(2/15/07)  The Select Board met Monday, February 12th.  Anne Awad, Robie Hubley, Rob Kusner, Gerry Weiss and Hwei-Ling Greeney were all in attendance, as was Town Manager Larry Shaffer.

Ms. Awad opened the meeting with the public comment period.

Vince O'Connor, a member of the Public Works Committee, requested that the Select Board consider the committee's charge in the near future.  He expressed concern about the placement of street lights, particularly in dark areas with side streets, including Pelham Road and East Pleasant Street near Sheerman Lane. He said that the Town can't afford to turn on all the street lights unless Amherst College pays for it, as he said they've done for College Street.  He said that the Town could be more judicious in the placement of lights, which he said could save money, and that the lack of lights creates a dangerous situation when drivers are looking for, or emerging from, side streets.  He wanted the committee's charge expanded to include street light placement and said that with the new members, the committee was capable of taking this on.  He also wanted to address issues of concern on Pelham Road, including the need for sidewalk re-surfacing, but particularly the fact that many homes on the north side of the street have their mail boxes on the south side.  He said that the high speed and high traffic volume made crossing to get mail unsafe, and said that people have died in similar situations on Montague Road and Russellville Road.  He said that he hoped the Select Board would address this issue with the Postmaster or authorize the Town Manager to do so. 

Ms. Awad said that in the past, the Select Board had used a decision-making tree for determining street light locations and that it would be good to look at that again.  Mr. O'Connor requested that the document be referred to the Public Works committee. 

Ms. Awad said the Town could begin a discussion with the Post Office for all those boxes, but that residents could also make written requests to the Postmaster expressing concern about having their mail boxes across the street from their homes. 

Mr. Shaffer said he agreed about the lighting issues, and that he was “stunned by how little lighting there is” in this community when he arrived here.  He expressed particular concern for the lack of lighting by the Amity lot and the library, given how many people cross the street there.  He said he would ask Public Works to look at that.

Ms. Awad asked Mr. Shaffer to track down the street light prioritization list she had referenced, and he said he would.  She said that it had been a good list, and was based on safety considerations.  She recalled that cul-de-sacs had been prioritized for lights, but then residents of cul-de-sacs would say they didn't want lights.  Ms. Awad sought Eva Schiffer's recollection of the document, and Ms. Schiffer said that cul-de-sacs as well as intersections had been prioritized.  Ms. Awad said that some of the darkness of the town is by choice, because the community values dark skies, and the Town now seeks lights that only project downward.  Ms. Greeney mentioned another dark and difficult crosswalk, near St. Brigid's church.

Mr. O'Connor said he urged the board to refer the old document to the Public Works Committee and ask them to review it and report back to the Select Board, and said that would give the committee the Select Board's authority to make recommendations back to that body.

Walter Wolnik, a member of the Cable Advisory Committee, accompanied by members Carlton Brose and Mary Jane Laus, spoke about his concerns and dissatisfaction with the manner in which the Town's contract negotiations with ACTV have proceeded.  He said that in September, that committee had agreed that the Town Manager would conduct the contract negotiations and the committee would advise him, and the following month the committee created a draft contract for the Town Manager to use as a starting point.  He said the committee lost several members and was no longer able to achieve a quorum, and that he made multiple requests for new members so that the committee could advise on the ACTV contract and prepare for other cable marketplace activity.  He said that in January he asked again for new members, and learned from people within ACTV that a contract would soon be signed.  He said he asked for a copy, and had unpleasant dealings with an ACTV board member who didn't want him to get involved.  He said he was dismayed to read recently in the paper that a contract was to have been signed last week without any involvement by the committee, which would have only needed one member to achieve a quorum.  He said he supports the Town Manager and that attention should be paid “to the political environment in which all of us here have to operate.”  He said that whether or not a contract has been signed, the remaining committee members intend to review it and issue a report as if they had been asked to do so, and that they anticipate bringing that report to the Select Board in the future.

Ms. Awad said that the Cable Advisory Committee is a Town Manager appointment, and the committee's charge is to advise the Town Manager and help with the Comcast relationship, not to have oversight of ACTV.  She said that the Town Manager deals with contracts, and for the committee to be involved is a reasonable request but is at his discretion.  Mr. Wolnik said there is precedent for the involvement and that language in the charge says that the committee deals with cable television in general, and is not restricted to the cable operator.  He said the previous contract contained provisions for performance hearings with respect to ACTV, and Ms. Awad said the details couldn't be debated at this meeting, and that what he was referencing was a proposal to the previous Town Manager, but was not necessarily a practice. 

Mr. Shaffer said he appreciated the Cable Advisory Committee's work on the Comcast contract and the draft ACTV contract.  He said all contract negotiations require give and take, and that the ACTV contract hasn't been signed yet but is an “agreement in principle.”  He said new features of it include all capital funds staying with the Town until ACTV makes capital acquisitions; ACTV will use Town purchasing requests; and its equipment will be marked and insured as Town inventory.  He said the contract guarantees ACTV coverage of certain boards and committees, with provisions for others to apply to be filmed as well.  He said the contract is not identical to the one drafted by the committee, but meets its spirit.  He said that contract development and execution is the Town Manager's responsibility and he doesn't intend to give that up.

