Present: Chris Carlin, Paul Desmond, Christine Edwards, Peter Fimognari, John Goodrich, Bob Margerison, Maureen O’Sullivan, Jim Pennington, Peter Ross, Ann Lee (FinCom Admin. Asst.)
Also Present: Gretchen Neggers (Town Administrator), Deb Mahar (Town Accountant), Hope Bodwell (Library), Richard Guertin (Selectman), Donna Hall-Adams (School Committee), Ed Harrison, Dorothy Jenkins (Town Collector), Kurt Kaiser, Sgt. Steve Kozloski, Officer Scott Lawrence, Officer Kristin Marciniec, John Morrell (Highway Surveyor), Kathleen Norbut (Selectman), Karen Patenaude (School Committee), Carol Woodbury (School Superintendent)
Absent: n/a
The meeting was convened at 6:30 p.m.
A motion was made, seconded, and SO VOTED to accept the minutes of the 3/28/05 meeting, as written.
CORRESPONDENCE
A letter of resignation was received from Richard Crane on March 30. He thanked committee members for their hard work and dedication.
A memo dated March 31 was received from Gerald Paist, Pathfinder Superintendent, in response to the letter sent him from FinCom. Pathfinder has a meeting scheduled April 12 to discuss their FY06 capital request. Mr. Ross related he spoke to Mr. Paist and received the same information.
A letter was received from the Association of Town Finance Committees. Annual dues for FY06 for the town of Monson have increased 2 ½ to $160. A dues notice will arrive July 1. Mr. Margerison asked if FinCom has to belong to the organization. Mr. Carlin said FinCom does not have to, but chooses to, and attends the annual meeting. Mr. Fimognari motioned to pay ATFC dues. It was seconded and SO VOTED unanimously.
A memo dated March 28 was received from Gretchen Neggers, Town Administrator. BOS will review requested warrant articles for both the annual town meeting and the special town meeting within the annual at its April 12 meeting. Requested articles must be submitted in writing on or before that date.
OLD BUSINESS / NEW BUSINESS
Request for Transfer from Utility Reserve Fund: A request for transfer was received from Fire Department Chief Marty Harris in the amount of $2,000. The funds are needed to pay for a heating bill for the fire station. Mr. Fimognari motioned to transfer $2,000 from the Utility Reserve Fund; it was seconded and SO VOTED.
Request for Transfer from Reserve Fund: A request for transfer was received from Town Clerk Nancy Morrell in the amount of $486. The funds are needed to pay for a legal ad as per the attorney general. A zoning by-law from 1989 was not sent to the Attorney General for approval, and now, in order to approve the zoning by-law, the AG requires special language to be published in the local paper. Ms. Neggers explained this occurred when the Planning Board was updating the zoning map in 1989 in order to bring it into compliance. Mr. Fimognari motioned to transfer $486 from the Reserve Fund to the Town Clerks Legal Ads account, Mr. Margerison seconded, and it was SO VOTED.
MA Municipal Association Spring Regional Update Meeting: Ms. O’Sullivan attended the update meeting in Amherst on March 31. Mr. Harrison also attended.
One topic of discussion was the proposed closing of the telecommunications industry’s tax loophole. A 1920 law allows some telecommunications companies to avoid paying taxes, which causes loss of revenue to towns. Mr. Harrison explained the MMA urges all communities to be on board to get this loophole closed. Ms. Neggers added personal property income tax was down approximately $70,000 from last year to this year because of telecommunications companies not having to pay personal property taxes. Both Ms. Neggers and the Town Assessor received the “Loophole Closing Advocacy Kit” from MMA.
Also discussed was the state’s lottery money. Reliance on property tax is at its highest since 1982. The government has a five-year plan for the lottery; the MMA wants to reduce it to a two-year plan so money comes back to towns sooner.
Circuit breaker funding, which was $50 million last year, is to be increased to $200 million this year.
MMA related an expected increase in town funding for FY 06 by July 1. Mr. Harrison sensed it would not be a great deal of money. The statement was made that it is “a bad year for local government.” MMA is also trying to get greater reimbursement for Snow and Ice deficits for towns. Also discussed was an adjustment to the Chapter 70 formula to improve fairness and equity to towns. Mr. Ross asked if the change was expected for FY06. Mr. Harrison answered any change would have no impact until FY07 or FY08.
School Committee Discussion for Utility Shortfall: Mark Hebert, School Committee Chairman, and Carol Woodbury, School Superintendent, addressed FinCom. Ms. Woodbury handed out a memo and two spreadsheets (see attached).
The School department estimates a utility budget shortage of $14,313.
