NOTTINGHAM BUDGET COMMITTEE MINUTES
DECEMBER 18, 2008
PUBLIC SESSION
APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE JANUARY 8, 2009
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Mr. John Decker, Chair Mr. Gene Reed (Excused)
Ms. Gail Powell Ms. Donna Danis (Excused)
Ms. Amy Plante, School Board Rep. Mr. Kyle Barry (Excused)
Mr. Peter Bock, BOS Representative
Mr. Scott Curry
Mr. Chet Batchelder
Ms. Charlene Andersen
Mr. Michael Koester
The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:05pm.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Mr. Curry made a motion to approve the Budget Committee minutes from the meeting of December 4, 2008. Mr. Batchelder seconded the motion.
The Committee had some discussion about the minutes and they made a few changes.
Mr. Bock asked what the procedure was for handling the questions that had been posed via email from a member of the public. Mr. Curry said that the questions needed to be answered in a public forum. He said that it would be up to the Budget Committee to decide which of the questions were relevant to their particular committee. Mr. Decker agreed that some of the questions posed would be better answered by other Boards and Committees in town. Ms. Powell asked if the Budget Committee should refer the resident to who should answer each question. Mr. Decker noted that the Budget Committee was always in a hurry because they were under time restraints. He asked whether they had the time to repeat themselves more than once. He also wondered whether it was the responsibility of the Budget Committee to take
the time to refer people with lengthy written questions to other committees. He said that the Budget Committee had a very open format and typically allowed the public to speak when they had questions. He said that the best time for people to ask questions was when they were listening to the information. He said that questions were often answered during meetings, not weeks later.
Mr. Curry made a motion to approve the Budget Committee minutes from the meeting of December 4, 2008 as amended. Mr. Koester seconded the motion. Mr. Curry, Mr. Koester, Mr. Bock, Mr. Batchelder, and Ms. Andersen voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Decker, Ms. Powell and Ms. Plante abstained from the motion. The motion passed 5-0 with 3 abstentions.
SCHOOL GROWTH:
Ms. Plante showed the Budget Committee a graph that she had done of the birth rate in Nottingham and the number of children who attended Kindergarten and 1st grade at Nottingham School. She said that in most cases the number of births had been fewer than the number of children who had enrolled in Kindergarten and she said that in all cases the number of children who had enrolled in 1st grade had been higher than the number that had enrolled in Kindergarten.
Ms. Plante said that the School Board did not have any measure of looking at the high school enrollment numbers for the long term. She said that they only had information about the high school enrollment numbers for the previous year and the current year as well as the proposed numbers for the next year.
SCHOOL BUDGET DISCUSSION:
Ms. Plante explained the information packet which had been provided to the Budget Committee. She said that it included a sheet of projected revenues, an overview of the major proposals for the 2009-2010 school budget, the numbers of staff and the estimated tax impact. She also explained which staff were not included in the graph she had given to the Budget Committee. She said that the number of staff which were not included equalled 2 1/5 plus a number of hours. Mr. Curry asked whether the budget being given to the Budget Committee was still the budget as the principal had proposed it. Ms. Plante said that the School Board had looked at it twice but she said that the prior night's meeting had been cancelled. She said that she did not have copies of the warrant articles for the Budget Committee to discuss
but she said that she could tell them what the School Board expected the warrant articles would be. She said that the budget was almost final but not completely final. Ms. Powell noted that the numbers seemed high for school board services and athletics. Ms. Plante said that the school board services numbers were high because they had put in money for counsel as they were scheduled to go into contract negotiations with staff. She noted that those costs were not included in the default budget. Mr. Curry asked why the default budget was ever higher than the proposed budget. Ms. Plante said that there were sometimes things that were in the default budget because they were not one time expenses but that they did not need in the current year proposed budget. Mr. Batchelder said that things like that being in the default budget were the prerogative of the School Board but he said that there was common sense to consider when making the decisions
of what would be included in the default budget. Ms. Plante said that the utilities costs in the default budget were based on the utilities costs for the current year. Mr. Bock asked whether the School Board had revisited their plan of giving certain staff members a 3.5% raise. Ms. Plante said no but she emphasized that the 3.5% would only apply to staff in a very few select positions who were not a part of a collective bargaining agreement.