Mr. Kusner asked if the contract is a public document, and wanted to make sure that Mr. Wolnik has a copy.  Mr. Shaffer said it is always available.  Mr. Wolnik said he had been told by Town staff that he could have a copy after it's been signed.  Mr. Kusner said it is tough to have up-to-date versions available when negotiations are going on, but asked if there might be a way to do that and Mr. Shaffer said yes.

Discussion of Budget and Override Options

Ms. Awad introduced the budget and override discussion by asking people to please listen respectfully to each other, and emphasized that after members of the public spoke, the Select Board members needed time to talk among themselves.

Richard Hood gave the Select Board a handout with a proposed ballot question with two parts to it, one for a $2.5 million override and one for a $3.25 million override.  He said that $2.5 million is the amount used in the Finance Committee's three year plan and includes 3% budget growth in FY08, rather than the 1% allowed with no override.  He said that at 3% growth, that allows for roughly half the cuts required at 1%.  He said that the $3.25 million amount reduces those required cuts by a third.  He urged them to place the override question on the March 27th ballot.  He asked each Select Board member and the Town Manager to answer the following questions:  1) Do you believe an override is necessary for FY08?  If so, but not for the March 27th ballot, why?  If not, is that because you believe the Town can live with a 1% budget increase in FY08?   2) Last spring's non-binding ballot referendum had the majority voting for a combination plan of an override and spending cuts.  Do you believe the Finance Committee's proposal is such a plan? 3) Some think March 27th is too soon for an override vote, but recommend that it occur before Town Meeting.  What specific new information do you expect to learn in the 34 days between March 27th and the beginning of Town Meeting, and is that extra information worth the $12,000 cost of holding a special election?  Is it more fair to have the vote during a general election which has higher voter turnout?

Elena Rossen said she is a senior at the High School.  She said she thought putting the question on the ballot was the most democratic way of deciding about an override.  She said that she is a musician and feared cuts to the valuable arts programs and the loss of talented and inspirational teachers.  She spoke of Mr. Messier, one of her teachers, whom she praised highly, and told of the Town's good luck to have him in light of his other attractive career options.  She reiterated Mr. Hood's points about the desirability of the March ballot and the question of whether a later date would be worth the additional special election costs.

Karly Domb Sadoff said she is a senior at the High School and that she collected almost 300 signatures in one day from students for a petition supporting a March ballot.  She said that unlike the Select Board, she's gone to the High School every day – “almost every day” – for four years, and knows that it needs more money, not more cuts.  Mr. Kusner and Ms. Awad both praised her hard work in collecting the signatures, and Ms. Awad urged the 18-year olds to vote.

Kevin Mepham said he was back for his second Select Board meeting, and had been reflecting on the last one.  He described the situation as a structural budget issue involving two levers – service cuts and property tax increases.  He said the result is a zero-sum game, with people who can't afford either outcome.  He said it was important to find other options so we don't face the same scenario again at the end of an override period, if one should pass.  He recommended pursuing economic development and asked if there were State measures citizens should be pushing for, such as the ability to buy into the State health care system.  He suggested that having some of these things to talk about as yielding future benefits would “help the tenor of the discussion,” so people could know that we were actively taking steps to avoid the same situation again in a few years.

Carol Moskowitz asked for clarification of how an override works.  She said that she understood that a one year override would add that amount to the tax base permanently, and wanted to know what happens with a three year override.  Ms. Awad said she believed it meant that the override amount would be added to the tax base this year, next year and the year after, and the Town wouldn't seek another override during that period, and said it is complicated because it involves a commitment by Town boards not to spend beyond certain fixed increases during that time.   Ms. Moskowitz asked if the full amount of the three year override would become permanent.  Ms. Awad said that if a $2.5 million override were to pass, $2.5 million would be added in year one and become permanent, and in year two and become permanent, and she was then corrected.  Alice Carlozzi, Chair of the Finance Committee, said a general override of this sort would add $2.5 million to the levy permanently, and that next year the allowed 2.5% increase would apply to that new levy total.  Mr. Kusner said the term of the override refers to how long the override money will keep us in the black, given current spending patterns.  He said that without new revenue source or significant new adjustments or cuts, we may need another override at the end of the proposed override period.

Mr. Weiss asked if it's true that a $2 million override in FY08 would cost tax payers more and yield more income for the Town than would a $1 million override in both FY08 and FY09.  John Musante, Finance Director, said that if you had a total of $2 million in overrides over 3 years and it was split so that only $1 million was collected the first year, that would result in less taxes collected overall because only $1 million was collected in the first year. He said there is a also the cumulative impact of being able to increase the levy limit by up to 2.5% each year, so splitting it loses that portion of the extra allowable taxation as well.  Mr. Shaffer said the difference of the multi-year versus recurring overrides is that linked to the multi-year plan is the sense that the different budgeting bodies will adhere to specific spending restraints and develop sustainable budget plans within those restraints for that time period.  He said that is very different than typical local government budget practices, and it lets the Town operate from a fixed position for three years while putting other assets in place to help build out beyond the three year period.