A discussion about the School’s utility purchasing and use explained the following:
The fixed price for oil is $1.51/gal until the end of the fiscal year
Paul Shrouder at LPVEC does the bidding for 27 towns, including Monson
The Schools ended FY05 with empty oil tanks
The current spot price, if purchased by the School, is $1.89/gal
When it is cheaper to do so, the School uses natural gas
The initial expected shortage for FY05 was $62,000. Colder weather occurred on vacation weeks, which allowed the school to save on energy costs.
Mr. Fimognari noted that the greatest overage is at Hillside School, and asked if spending $40,000 for offices is efficient. Ms. Woodbury explained Hillside is the oldest building, and the School budgets knowing it is not energy efficient.
Mr. Carlin asked Ms. Woodbury if she wished to share anything with FinCom for them to make their recommendation to the town. Ms. Woodbury answered that compared to the initial $62,000 projected shortage, the projected $14,000 shortage, given fluctuating energy costs, is a fairly close budget. The Schools use natural gas first, and switch to oil when it becomes cost effective. In October, the School department did not have all the information to accurately project energy costs; now, in the third quarter, a closer projection is possible.
Mr. Pennington asked two questions: if the School knows what it has available to spend, what steps has it taken to conserve energy? He mentioned MHS being “lit up like a landing field.” Secondly, what would the Schools do if there was no more money available? Ms. Woodbury answered she and Mr. Tassinari have discussed conservation. State law mandates school buildings must be maintained at 68~. School buildings are used many nights, particularly in winter months, requiring outdoor lighting. Further discussion revealed the lights have been dimmed since the conservation question was raised a few years ago. The lights are linked together, and are on a timing system, meaning it is not possible to turn off only selected lights. Mr. Hebert stressed that to reduce
lighting would invite vandalism, and if someone were to be injured, could make the School liable. As to Mr. Pennington’s second question, Mr. Carlin asked to stick to the request at hand.
Mr. Ross asked if the original calculation needing an additional $62,000 included filling the tanks at the end of the year. It did. Mr. Margerison mentioned the tanks were filled March 3 at QH and GVMS, and asked if all that oil will be used.
School Committee Discussion for Special Education Shortfall: Ms. Woodbury explained there is no more money expected from the state to help with additional SPED costs. Monson has already utilized an additional $50,495 from circuit breaker money. She explained the budget lags one year behind, and a SPED program must cost at least $20,00 to get any circuit breaker funds. Also, the state lifted the cap on private placement programs, and the SPED budget was calculated using tuition numbers before they were increased.
Mr. Fimognari asked if there was discussion of the cap being lifted during the time the budget was being prepared. He also questioned the line item being reduced by $100,000 from the FY04 number. Ms. Woodbury explained the budget is based on the students at the time – real kids in real placements. Ms. O’Sullivan questioned the addition of an instructional aide. Ms. Woodbury explained the IEP required an aide, and one was added to that student’s program. Ms. Dion explained the move in law. If a student is in an outside placement, and moves to Monson, the other school system pays for the outside program for the rest of the school year. If a student is being provided services in another school system within the school, and moves to Monson, we are responsible for
paying for an outside program if we are unable to provide the same program within our schools.
Mr. Goodrich asked how the shortage could not be anticipated when, according to the spreadsheet, everything above student E occurred before November, when the new tuition rates were set? Ms. Woodbury explained the School asked for $31,000 at the STM. Ms. Dion explained money was moved from another line item for an aide to pay for the new aide. Ms. Woodbury added that education plans occur throughout the year. Mr. Goodrich answered he understands, “that’s why I’m not getting aggressive.” Ms. Woodbury reiterated the Schools asked for additional funding at STM because the tuition cap was lifted.
Mr. Ross stated he appreciated the budget forecasting. He added his overall concern that adding to the School budget brings us back to an unsustainable rate of increase. Mr. Hebert stated there have been 300 students added to the system in the last five years. He explained that the Schools incur costs for any children enrolled this year, but those children are not included in the NSS calculation until next year.
Mr. Fimognari asked about the student who exited in February, and the students listed “pending.” It was known the student was exiting and budgeted as such, and it is known the pending students will be in the School system this year. Mr. Fimognari then asked again why the budget was cut by $100,000, and the Schools now need an additional $90,000. Ms. Woodbury answered that the budget was based on the student population at the time, and it would not have been a true budget, nor would the School department have been able to justify that budget.
Mr. Goodrich stated he has said at School Committee Meetings, and will state again, he does not condone padding a budget with the intention of later shifting money around. However, he has a problem with receiving this information at a late date of April. Mr. Pennington asked if the SPED budget has increased yearly. Ms. Woodbury and Ms. Dion explained the student population changes yearly. Mr. Pennington stated the School should assume everything increases. Mr. Hebert mentioned that a couple years ago there was concern over having a “real budget.” School Committee members went over the budget “line by line” to provide the most accurate budget at the earliest time possible.