Ms. Powell asked whether the tax impact would be based on a 9.73% increase. Ms. Plante said no. She said that the 9.73% number was calculated using only expenses and not revenues. Mr. Decker asked what the actual budget request was in the default budget. Mr. Koester said that it was the sum of the last two columns. Mr. Decker said that there needed to be a column for the total. He said that he would like to see a default column in the proposed budget instead of a column for non request and payroll. Ms. Plante said that the Interim Business Administrator had asked the Department of Revenue Administration and had been told that tuition reimbursements by parents should be a part of revenue. She said that she would ask whether that would apply to the current year or not. She said that the
revenue projections were based on food service numbers, catastrophic and building aid grant projection numbers and a projected fund balance. Mr. Curry asked how the aid was calculated. Mr. Batchelder said that there was a formula. He said that it could be found on the state website. Ms. Plante noted that the amount of aid to Northwood had decreased and the amount of aid to Nottingham had increased.
Ms. Plante said that there was the possibility of an increase of 27 high school students for the next year. She said that a small class had graduated and they had a large class of 8th graders who would be Freshmen. She said that they were trying to budget for a 3.5-4% tuition increase at Coe-Brown and a 5% tuition increase for Dover High School. She noted that those numbers were simply estimates. Mr. Decker asked if they had received a not to exceed number for tuition increases. Ms. Plante said that they usually got one but she was not sure that it had been finalized yet. She also noted that it was only a very small number of students, about 13 who went to other schools besides Dover High School or Coe-Brown.
Ms. Powell asked about the warrant articles. Ms. Plante said that she did not have them but that the School Board intended to keep asking people to contribute to the two capital reserve funds. She said that they were also considering putting an article on the warrant about irrigation of their soccer field. She said that the School Board was also having a discussion about putting some money for their Building Committee on the warrant article. Mr. Batchelder noted that the tuition for the other schools had been calculated using an average of the tuition numbers for Coe-Brown and Dover High School. Ms. Plante said that the field irrigation costs had been pulled out of the proposed budget. She said that they had added the costs of one regular education paraprofessional for each Kindergarten class to help the
teacher. She said that was based on the projected number of Kindergarten students. She said that if the projected number of students did not materialize then they would not hire the regular education paraprofessionals. Mr. Curry asked if it was the goal of the School Board to get the projected increase down from 9% to 6%. Ms. Plante said that she did not know. Mr. Curry asked Ms. Plante if she personally thought that would be a realistic goal. Ms. Plante said no. She said that there were more high school students, another Special Education teacher and more paraprofessionals in the proposed budget. She said that she did not think it could be reduced by as much as 3%. Mr. Curry asked whether Ms. Plante could talk to the School Board about whether they had a goal by which the budget could be reduced. Ms. Plante said yes.
Mr. Decker said that he thought the School District Budget Public Hearing should be moved to January 15, 2009. He said that would open Thursday night January 8, 2009 for a Budget Committee final review of the school budget. He said that Budget Committee members with questions before the final review should submit them to Ms. Plante. Ms. Plante said that she would meet with the Business Administrator and ask the questions so she would be prepared to answer them at the final review. Mr. Decker said that questions should be submitted to Ms. Plante before the opening of business on January 5, 2009. He noted that the Budget Committee should not be seeing major changes to the school budget at their final review.
Ms. Plante noted that nothing had been submitted to the School Board by petition for the ballot. She also said that the School Board wanted to try again to have their Deliberative Session on a week night. She said that they were looking to have the Deliberative Session on Wednesday February 4, 2009 and they wanted to have the snow date be February 7, 2009.
Mr. Decker said that the Budget Committee public hearing on the town budget would be held on February 5, 2009 and the snow date would be on February 12, 2009.
The Budget Committee Secretary asked about a snow date for the School District Budget Public Hearing. Mr. Decker said that since the last date the hearing could be held was January 20, 2009, they would plan the snow date for Monday January 19, 2009.
Mr. Decker said that the Budget Committee needed to have a total column on the school default budget and they would like to get the MS27 spreadsheet on the school default budget by Christmas.