Ms. Greeney said the information she would find most helpful that she hasn't received yet is the actual amount the average house in Amherst would have to pay.  She asked for verification that in FY08 the average house valued at $330,000 would pay $5200 plus $400 for the override plus a 2.5% increase, which she said amounted to $5200 plus $600.  She asked if that was true and if so, what would the figures be for FY09 and FY10.  Ms. Awad asked if she could defer those questions while more public comment was heard, and she agreed.

Kate Troast said she is a Town Meeting representative and has two kids.  She said that she favors the three year override.  She said she understands that it will be difficult for many to pay more taxes but she is concerned about the quality of the schools, both for the kids and for maintaining high property values.  She said she's willing to pay higher taxes in order to have good schools and services.  She said she is optimistic about economic development potential and suggested that some nice chain stores could add to our downtown and that pursuing economic development and having a lovely town need not be mutually exclusive.  She thought such economic development would likely take three years to establish, and said that for now, we need a “stop-gap.” She said she's willing to attend Select Board meetings year-round, not just during budget season, if the Select Board is willing to commit to working on economic development year-round, and she said “I think we're all going to have to work overtime.”  She asked about the status of the five-year projection that was requested by Town Meeting last year.

Ms. Awad said all the Select Board members work overtime 52-weeks a year and said that they have been serious with economic development, citing the Tax Incentive Financing (TIF) for Atkins and Cushman Market, and what she termed “abstract help” for the cinema, which she said took a lot of actions through Town Meeting and the Town's Building Department.  She said low-profile work is being done all the time and that no one is proposing big-box stores for Amherst but rather, building up the downtown and village centers with appropriate businesses for this town.

Mr. Hubley said that Mr. Musante does five-year projections and they are readily accessible.  Ms. Awad said she thought that the Town Meeting article was an expression of interest in looking at those, and that they can be put on the web site.  She said that Mr. Musante's 5-year projections were helpful and an improvement over year-to-year planning.   Mr. Hubley suggested that the Town needs more entrepreneurs and that if people come to the Select Board with projects like Atkins, the cinema or the Cushman Market, they will be warmly welcomed. 

Mr. O'Connor said he appreciated the board's comments about economic development, and then repeated what he said at the February 5th Select Board meeting:  to make the $3.3 million deficit go away would require duplicating the entire commercial tax base of Amherst.  He said that even $300,000 of income would require $20 million of development, which he said is the equivalent of one of the proposed malls in Hadley.  He said that there is no place in the village center districts to put $220 million of assessed value unless there were to be wholesale demolition.  He said that Amherst's real tax base is the colleges and University, and it's time for them to pay their fair share.  He said we don't pave their streets and they have their own police, but we provide the entirety of their fire and EMS protection, and they need to pay their fair share.  He said that they pay for their water and sewer use, and that this wouldn't be a new policy to collect a fee for the services the town provides, and has been providing for free for a long time.   He said that while he is in favor of economic projections, it should be clear to anyone paying attention to the economics of the region or the world that an override won't stop a slide in housing values.  He said we can do that by taking the two schools that are on the MCAS list off of that list, and that that would be a more effective way of protecting property values.  He said it is easy to make projections about spending, but that the Federal Reserve and short term interest rates can't be predicted.  He said capital spending could be predicted, but not income, and he said much depends on the state and federal governments and on the state of the economy.  He said the new governor will have the State headed in a new direction, and he said that as much as he's in favor of an override to help this year, he finds it “profoundly unwise” to go with a three-year plan.  He said the State doesn't project out three years so we shouldn't either.  He said let's stick to this year, let's see what happens with this Governor and the policies of a democratic governor and legislature, and see if we can make changes that will have long-term effect for Amherst and all other Massachusetts communities.

Alan Root said a moderately-sized override might be needed but said he thinks it's unwise to draw any conclusions on that amount before hearing more from the new Governor and his budget proposal expected February 21st,  and said the Governor was elected based on his different views of the burden imposed by property taxes.  He said that growing up in the depression era, people lived within their means and said he's not hearing that idea from anyone.  He said that until that is accepted as a realistic goal, we will accumulate more debt and make things worse for children.  He said he hopes the Select Board will wait for the Governor's budget and see what key legislative committees are signaling in regards to property taxes, and he said he doesn't expect we'd have to wait long.  He said we need to deal with the future of the town in a responsible and sustainable way.

Mindy Domb said she urged putting the override question on the March ballot, and urged its passage.  She spoke to the value of the schools and said that they are a form of economic development because they help attract businesses, and that people buy homes in communities with good schools.  She said that though there are not music and art MCAS exams, those programs affect all subjects students are tested on, because they teach discipline, practice, risk-taking, and correcting mistakes.  She praised Amherst's music and arts programs and contrasted them with the inadequate ones her children had in another town.  She said that music and art are the kinds of programs typically cut in conservative governments, and that she expects more in Amherst.  She asked the Select Board to consider not just that we should live within our means, but to be generous and realistic about what those means should be.

Joshua Wolfson [name may be wrong] said he is a student at the Middle School.  He said the kids there have talked a lot about  the budget news and are worried about the cuts.  He said Amherst schools are among the better schools nationwide, and cuts to music and drama would result in kids not receiving as rich of an education.  He said these subjects represent passions for many students, and are their only opportunities to pursue them. 