Mr. Carlin asked what next year’s SPED budget is, and how much of that is administrative. Next year’s budget is $1,848,223, based on current information; this year’s is $1,717,250. FY06 budget line 59 is $430,000. Mr. Margerison questioned $41,000 left in the budget last year when a teacher left, and he heard the School used it to give raises. Ms. Woodbury said she did not give raises.
Mr. Goodrich asked how many Guidance Counselors are at GVMS. Ms. Woodbury stated 1 ½. Mr. Goodrich asked if that other ½ position was there, would some of the SPED issues be caught earlier. Ms. Woodbury answered that without the additional ½ counselor, problems can escalate, but the addition would not ensure all problems would be corrected. Some cases are intense, and it is better for some students and their classmates for them to be in another placement.
Police Department FY05 Budget: Ms. Neggers explained to FinCom that 2 situations emerged with the Police salaries that will require the Selectmen placing a warrant seeking to transfer funds. The Chief’s contract was not renewed and he has submitted a resignation effective 4-15-05. His severance package consists of $38,814.36 plus $5,580.31 in accrued time. This number was originally expected to be approximately $13,700 higher, but the Chief has used considerable time lately.
An original budget error was made when the funds needed for the Quinn Bill for regular patrol were omitted. In addition, a Sergeant has been on medical leave since October and an Officer has been on injured leave intermittently since December. As the PD does not have many part-time officers, the department has been incurring over time costs in an effort to maintain two patrols on the street at all time. Monson has recouped $11,800 from the insurance company for the injured officer. In summary, the Police Department will need an additional $61,000 to $64,000. There is $62,500 in the Debt Services account that can be transferred to cover the majority of the amount. The amount is in Debt Services because the Rescue Truck was delivered so late in the year no payments were made, as the money
was not borrowed when expected.
Ms. Neggers explained the transfer request will be in the Town Warrant, and BOS hopes for a favorable recommendation.
Mr. Ross asked if there were any other anticipated problems FY05. Ms. Neggers answered there may be money needed for the purchase of utility products, but it can be taken care of with the Utility Reserve Fund.
Mr. Goodrich asked if a letter asking about the status of the SRO position had been sent to BOS. It has not. This led to a discussion of the SRO position.
Monson’s Student Resource Officer: Sergeant Kozloski addressed FinCom regarding the SRO. He explained three years ago Chief McKenzie applied to and received from the Department of Justice a three year grant to fund a Student Resource Officer. The terms of the grant state the recipient is required to fund the position for one full budget cycle upon the grant completion, which is August. Sergeant Kozloski asked the DOJ for waiver requirements. He believes Monson will not be able to meet waiver requirements right now.
Mr. Ross asked who is responsible for future planning when applying for grants, especially when town funding will be required. He expressed concern that the town’s employee roster could grow quickly. Ms. Neggers replied this is not the first time Monson has utilized federal funding; it is the third time the town has used federal money to increase the force. From those grants, the PD has retained one full time officer and some part time officers. Ms. Neggers stressed it is important to recognize the Police department is understaffed, with only twelve members including the Chief and the SRO, and the PD and BOS have made a commitment to increase the force. The PD relies heavily on part time personnel to fill staff needs, and these personnel are not as thoroughly trained or as readily
available. A policy geared toward increasing and maintaining the force has been discussed for many years. Ms. Neggers stated she believes “the town would be willing and able to pick up” the cost. She stressed it is almost impossible to man the PD 24 hours without incurring large over time costs, and the alternative is gaps in coverage.
Mr. Goodrich stated he personally has knowledge of the responsibilities of the SRO. He asked if those responsibilities would take a significant amount of time from a non-SRO officer in terms of legal reinforcement. Sergeant Kozloski explained that in addition to teaching, mentoring and counseling the SRO performs additional duties that are “unique to our area of expertise.” The School has not only grown accustomed to the SRO; the position has become necessary. The SRO handles a number of calls that would require the dispatch of an officer, and as the PD’s day shift also maintains court cases and performs administrative functions in addition to its patrol duties, the elimination of the SRO would greatly impact the remaining staff.
Ms. Neggers stated the SRO was in place in the years the force was heavy with part time positions funded by a grant. Mr. Goodrich agreed the position has had a positive impact on youth. Sergeant Kozloski added he has received a number of documents from school professionals who are passionate about maintaining the position. Mr. Margerison asked if the SRO is available to all schools – it is.
Officer Kristin Marciniec, SRO for 2 ½ years, addressed FinCom. She explained a large part of the position is prevention – walking the schools’ halls, patrolling the parking lots in the cruiser, all in order to maintain a uniformed presence. No other officer does this. During school time, she is able to respond to calls quickly because of her proximity. She stressed she “advocates for the position, not myself”, as she strongly believes in the importance of maintaining the position. Officer Marciniec believes the SRO is a “crucial part of today’s society and educational environment.”