RSA 32:5,V-a:
Mr. Koester said that he would like to revisit the Budget Committee discussion on the warrant article which would allow them to post their vote tallies on the warrant. Mr. Bock said that he had asked the Town Administrator to talk to the attorney about that proposal. He said that he was not sure whether he had gotten back any information from the attorney on that yet. Ms. Plante said that she had given the information about that proposal to the Superintendent. She said that she had not heard back about it.
DEFAULT BUDGET RSA 40:14-b:
Mr. Decker said that he would like to continue discussion about the RSA which would allow the Budget Committee to make decisions on the school default budget. Mr. Batchelder asked whether it would make sense for the Budget Committee to put the kind of time in that would be required for that. He asked whether the committee knew what they would be taking on. Mr. Decker said that if the people voted in favor of this RSA, the Budget Committee would be responsible for the default budget so the SAU would have to give them the necessary information. He said that he felt the Budget Committee could put together the default budget over the summer. He said that he was in favor of putting this RSA on the ballot for the voters. Ms. Plante said that the SAU divided their time between three districts so they were very
busy. She also said that she was not sure that the default budget could be put together as early as the summer. She also questioned whether the audit would be done in time for the default budget to be put together early. Mr. Koester asked how the voters would know about this issue before they saw it on the ballot. Mr. Decker said that the Budget Committee could present it at the Deliberative Session. Mr. Koester noted that the Deliberative Session was not usually well attended. Ms. Powell said that if the Budget Committee was really serious about this question and they were passionately in favor of it than they should advertise that to the voters. Mr. Decker noted that the Budget Committee did not have a budget for that. Ms. Andersen said that the Budget Committee should look at using existing publications. Mr. Decker said that the School Board paid for publications sent by the School District so what went into them was at the
discretion of the School Board but he agreed that the town newsletter was available. He said that the Budget Committee could go to a meeting of the School Board and ask to be included in their in their publications.
Mr. Curry made a motion that the Budget Committee request to the School Board that they put the adoption of RSA 40:14-b on their ballot as a warrant article. Ms. Powell seconded the motion.
Mr. Koester said that he was in favor of the Budget Committee taking on this responsibility. He said that he thought they could get it done during September and October while they were waiting for other information. Mr. Curry said that he was concerned about the expertise of the Budget Committee members on this. He said that he was also concerned that the committee might still not get the information they wanted from the SAU and then they would be forced to make a decision on the default budget in a hurry without having all the information. He said that he also was concerned that the Budget Committee might not know the rationales of the School Board in regards to keeping certain line items in the default budget or in regards to how much money was in certain lines of the default budget. Mr. Koester said that he
saw the responsibility for the default budget as a collaborative effort between the School Board and the Budget Committee. He said that he thought the Budget Committee should present their default budget to the School Board for review just as the current system asked the School Board to present their default budget to the Budget Committee for review. Ms. Andersen said that she liked the idea of there being a joint meeting between the School Board and the Budget Committee to discuss this. She said that she was trying to imagine how things would work differently if this change were made. Mr. Koester said that he would suggest if the Budget Committee were putting together a default budget they should start with the passed budget and go line by line. Ms. Andersen asked if this would create another layer of development. Mr. Decker said that he thought the Budget Committee should communicate directly with the School Board on this. Ms. Powell said
that taking on this responsibility would give the Budget Committee a tighter understanding of whether the taxpayer money was being spent properly. Mr. Decker said that he thought the Budget Committee needed more insight into the default budget process. Mr. Curry asked whether this change would allow the Budget Committee to have that and he asked how that would happen. Ms. Andersen said that she thought the Budget Committee should have sat down and talked with the School Board about this proposal months ago. Mr. Batchelder noted that the Budget Committee was always pressed for time and that this proposal would add to their work load. Ms. Powell asked whether the Budget Committee would be helpful by taking on this responsibility. Ms. Plante said that she thought there should be a budget workshop to help answer questions from the Budget Committee about the default budget process. She said that would help everyone understand the budget better. She said that she did not know how
much time it would take to put the default budget together. She noted that the School Board did not actually put it together. She said that the SAU put the default budget together and gave it to the School Board. She said that she did not know if they could get it done any earlier than they got it to the School Board. She said that it might be better for the Budget Committee if the default budget information included more details. Mr. Koester said that he would like to apply the experience of the Budget Committee to the default budget. He said that he hated that the numbers for the default budget and the proposed budget were often so close together.