Eric Nazar said he is an alumnus of the High School and a candidate for Town Meeting.  He said he had a petition signed by 268 alumni of the High School, and said many are Amherst residents and all support an override on the March ballot.  He said those who signed were shocked and outraged by the proposed cuts.  He said that schools don't just provide services for students; they also provide space for leisure services programs and don't charge fees for that space, which he said would amount to hundreds or thousands of dollars otherwise.  He said that regarding the notion of the town living within its means, that much of the problems in the school budget result from increases in heath insurance costs and decreases in state revenue.  He said that when our means are dictated by insurance companies and state and federal government, that requires exceptional action by citizens and local government to save programs and institutions we care about. 

Ms. Moskowitz said that the community is full of very involved and highly-educated people who could be used as volunteers, if the schools welcomed that.  She said volunteers could put together programs that could add to the curriculum, and said that community volunteers haven't been used appropriately.  She said that she has Masters degrees in teaching and public health and thinks she could add to the curriculum in many ways. She said she also thinks the schools should charge facility fees.

Ms. Carlozzi said the Finance Committee had voted to recommend a $2.5 million override as part of a three year financial management plan.  She said they had considered scenarios including no override, which she said was rejected because of the damaging cuts that would be required to the schools and town services.  She said that a one year $1.5 million override was considered, but provided no opportunity for forward planning and would require seeking million dollar overrides next year and the year after.  She said that a five year plan was seriously considered but ultimately rejected because it would need to be very large and there was too much uncertainty in years four and five.  She said that they decided on a three year plan that limits budget growth to 3% above FY07, which still requires serious reductions to the Town, schools and libraries, and plans for 5.5% budget growth for the next two years.  She said that would be enough to prevent some key cuts in FY08 and should be coupled with: controlled spending, seeking new funds from the colleges and University, encouraging legislative actions that help communities expand their revenue base, and increased assistance for tax payers.  She said there is no expectation of significant new revenue from those source for FY08 because such changes take time.  She said the three year plan gives Town officials the opportunity to concentrate on economic development instead of spending so much time each year cutting the budget.  She said the three year plan was a very reasonable time and could work well for the Town.

Mr. Kusner thanked everyone for coming out and said he had written several pages of notes listing good new ideas.  He asked about the Finance Committee's recommendation for timing of an override vote.  He said the three year plan requires a big chunk up front in order to draw from that reserve later, and said that in three years another big increase might be needed.  He asked if it might be possible with one vote to authorize three smaller steps that would have the same end result, and said that three smaller steps might be less painful and more equitable, and that during that time some new people would move to town while others will leave.  He said the multi-step approach might be less drastic.

Ms. Carlozzi said the Finance Committee didn't make a recommendation about the timing of the ballot question because they felt it was a political decision that was up to the Select Board to evaluate.  She said some thought that to have it later than March would allow for more State budget information and still be before Town Meeting's budget deliberations.  She said the committee took no formal vote. 

Mr. Musante said an override of any amount authorizes the Town to increase the levy limit, but that it is within the Town's judgment to decide whether it will seek to collect that whole amount in taxes.  He said that after the FY05 $2 million override, additional lottery aid became available and the Town chose to only collect $1.6 million of the new levy amount.  He said you can place the larger amount on the ballot and choose not to levy to the full amount, and said the downside is you don't collect that extra money.

Mr. Kusner asked if passing the larger override and not levying the full amount is something the voters would have to just hope for, or could they authorize specific increases in the levy for the future with one vote this year, and if that could be binding.

Mr. Musante said the vote couldn't bind a future action of Town Meeting and the same is true for the spending guidelines.  He said in order for the three year plan to succeed, it requires the cooperation of different boards.

Mr. Hubley asked if the question could allow for an override of a certain amount by a certain date, and another amount by another date, and constrain future boards in order to achieve what Mr. Kusner is suggesting.

Mr. Musante said he wasn't aware of such a ballot question by other towns, and said it might make the override more palatable.

Mr. Shaffer said he would be happy to seek Town Counsel's opinion on that question.  He said that a three year $2.5 million override raises $7.5 million over that period.  He said that if you only raise $1 million this year, that requires raising more in years two and three to get to $7.5 million.  He said there are different ways of dividing that sum up, but at the end of three years, you still will need to have collected the full $7.5 million to make the spending plan work.

Mr. Hubley compared it to purchasing a house and the option to pay for it all up front or pay over time.  He said much of the override fear is that you have a $7 million override now, and another $2 million might be needed in three years.  He spoke approvingly of a plan that would lay out multi-year details in a single question and get voted once, where voters would know what they would pay each year, and then would require action by Town Meeting in order to change it.  He said he isn't recommending this idea but wants to know all the options available, likening them to tools in a toolbox.

Mr. Weiss said he thought the discussion should back up a bit.  He said the first question should be whether or not to put an override on the March ballot.  After that is decided, he suggested the time period – one, two or three years – should be addressed.  He said he is in agreement with the Finance Committee's numbers, though he said he did his own calculations and thinks the Town portion of the budget can be reduced by $150,000. [Corrected 2/18.  Had erroneously read "$1.5 million."] He said he is thinking of all the residents and voters, and that few show up for a meeting like this one to say they are adamantly opposed to an override, because he said that would take guts to do.  He said he doesn't believe any override amount is guaranteed to pass in March or in May, and that the plan for the override must be sound and respect all voters by demonstrating that every angle has been considered.  He said if they only needed to consider the people at the meeting, it would be easy to support a March 27th ballot question.  He said the question should be how to set the override up for its best chance of success.  

