be able to get together any final budget
and get it sent to us so we can have something in hand. So that might be tight, but we'll see. We'll see what we have. So that I'll surely put that on the budget for on the agenda for for next week. >> And and there is a draft of the warrant that's that's posted on on the town
website as well. >> Oh, good. And it's in our drive, too. So, >> Right. Right. >> Oh, it's on the town website now. Great. Okay. I know some some people were asking some some members of some residents were asking for it. So, good. It's not it's not on the splash page. I
I can't say that I'm in love with the new with the new design of the website. I find things harder to find, but I think it's just because I'm not used to I'm used to the old way and not the new way. Um I happened to stumble across it.
>> Oh, so is it Oh, it's not on the home >> on the home splash page. Yeah. Not not as of two days ago anyway. Maybe it is now. I was re I was researching something else and um I happened to stumble across it.
>> Yeah. Okay. >> You know, to tee off on your comments, Cindy, very very briefly, it would be great if on the town website, there could be a a a link to the meet Google
so that I I don't need to dive through and try to find your emails, Karen. You know, it It used to be that you could just go there and click and and away you go. And unless I'm missing it, it it just doesn't seem to be there. >> There isn't a tab that says meeting
meetings and agendas or is it? >> It does. It does, but you have to you have to copy it and paste it. >> Oh, you do? >> No. Um I go to the town >> I go right to the town's website and right on the homepage there's the calendar >> and if you click right on the date, so
today was the 19th. If you click on the 19th, it lists all of the meetings and you click right on there and it's a hyperlink that will take you right here. >> Okay. So, so I'm wrong. I'm a lite, you know, and the older I get there, the more I >> So, so I I'll look at it again. Okay.
Thank you. Thank you. >> Sure thing. Okay. Um All right. Well, uh, anybody else have anything else? Otherwise, we can adjourn for the night. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Okay. I will do a roll call. Q >> Morton. I
>> L >> Ali, >> Duncan, >> Duncan Law, I >> Zack >> Zack Lew. I >> Cindy >> Cindy Brown. I >> Christopher >> Christopher Brasher I >> Nancy >> Nancy Stan Crossy
>> and Karen Rose. All right. Thank you everyone for our Thursday. See you next week.