Richard Guertin, Selectman, addressed FinCom. He explained that he supports the position, grant or no grant. He believes the benefits are the relationship the SRO has with the students, and especially the SRO’s ability to assist with issues that arise with Special Education students. He stated he adds his “personal support on the basis of what I know, that others don’t.”
Mr. Hebert explained that prior to having the SRO, there was significant vandalism to school property, significant behavior issues, and significant racial issues. The occurrence of the racial problems was the main reason for entertaining the idea, and bringing into the school, the SRO.
Kathleen Norbut, Selectman, addressed FinCom. She related she was the Health Coordinator for the district from 1995 to 1998, and during that time had a DARE officer as an adjunct to the curriculum. The SRO has allowed a full time position. She asked FinCom to remember that prevention is real, and the SRO provides a “positive and strong fiscal policy.” She added that juvenile crime is very real, and is happening, and the SRO has knowledge of case law that proves very helpful to the schools.
Mr. Carlin expressed the thought that FinCom needs to look at funding issues, not advocacy. He reiterated Pete Ross’ comment that FinCom needs to careful of funding recurring costs with Reserve Funds. The question remains – how do we fund it? Mr. Goodrich mentioned the waiver. Ms. Neggers said it is being researched. She said she had one concern, and asked FinCom to resist the temptation to “cherry pick” the SRO as a way of reducing the budget. Mr. Ross mentioned that the grant runs until August, meaning there is some additional money coming in from the grant in FY06 - $5,900 that was not included in the FY 06 budget calculation. Mr. Kaiser asked if the failure to fund the SRO means Monson must repay the grant. Ms. Neggers explained the federal government
won’t commit to any consequences in writing, but failure to fund the position may make Monson ineligible for other federal funding. She mentioned the current audit of COPS money, and explained Monson may be vulnerable on the part time grant because the PD has not retained all the part time personnel. Mr. Carlin asked if there is a position the BOS supports – an increase in the amount of Reserve Fund to use, or cuts in other departments? Ms. Neggers answered a combination, adding the BOS have identified as a priority our commitment to a long term PD plan.
Mr. Margerison asked if there is other grant money available that could be used. Sergeant Kozloski explained that in order to comply with the retention clause, the DOJ does not allow another grant to fund the position. Ms. Woodbury stated that FinCom needn’t fund $42,000, as the School department has committed to $20,000 in its NSS. The amount to fund is approximately $16,500 - $42,000 less the $20,000 less approximately $5,500.
Election Results: Ms. Morrell, Town Clerk, arrived to present the results of the election and announce the winners.
Selectman – Ed Harrison
School Committee – Kurt Kaiser
Park and Rec. – Mr. Braskie
Housing – Judy White
FY06 Budget: Mr. Carlin recapped the budget as it stands. FinCom agreed to use up to $480,000 of Free Cash. Last week’s worksheet, after recommended cuts, used $407,578 of Free Cash. PD salaries can be reduced to $714,098 because $5,900 is funded by the grant in FY06. Mr. Goodrich mentioned FinCom does not have much choice in funding the SRO. It appears Monson does not qualify for a waiver and faces the real possibility of repaying the grant. Mr. Pennington made a motion to fund the Police Department salaries at &714,098. Mr. Goodrich seconded it. Mr. Pennington mentioned that to not fund the SRO would be bad publicity for the town. Mr. Goodrich felt it would have an impact on the budget at some future time. Mr. Ross questioned where FinCom will
find the money. Mr. Ross and Ms. Edwards abstained; everyone else voted “yes.” The motion carries.
Preparation for April 11 meeting: Mr. Goodrich stated that FinCom needs to look again at some line items impacted by the preliminary decisions made at last week’s meeting, and expressed concern if the decisions made were fair “across the board.” He believes some departments misunderstood the level funding request. Mr. Ross added that, assuming the School will be funded an additional $90,000 and the SRO will be funded, less Free Cash will be available. Mr. Pennington mentioned that there are not many places to change, and it may be necessary to look at larger departments. He added FinCom agreed on an end number, but may not be able to reach that number unless more cuts are made. Mr. Ross informed FinCom they can not reduce the Assessor’s budget by the expected
$6,000, because the amount is needed in FY06 for the software service fee.
The committee agreed that they will decide at the April 11 meeting if they will need to meet the week of April 18. They plan to work on being closer to having a budget they will be able to present to department heads.
The next scheduled meeting of the Finance Committee is April 11, 2005 at 6:30 p.m. at the Town Accountant’s Office.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Ann M. Lee
Administrative Assistant to the Finance Committee
| 