Ms. Greeney agreed with Mr. Weiss' sentiments about showing respect for the voters and asked her original question about he cost of the override each year for the owner of an average home.

Mr. Musante said he would try to answer that question, with a word of caution because the details become more complicated in subsequent years.  He said that the average house assessment is $330,900 and the override would mean an increase of $1.22 per thousand dollars of assessed value, for a $404 increase.  He said that proposition 2 ½ also allows the levy limit to increase by 2 ½% per year, plus new growth.  He said the tax bill on a home with the average assessed value is $5,189.  With the override, that would add $404, plus $140 for allowable 2 ½% increase for FY08.  He said the chart in the override report shows that future tax bills would be impacted differently in the out years depending on factors like how an individual house is valued versus the average, and because new growth spreads the tax burden over a larger base.  He said there is $42 million of new growth in FY07, and that new growth fluctuates, but averages a little over 2% per year.  He said the Finance Committee's report deliberately chose to make no assumptions about new growth.

Mr. Weiss wanted clarification on new growth, and asked if it was true that the impact of new growth is that taxes go up.  Mr. Musante said it is the levy that increases by the amount of new growth.  Mr. Shaffer said that if you were going to raise $2.5 million in levy each year, this year's tax base would be fixed.  He said that next year, if the tax base grows by 2 ½%, then the $2.5 million levy is distributed over a larger base  He said it wouldn't be fair to say that the same people who are sharing the burden of the levy this year would be sharing it next year; the base will presumably grow.

Ms. Greeney said the explanations were too abstract and complicated and that she didn't want to understand how the numbers were derived, but rather wanted to understand what the impact would be.  She said that she understands that new growth isn't factored in and  she understands that it is the levy and not the average household taxes that grow by 2.5%, and that the average household taxes can grow by 10%.  She said she wanted to know what is the historic trend for tax increases for the average homeowner. 

Ms. Awad said that if someone has a 10% increase in their tax bill, that would be due to a reassessment.  Ms. Greeney said she wanted all of these details factored in to a projection of the increases for an average homeowner.

Mr. Kusner said he thinks that what Ms. Greeney was addressing was that anecdotally, it appears that there have been larger increase in the assessed values of the average house, which he said would tend to be would tend to be smaller houses, and that the increase to larger houses hasn't been as great.  He returned to his point about a stepped increase, which he compared to being a fish ladder rather than a dam.  He said that belt-tightening and new revenues from the colleges and University were needed, along with increased State aid, but that an override was probably needed, because the reality is that inflation is greater than 2 ½%.  He said that not only does the amount of an override need to be determined, but also the issues of the shape and form it will take, so that is it something that can pass and that consensus can be built around.  He said he would be equally upset for an override measure to pass or fail by a small number of votes, and that it isn't just about timing, information and negotiating with employees, but that it's about what people will strongly support.  He said many in the room had concerns about their ability to stay in Amherst, and that different ideas were needed to find a way out of the zero sum game.

Ms. Awad requested that the discussion focus on: if the members think an override is needed; whether or not they think it is, if the question should be put on the ballot out of respect for the voters; and if so, the timing of that.

Mr. Hubley spoke of uncertainties of the Governor's budget, repeated his points from last week about the budget dictating the override, not the other way around, and that presenting Town Meeting with an extra $7 million would result in that body spending it.  He said more discussion is needed on cuts and spending, and that March 27th isn't enough time to determine if an override is needed and for how much.

Mr. Kusner spoke of the competing passions of all the concerned parties, and the negative outcomes faced on all sides.  He spoke of not wanting negotiations to take place and decisions to be made under a “Sword of Damocles,” where programs, teachers and student opportunities are threatened, but that budget discussion should reflect trying to keep programs going, and not be used in a way that scares people off.  He said more time is needed to understand possible structures for an override and learn more about the State budget information and progress on other fronts, and didn't think March 27th allowed enough time for all that.

Mr. Weiss reiterated concerns about the State budget information and the state of discussions with the university.  He asked the Town Manager when he expected to know more from UMass, and he asked School Superintendent Jere Hochman about the differences of having an override pass on March 27th versus May 1st. 

Mr. Shaffer said he sent a proposal to UMass in December about sharing the costs of Fire and EMS.  He said UMass currently contributes about $180,000 towards those services, but that the cost of their usage is closer to $500,000.  He has proposed a 10 year contract that would include payment formulas with ceilings and floors, and if agreed to, he will use it as a template for discussion with the other colleges.  He expects to hear back by the end of February or early March.

Ms. Greeney spoke of the large number of home owners and renters who put more than 30% of their income toward housing costs, and how increased property taxes would worsen that situation.  She expressed particular concern about not knowing the effect an override would have on renters.  She also encouraged Select Board members to host community forums in different parts of Amherst with a focus on the apartment complexes, to listen and build consensus.  She said March 27th was too soon to gather all that information.