Ms. Powell, Mr. Koester and Mr. Decker voted in favor of the motion to ask the School Board to include the adoption of RSA 40:14-b on their ballot as a warrant article question. Ms. Andersen, Mr. Curry, Ms. Plante, Mr. Bock and Mr. Batchelder voted against the motion. The motion was defeated 5-3.
Mr. Curry said that he would like to keep discussing this proposal in the spring. He said that he did not think the Budget Committee should hurry to get it done this year. Mr. Batchelder said that he did not oppose the idea in general but he wanted to have more information on it. He said that he liked the idea of a workshop. Mr. Koester said that he agreed the School Board needed to be a part of this discussion but he noted that the Budget Committee had been discussing this proposal for a month and a half. Mr. Decker said that the Budget Committee had been asking the School Board and the SAU the same questions about the default budget for years. Mr. Batchelder said that the Budget Committee would like to request from the School Board the methodology they used for the default budget and how they got their
equations. He said that the Budget Committee would also like brief descriptions with the items in the default budget answering such questions as were they one time expenses, did the School Board make any changes to them, etc. He said that he thought the Budget Committee should put this request in writing to the School Board. Mr. Koester said that he had asked for a copy of a draft of the default budget at a School Board meeting in September. He said that he had been told that he could not have one because the numbers would be too far off. He said that was how budgeting worked, the numbers were not always accurate. Mr. Decker said that the Budget Committee would not be looking for the final numbers during the summer months. He said that they would be looking for the methodology and trying to answer questions such as how something was determined to be a one time expense.
OTHER:
Ms. Andersen said that she wanted to make new members of the Budget Committee aware that there was a form which could be filled out when they had questions or wanted to make an information request of a town or school district official. She said that a process had been devised for that purpose. She said that she did have copies of the form if anyone would like them.
Mr. Curry said that he had grown up in a town which had been somewhat similar to Nottingham. He said that this town had put into place policies which had effectively driven out people who had lived in the town for years. He said that he had vowed not to be one of the people who would let that happen in Nottingham. He said that he was concerned about expenses. He noted that the economy was very bad. He said that he would like to propose some sort of tax discount for people who had lived in town a long time and wanted to stay. Mr. Decker said that was what impact fees had supposed to have been used for. Mr. Curry said that he was looking for some feedback on his idea. Mr. Decker said that he did not know if implementing the idea would be legal. Ms. Powell said that the town needed some sort
of emergency fund to deal with environmental crises like floods and ice storms. She said that those things would keep happening. Mr. Decker said that there was a mechanism in place to deal with those crises. Ms. Andersen noted that Nottingham did have tax breaks for the elderly, the disabled and veterans. Mr. Batchelder said that there was an attempt currently going through the legislature which proposed to eliminate property taxes for those people over 85 years of age. Mr. Decker noted that New Hampshire was a state with a single tax base system. He said that there were positives and negatives to everything including that system. Mr. Bock said that one of the most important parts of being on the Board of Selectmen was helping people who were in need. He said that there were two or three groups of very different residents who were trying to come to terms with each other in the Nottingham community. He said that the use of the
food pantry had increased among residents in these difficult economic times. Mr. Batchelder noted that in the past the Budget Committee had been very understanding of the needs of the school district when they had evaluated the proposed school budgets. He wondered whether it was time for the Budget Committee to recommend slashing the school budget. He said that these economic times were tough for people, other governments were cutting back and he said that if the School District didn't spend the money, they would not need to raise it.
Mr. Decker suggested that the Budget Committee meet with the remaining town department heads on January 22, 2009. He also suggested that they do their final review of the town budget on January 29, 2009. He said that the Budget Committee public hearing on the town budget was scheduled for February 5, 2009. Mr. Bock said that he would discuss those dates with the Town Administrator.
Mr. Koester made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:00pm. Ms. Andersen seconded the motion. The present members of the Budget Committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 8-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Kelly Tivnan
Budget Committee Secretary
| 
