Town of Lyme
Budget Committee
November 17, 2004
7:00PM
Lyme town Offices
APPROVED: December 1st, 2004
Present at this meeting: Selectmen: Judith Shelnutt Brotman and Richard Jones. Budget Committee Members: Gibb Cornwell, Jeff Lehmann, Josh Kilham, Chairman Barney Brannen, Earl Strout, David Caffry, Wayne Tullar. School Board Chairman Laszlo Bardos. Staff: Administrative assistant Carole Bont, and Scribe Dina Cutting.
The meeting was called to order at 7:05pm by Chair Brannen.
The Selectmen’s proposed budget and the employee’s wage and benefits worksheets were passed out to all Budget Committee members present.
1) Mr. Brannen reviewed the objectives of the upcoming Budget meetings. Tonight’s meeting and the next meeting will be dedicated to the Select board’s proposed budget requests. The Budget Committee may need to add an extra night to the meeting list; this would be December 1, 2004 at 7:00 pm if needed.
2) The Budget Committee wants to send out a letter to the tax payer’s right before the tax bills go out. Purpose of the letter: a) to explain the changes in the tax rate caused by the town wide property assessment update; b) to explain the increase in the tax rate caused by the changes in town and school district expenditures and revenues; c) to encourage citizens to participate in current year’s process. The Budget committee discussed the possible date the tax rate will be finalized, when the tax bill are expected to go out and the logistics involved in getting this letter out. The Selectmen’s office staff will not have time to fold, stuff and do the mailing for this letter. It was the sense of the Budget Committee that Chair Brannen should write a draft of this letter, e-mail it to
everyone and form a final letter via e-mail. The members of the Budget Committee that are available will meet at the Selectmen’s office on Tuesday at 3:00pm (with Wednesday as a backup date) to put labels on envelopes and stuff them to be ready to mail prior to the Select board sending tax bills.
3) Mr. Jones noted at this time that the Budget Committee needs to be careful about what is discussed and decided via e-mail. Because of the Right To Know law this is not an appropriate way to hold discussions or make decisions. Mr. Brannen stated he was aware of the requirements of the state’s public meeting law and that, while he believed it was appropriate to communicate informally between committee members via e-mail, all formal discussion and decisions of the committee would be made in a public meeting. Mr. Brannen commented he felt the Budget Committee did not need to meet every time a decision needed to be made.
4) The following points and criteria for this letter were discussed.
* Needs to be able to be easily understood.
* Valuation update needs to be explained.
* The combined effect of the valuation update and the tax rate results in a greater increase in the tax burden for the middle and lower range homes.
* Issues with the school budget.
* The Budget Committee will be holding spending for next year to a minimum.
* Tell taxpayers to meet with Select board for abatements if needed.
The Budget Committee discussed the need for this letter and whether or not they wanted to send it. It was the sense of the Budget Committee that they should write and send this letter.
5) Mr. Brannen explained that the Budget Committee had been discussing via e-mail the possibility of keeping the budget increase for 2005 to a minimum. In light of the need to have the discussion in public session, the Budget Committee decided not to have the Select board formally present their proposed budget for discussion at this time. Mr. Brannen asked Mr. Lehmann to explain his proposal to cut the town budget by 5% then asked all Budget Committee members to respond to the proposal.
Mr. Lehmann explained that he had contacted Mr. Brannen with his concerns over the rate of increase within this year’s department head budget requests. He suggested cutting the town’s budget request by 5% from last year. He estimated this would keep the combined school, town and county budgets to a 1% increase. He expressed concerns over the direction the Budget Committee was heading. He feels the best procedural approach is to decide on an appropriate amount of increase for the overall budget and then let the people who know best (the department heads and Select board) decide where the cuts should come from. He believes the town needs to look at its services and that the town has been too aggressive about hiring full time employees and full time benefits in the last few years.
At this time Mr. Brannen asked the members of the Budget Committee to give their opinions about Mr. Lehmann’s proposal.
Mr. Strout: He has been very frustrated about how the whole budget process has been working. Mr. Lehmann is going in a direction he likes. He supports this idea.
Mr. Cornwell: He likes the concept. A likely outcome of adopting Mr. Lehmann’s proposal is that we could end up with a 1-2% increase in the tax rate. He would like to start moving towards looking at the bottom line, setting some goals, and letting the Select board and department heads make the cuts where they can. He stated that there is no place to cut the school. The school is tied into special education and high school tuition. These expenses cannot be cut.
Mr. Kilham: He disagrees with Mr. Cornwell. If you are really going to cut money you can’t leave the school alone.
Mr. Brannen spoke about e-mails he received from Mrs. Swan and Mr. Smith who wrote in response to this topic.
Mrs. Swan: Mr. Brannen felt Mrs. Swan was saying the same as Mr. Kilham. If you are going to make big cuts from the town you must cut from the school also. Mrs. Swan further stated the she felt the town had already endured more budget cuts than the school and that the school budget should be cut before any further cuts in the town budget.
Mr. Smith: From his e-mail Mr. Smith felt that Mr. Lehmenn’s proposal was an appropriate approach but he disagreed that a 5% cut in town spending was necessary. Mr. Smith felt the “level funding” message endorsed by the Budget Committee in September would be adequate. The town department heads should be getting a clear message to approach their budget with a goal of level funding from the September 29th, 2004 Budget Committee meeting.
Mr. Tullar: The town should be considering what being tied to Hanover is doing to the budget.
Ms. Shelnutt Brotman: The Budget Committee always says we can’t cut from the school because of special education, high school tuition, and programs. Then the Town is expected to make up the difference. The town has legal requirements to meet and programs also. We have to do something and if we are going to cut from the town’s budget then we have to cut across the street also.