Ms. Carlozzi said that the State legislature is considering loosening eligibility for the “circuit breaker” tax credit program, for which renters would also be eligible.

Ms. Awad reiterated the earlier concerns about State information, peoples' worries about higher taxes, and not having enough time to educate them about the situation.  She said she thinks an override is needed along with cuts and new revenue, but that she doesn't feel they have enough of information yet to know its size and form in order to schedule it for March 27th.

Mr. Shaffer said that most rental properties are assessed at values between $50,000 and $100,000.  He said that for a $100,000 property, the override increase would be about $98 per year, and just under $50 per year for a $50,000 property.

Dr. Hochman said he doesn't envy the board for having to deal with the repercussions of every State and federal politicians' campaign promise to not raise taxes.  He said that because taxes haven't been raised at those levels, the Town is stuck having to raise property taxes.   He said he understands how tough it is for families and others who can't afford tax increases, and knows the Town is pursuing measures to help them with tax relief.  He said many of those families also have kids in the schools and those kids do better with 19 and 20 students in a class rather than 26 and 27.  He said we can continue to wait for more State information, but waiting last year was a rollercoaster, going up and down with each step of the process, sometimes with aid to the elementary schools going up while aid to the region went down and vice-versa.  He said that ultimately, the numbers don't fluctuate by millions or even by hundreds of thousands, but we can keep waiting.  Ms. Awad said that waiting was partially a political decision to inform people and increase the chances of an override passing.

Dr. Hochman spoke of still needing to make cuts even with an override, and those are on top of $2 million in cuts last year.  He said that cuts mean staff positions because there's nowhere else to cut.  He said that students will soon be choosing their classes for next year and that staffing is based on enrollment.  He said cuts will require students to take two study halls next year, after having last year's cuts require one study hall each for this year.  He said there will be cuts in music at the High School, cuts in music and other programs at the Middle School that will have them be every other day instead of daily.  He said that teachers see the cut lists and those whose jobs are uncertain will look elsewhere and Amherst will lose them.  He said the timing issues are critical and urged letting people vote.

Andy Churchill said the Town's situation is driven by State and federal tax cuts, and that the increased burden of property taxes is also mitigated somewhat by the overall tax burden.  He said that issuing pink slips to teachers is not a negotiating strategy, but is required by contract, and that that argues for having a vote on the issue sooner rather than later.

Mr. Kusner said he didn't mean pink slips were a negotiating strategy, and said it was unfortunate that whole teachers have to be cut versus COLA/step increases for others. Ms. Brighty said she was bothered by the term “scare tactic” and said they are required to list the cuts and everyone knows who has seniority.  She said they try to make the cuts that hurt the kids the least, but that it still amounts to 20 teachers plus others, and that will mean 1/5th of the high school faculty has been cut in two years.  She said there is no need to wait for a little more information, and that the Finance Committee has given an amount that protects the schools at the 3% level.  Ms. Awad noted that that amount still represents cuts.

Mr. Weiss asked what the bottom-line dates are for sending out pink slips.  Ms. Brighty said dates don't matter, because the teachers already know, and whether or not pink slips have been sent, teachers are already looking for new jobs  Mr. Weiss said he wanted to have a discussion, not a hearing, and asked the specific dates.  Ms. Brighty said that one official date is May 1st, and reiterated that people already have seen the list, so the only difference in the date is that more pink slips will have been issued.

Mr. Weiss asked if the School Committee would prefer the three-year $2.5 million override on the March 27th ballot, with the chance that it might fail, versus a smaller one-year override to get that money into the coffers this year.  Dr. Hochman said the predictability and stability, and planning opportunities, provided by the three year plan make that choice more desirable. 

Ms. Schiffer asked Ms. Awad about her feelings for holding the vote in late April or early May.  Ms. Awad said she is considering those times but needs more discussion with the board.  Ms. Schiffer said she thinks the vote should occur before Town Meeting takes up the budget, and that she preferred the extra month to help explain the situation and increase the chance of the override passing. 

Ms. Schiffer asked the Town Manager for his opinion on the timing and the amount.  Mr. Schaffer said he believes an override is necessary, and that $2.5 million is a good amount.  He said that from a tactical perspective, he doesn't think March 27th is a good date because going to the voters should be the solution of last resort, and he would prefer to know more about the situation with the State.  He said his recommendation is strongly in line with that of the Finance Committee

There was continued discussion about the pros and cons of different dates and the various election deadlines necessitated by each one.  There was more discussion about hearing from more citizens and needing more time to explore different models of how to set up an override question.  Mr. Weiss said that getting the State to restore the income tax rate at 5.9% was necessary to break this cycle, and said that most people's property taxes have gone up by more than they would have paid in State income tax at that rate.  He said that .5% cut has cost the State billions of dollars. 

Mr. Musante talked about the stability benefits of a multi-year plan, and said that any success in generating new revenues and any increase in State aid – neither of which were factored into the override scenarios – would improve the financial situation during the three year period and possibly beyond.

There were more discussion on timing options and the potential for Mr. Kusner's fish ladder override model. 

Brian Messier, a music teacher who has been cut from the High School, said that delaying the vote further damages the schools, whether it passes or not.  He also said that in hearing about all the people who have called, e-mailed and otherwise contacted the Select Board members with their feeling on the issue, he wasn't clear what population hasn't yet been heard from, and said he would be shocked if the majority of the Town wasn't already aware of the override possibility.  He said that if the override didn't pass in March, there would be another chance, and that if they wait until May, many teachers will have made other plans.

There was more talk about timing and how much more definitive any planning information becomes with the vote in March versus May, and that Town Meeting still has to deal with the budget after that. 

Eventually, Mr. Weiss said he felt compelled to move that a $2.35 million override question be placed on the March 27th ballot. He said he felt the schools faced the greatest crisis and this was their wish.  The vote failed 1-4, with Mr. Weiss voting in support. 

There was more discussion about other possible dates.  Dr. Hochman mentioned that the other three towns that are part of the regional system will have their town meetings on he last Saturday in April and the first Saturday in May.  He said those towns could already vote on a 1% budget before Amherst has made an override decision.  He also said that the deadlines for the Town Meeting warrant articles are much earlier than the May election dates being discussed.  Ms. Awad said that it is a difficult situation, but that they had to make the decision that was best for Amherst and not make it around the deadline of the other three towns.

After still more discussion of date possibilities, a motion was made for May 1st and it passed unanimously.

Town Manager's Report

Mr. Shaffer said that he has been in discussions about economic development possibilities related to the University.  He called these “informal conversations” with the Graduate Student Dean and others at UMass' Center for Economic Development.  He said that he has learned about intriguing patents and business plans owned by the University.  He said another meeting is scheduled for Friday, and he thought the time would be right to have Select Board participation.  He said there was no project in the pipeline, but as the conversation evolves and matures it would be appropriate to have Select Board members be part of that.

Ms. Awad said that she and Mr. Hubley are the Select Board's town-gown representatives, and that it might be good for them to take part.  Mr. Shaffer agreed.

Mr. Kusner said he would like to participate, but can't because he would be in a conflicted position. He mentioned the University and Town partnership on the community wireless project, and how that is an economic development project with a more delicate footprint than putting “boxes on the ground that hold people and machinery.”  He said it said it is low-impact and allows non-profit and entrepreneurial activity to develop, and said it has an “infrastructure multiplier effect.”

Mr. Shaffer said he is very familiar with Richard Florida's theories of creative economy, and the move away from the traditional business paradigms and toward in-home and smaller entrepreneurs.  He said the shift is considered as significant as the move from an agrarian to an industrial economy.  He said Amherst is well positioned for those possibilities, and that the University is interested in that also.  He said intellectual entrepreneurs may hold promise and he would be exploring how to access those possibilities with the University.

All the members were interested in being part of Mr. Shaffer's discussions with the University.  Mr. Kusner wanted to get Town Counsel's opinion on his attendance at the meetings, even if not acting as an agent of the Town.  Ms. Greeney said it would tie in well with her Master Plan economic development working group, but was persuaded by Mr. Shaffer's cautions that a future project could be vulnerable to concerns that the Master Plan had set the stage for it to happen if both shared her involvement.  He said those concerns are why he has shied away from participation in the Master Plan.

Mr. Weiss asked Mr. Shaffer to clarify comments he had made at a recent Finance Committee meeting, which Mr. Weiss understood to have downplayed the importance of the new Mutual Aid Agreement as a policing and public safety mechanism with revenue-saving potential. 

Mr. Shaffer said he could not be more enthusiastic about the Mutual Aid Agreement, and that it has immediate benefits for the Town, as well as setting the stage for greater cooperative opportunities with the University.  He said his only concern is that people might consider it an end point, while he sees it as a starting point, providing much opportunity for expansion and improvement.  He apologized if he had sounded less enthusiastic, and blamed the late hour of the meeting.  Mr. Weiss said he wasn't looking for an apology, but wanted to understand Mr. Shaffer's view about the agreement.

Ms. Awad said that she was at the meeting, and said that Chief Scherpa might need support in moving into the new the arrangement.  She said that she doesn't have the same view of what they signed as he presented there.  She said that if the agreement is implemented in the way it was presented at the Finance Committee meeting, then that would not be in keeping with the Select Board's intent.  Mr. Shaffer reiterated that he could not be more enthusiastic about the agreement.

Mr. Kusner said a goal of the agreement was to make more effective and efficient use of important resources and he said he hopes that is communicated clearly. 

Mr. Hubley said his concern was that the principal effect of the agreement was considered philosophical, and he said that it is much more than that because it gives officers from either jurisdiction the ability to act anywhere in town, and that that is a matter of both text and law.  He said he was concerned that the Chief had said that seamless jurisdiction was something they had wanted but was impossible.  Mr. Hubley said he knows “seamless” was the word Mr. Shaffer applied to the agreement, and that he hopes that it has been achieved. 

Mr. Weiss cautioned against going beyond the scope of Mr. Shaffer's own comments.  Ms. Awad suggested that Mr. Weiss, Mr. Hubley, Mr. Shaffer and Chief Scherpa have a conversation to make sure everyone's on the same page.