Mr. Brannen: He is completely sympathetic to the idea of setting a target tax rate increase for the entire town. The Budget Committee needs to think about the signals they send out to department heads, school and community members. The Budget Committee needs to decide whether they want to say the town should cut, or the school should cut or they both should make cuts and how much those cuts should be. Mr. Brannen noted that with anticipated tax revenues of $115,000 from new construction and even a 1% tax rate increase, the town and school would have an additional $165,000 to meet expanded funding needs for the next year (for every $50,000 increase in the budget there is a corresponding 1% increase to the tax rate). Therefore, Mr. Brannen doubted that a 5% cut in spending by either the school or the town would be
necessary to meet the goal of keeping taxes level or nearly so.
Different amounts for the town and the school to cut were discussed, but none were decided on. At this time Mr. Lehmann stated that his proposal of a 5% cut was just a number. It did not have to be this exact number. This 5% was just a number to work from and to put on the table for discussion.
The following comments were made by various budget committee members:
*The town of Lyme should not be held hostage to the rate of pay given to employees by Hanover and Lebanon.
*There is a point where the town can only fund so many services and no more.
*We need to look at all departments and see if it is ALL needed.
*Perhaps the Budget Committee should go to Town meeting with different scenarios and let the town decide what should be cut.
*Whatever budget the Budget Committee ends up presenting, the Budget Committee wants to make sure the taxpayers/voters knows that the Budget Committee realizes this is a really tough year.
Mr. Lehmann moved to have a 1% increase in the overall tax rate as a goal to work towards in the budget process. (Mr. Brannen requested a sense of the Budget Committee). Discussion on the motion followed. It was reiterated that this was just a number to work towards. Some questions concerning the school faculty contract were asked and answered. Salaries are fixed for the 2005-2006 school year.
The motion was voted: 6 in favor (Lehmenn, Strout, Cornwell, Kilham, Caffry, Tullar) and 2 opposed (Shellnutt Brotman and Bardos).
6) Mr. Jones requested some clear direction from the Budget Committee. Because of the town’s obligations to employees and laws that need to be followed the Select board needs to know in a timely fashion if their employees will need to be notified of their termination as town employees. Mr. Jones noted at this time that the proposed budget that was handed out tonight is the Select board’s recommendation for the budget. These figures will go into the town report. The Supreme Court ruled that the Budget Committee must specify the line item to be cut.
7) Mr. Cornwell moved to approve the minutes of the September 29, 2004 meeting. Seconded by Mr. Strout. Corrections were offered. At this time Mr. Cornwell and Mr. Brannen noted they had numerous corrections. Mrs. Cutting requested that any grammar corrections be given in writing; any substantive changes to the meaning and or sense of the meeting were welcome at the open meeting. These minutes were voted unanimously in favor with corrections noted.
8) Mr. Strout moved to approve the minutes of the November 3, 2004 meeting. Seconded by Mr. Cornwell. At this time Mr. Cornwell and Mr. Brannen noted they had numerous corrections. Mrs. Cutting requested that any grammar corrections be given in writing; any substantive changes to the meaning and or sense of the meeting were welcome at the open meeting. These minutes were voted 7 in favor with 1 abstention (Bardos) with corrections noted.
9) The Select board’s budget is up about $104,000 from last year. This is a 6.5% increase. The school is up $175,000. In order to keep the budget in line with what the Budget Committee is trying to do the cuts will need to be significant. The cuts will probably involve programs and positions. It will also involve possible changes in revenue sources. Mr. Jones volunteered to act as an analyst for the Budget Committee. He will come up with different options for the cuts. He will show them what they will save for the first year which will be a partial year and in the second year which will be a full year. These proposed cut options will be just for discussion and will in no way be a recommendation from the Select Board. The Budget Committee asked if the Select board would like to have input in these decisions.
Ms. Shelnutt Brotman responded the Select Board would need to discuss this first. It was noted that we need to do this exercise for both the town and school. This needs to be done in a very careful sensible way or the exercise is useless. The Budget Committee can receive the information, make any decisions necessary and bring it to the Town Meeting for their decision. Mr. Strout requested that Mr. Bardos come back to the Budget Committee with the cost savings should the Town of Lyme designate Thetford Academy as the sole choice for Lyme high school students.
It was noted at this time that the school has been fiscally responsible in the past. The items that could be cut were cut and money was saved when possible.
Mr. Jones reported that the Selectmen voted to take $70,000 out of the surplus funds to reduce the tax rate.
Each department needs to be examined to see if the demands for services have changed substantially in the past years to justify the increases in each department’s total budget. The Budget Committee needs to look at reducing hours, reducing services, reducing staffing, program changes and possible changes in the revenue sources.
10) The Budget Committee decided to add another meeting on December 1, 2004, at
7:00 pm in the town offices. The Budget Committee will receive the information from Mr. Jones at the meeting. Mr. Bardos will bring the school’s information to the first meeting dedicated to the school budget, on December 7th, 2004, at 7:00pm.
11) This meeting will recess and reconvene in order to meet to stuff the envelopes on Tuesday November 23, 2004 at 3:00pm.
12) At 8:50pm Ms. Shelnutt Brotman moved to recess the meeting until
November 23, 2004 at 3:00pm in the town offices. Seconded by Mr. Caffry. Voted unanimously in favor.
REMINDERS: Get letter to town office for copying-Barney
Have envelopes printed with postage-Dina
Stuffing envelopes and labels- Tuesday November 23rd, 3:00pm (Wednesday if letter not ready).-Budget Committee
Respectfully submitted,
Dina Cutting
| 