Ms. Schiffer said she was at the meeting and was interested in Mr. Shaffer's answer when asked whether there would be financial savings, and he said they would not be significant.  She asked him to comment on that.  Mr. Shaffer said he sees no substantial financial advantages yet, but said it sets the table for significant opportunities.  He said he wouldn't say more because he still has to deal with collective bargaining agreements.

Refer Zoning Petitions to the Planning Board

This was explained as a formality where the Select Board refers zoning petitions – of which there was one – to the Planning Board for Town Meeting.   The Select Board hasn't taken a position on them yet and the petitions will come back to them down the line. The vote to refer was unanimous.

Consent Calendar

The Consent Calendar consisted of the minutes of the February 5th meeting and a special liquor license for Amherst College.  Approval was unanimous.

Change of Manager – VFW

The Select Board unanimously approved the change of manager for the VFW from Roy Rule to Richard A. Heath.

Budget Information Sessions

Ms. Greeney talked of their earlier discussions about making an effort to hear from renters about the override.  She originally suggested that Select Board members host forums, but it was instead decided that a 5-member citizen task force would be appointed, and that these “Community Dialogues on the Town's Financial Future” would be held in South Amherst, North Amherst, East Amherst and at Town Hall. It was discussed that it would be good to have committee members of differing viewpoints, and that any one interested should submit Citizen Activity Forms as soon as possible, and that they can be obtained on the Town web site, or by calling the Select Board office. The task force will determine its own schedule and Town staff will participate as appropriate.  The creation of this task force for the purpose of engaging renters and home owners in a dialogue about the Town's financial future was unanimously approved, and Ms. Greeney was named as liaison.

Ms. Schiffer asked if the Select Board plans to take an advocacy roll in supporting the override.  Mr. Weiss said that once they arrive at an amount and a type that they feel comfortable with, then they will advocate for it, and Mr. Kusner and Ms. Awad agreed.

Regional Transportation Plan Update

Mr. Kusner gave an update on the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission's (PVPC) regional transportation plan.  He said the group is soliciting comments until February 24th, and that people can get information at the PVPC's web site, and can write to PVPC's Executive Director Tim Brennan.  He said there were no high priority issues for Amherst, and that a new bridge in Agawam will be funded, as will commuter rail between Springfield and New Haven, and that there is a small amount of money for PVTA fleet replacement.  He said current issues that affect this area include planned improvements to I-91 at exit 19.  He had drafted a letter to PVPC for the board to sign, addressing two issues:  a request that public transit be put in place to ameliorate any automobile-induced sprawl from the exit 19 improvements; and a request to consider that project's effect on the use and effectiveness of the Norwottuck Rail Trail.

Mr. Kusner said medium-range priorities included train track improvements between Springfield and Northampton to bring commuter rail to the northern part of the Pioneer Valley.  He said that the letter to the PVPC applauds that effort and ask that Amherst and points north be included in future improvements.  He said he hoped the board would authorize Ms. Awad to sign the letter on behalf of the board, and that copies would go to Congressman John Olver, State Senator Stan Rosenberg and State Representative Ellen Story.

Ms. Awad said the letter was done in consultation with the Pubic Transportation Committee, and said it would help plan for the impact on the bike path at Damon Road,  She said track improvements are good for the regional transportation system and help assure that Amherst doesn't get “side tracked” in the planning.

There was more talk of potential bike path effects on Damon Road, and more talk of train track and route possibilities in the area, and ultimately a vote to send the letter to the PVPC was unanimous.

Ice Skating – Town Common

Ms. Awad asked for an update on the public skating rink being created on the Town Common.

Mr. Shaffer said he had no intention of causing an uproar.  He said he thought people would be pleased with the skating opportunity, and said that with the cold weather and not having any snow to plow, he “thought it might be a productive use of our work force and a productive use of our Common.”

He said the DPW is currently working on building up the base. He said it could be a charming element in the center of the community, and that recreational skating could be fun for the skaters and those watching.  He said he had asked DPW Superintendent Guilford Mooring about the possibility, and said that as they weren't plowing, couldn't do road work and had finished their spring preparations, it could be a good use of our people.  Mr. Shaffer said that even the Town's water levels were maxed out and no more could be saved.  He said that Wednesday's snow and the cold air to follow had potential.  He said that many people had called him to say they couldn't wait for it to be ready.  He said that with all the dense and imponderable budget details, some frivolity and whimsy were needed.  It was emphasized that the ice was not yet ready.

Ms. Greeney said that it was exciting and she could picture licensed vendors selling hot drinks to the skaters.  Mr. Kusner said that people are also skating and playing hockey at Puffer's Pond, which is accessible by the new bus route #32, 

SME Status Memo

Mr. Hubley produced his draft of the memo regarding the new application process for Special Municipal Employee status.  There was much discussion over wording and intent, and whether June 30th was a deadline for applying or for having the Select Board rule on the request, and whether or not that was a firm expiration date of the existing status.  It was agreed that boards and committees should apply for the status with enough time for it to be reviewed and decided upon by the Select Board prior to June 30th.  Ms. Awad asked that all suggested memo edits be e-mailed to Mr. Hubley, and she cautioned that they go to him only, with no communication among Select Board members, “so we are using e-mail properly.”

The meeting adjourned just before 11:00.

-- Stephanie O'Keeffe