[This recap is extraordinarily late. Sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused. – S.O'K]
(6/3/07) The Select Board met Wednesday, May 23rd at 6:00 p.m., prior to Town Meeting. Gerry Weiss, Alisa Brewer, Hwei-Ling Greeney and Anne Awad were present, and Rob Kusner was absent. Town Manager Larry Shaffer was present as well.
No one spoke during this time.
Mr. Weiss said that 12 planters had been put out downtown, thanks to a collaboration of Bill Elsasser, Andrew's Greenhouse, Whirlwind Garden Designs, Hadley Garden Center and Mr. Weiss. He said that people can still send donations, and if they receive enough, planters will be added to Main Street as well. Donations can be sent to Mr. Weiss with checks made out to Andrew's Greenhouse. Mr. Weiss asked that people keep an eye on the planters and to treat them gently.
Ms. Greeney praised the planters and those who worked to make them happen. She said she hopes that seeing the flowers will make people feel kind to each other.
Special Town Meeting – Article 1: FY07 Budget Amendments
Finance Director John Musante said that the original Annual Town Meeting warrant had had a placeholder article for the FY07 budget amendments which was dismissed and redrafted for the Special Town Meeting of June 6th. He said the article allows the transfer of surplus funds from one functional area to cover surpluses in another, in order to balance out this year's budget by June 30th. He said that debt service is included. He said they are working to reduce the gap which currently stands at about $99,000, down from about $120,000 a few weeks ago. He said they are looking to transfer projected surpluses in Conservation, Planning and Inspections and debt service to partly offset deficits in General Government, Public Works and Community Services. He said that the FY07 reserve fund was only $50,000, leaving a shortfall of almost $50,000 to be made up from free cash. He said they are still working on decreasing that gap and have been trying to reduce unnecessary expenditures. He said that not filling vacant seasonal and permanent positions has helped to bring the shortfall numbers down and helps to prepare for FY08. He said that health insurance continues to be a problem, as well as utility costs. He said that HVAC work at the Police Station was delayed as new specs were created for better long-term cost savings, but the delay has eliminated the short-term utility savings that had been expected.
In response to questions, he noted that there is a shortfall in veterans' benefits due to an unanticipated retirement payout, a savings in the overtime budget for the emergency call center dispatchers because that department has been fully-staffed, savings in debt service due to refinancing, and $12,000 - $13,000 projected as an expenditure shortfall for Cherry Hill. He said that Cherry Hill is looking to do well on the revenue side, weather permitting. He said he would come back with a recommended motion prior to June 6th.
Ms. Greeney asked about the health insurance shortfall and if it meant that the premium charges were too low. Mr. Musante said the health insurance situation is related to the mid-year premium increase of 12%. He said that as claims were monitored throughout the fall, it was clear that last July's 15% increase was not sufficient, and the mid-year increase was required. He said that represented over $150,000 in added cost, and keeping some benefit-eligible positions vacant has helped to offset that amount, but the shortfall is still around $135,000 - $140,000 related to health insurance. He said the mid-term increase had not been budgeted for at the beginning of the fiscal year.
Ms. Greeney asked about the Cherry Hill projected shortfall. Mr. Musante said that the course was projected to spend $12,000 - $13,000 more than had been budgeted for, but that the revenues looked strong. He said calendar year 06 was strong for the course and that the numbers as of October were ahead of where they'd been the previous year. He said that uncertainties for this year include weather and when people renew their memberships. He said that $210,000 - $220,000 is expected in revenue, which he said was enough to cover the direct appropriation and employee benefits, but would not be enough to cover the expenditure shortfall. He said that a strong May and June could lead to higher revenues.
The vote to recommend the FY07 budget amendments was 3-0, two absent, with Mr. Kusner and Ms. Awad absent. (Ms. Awad arrived shortly after this vote.)
Special Town Meeting – Article 2: Cherry Hill Privatization
Mr. Weiss said they would skip that article because the petitioner was not present.
Isaac BenEzra of the ACTV Board of Directors spoke about a hearing to be held at the State Capitol on June 5th regarding changing the rules for how local governments negotiate future cable television contracts. He said that Verizon is lobbying for the rule change which he said attempts to put contract negotiation into a maximum 90-day period. He said that change would take away ascertainments, public forums and other opportunities for a community to decide what it wants. He said there is a “sister bill” being pursued at the Federal level, and said that local governments face the threat of national- or state-negotiated contracts, and said that such changes would remove the “public” from “public access.” He said there would be a van leaving from Amherst to attend the hearing on June 5th, and said that strong advocacy was needed from our State legislators. He urged the Select Board to communicate that to Ellen Story and Stan Rosenberg.
It was noted that a letter to that effect had been sent by the Town Manager's office, and Ms. Awad moved that a similar letter be sent from the Select Board.
Walter Wolnik, formerly of the Cable Advisory Committee, noted that that committee had long lacked enough members to achieve a quorum and that this current topic had not been noted on the Select Board's agenda. He said that he would like for the Cable Advisory Committee to have a role in reviewing cable contracts, and said he was aware that some Verizon contracts have called for arbitration of disputes rather than adjudication. He suggested that an attorney be appointed to the Cable Advisory Committee to consider such topics. Mr. Weiss said that these issues were beyond the scope of the meeting's discussion.
The vote to approve sending a letter from the Select Board was 4 in favor, one absent.
Operating Budget – Regional Schools
Regional School Committee Chair Elaine Brighty said that that Committee had voted to recommend a 3% budget and a 2% assessment level. She said that the 2% assessment was $119,000 higher than 1%, and that the extra $150,000 difference between the 2% and 3% budget would allow them to use additional State money if it were received. She said that was not likely, but the higher budget number protected that possibility, which she said has been done before. She suggested that the $119,000 come from Town reserves.
Mr. Weiss asked about the option of using the Region's E&D funds instead Town reserves. Ms. Brighty said the Regional School Committee had considered that as an option for eliminating the second study hall requirement under the previous interpretation of the State statute, but that under the new interpretation, she said the other towns wouldn't agree to that.
Mr. Shaffer said that Town Counsel had provided an opinion on how Town Meeting might proceed with this issue, recommending that Article 16 be reconsidered, and if that is approved, to then table it until after the assessment figure has been resolved as part of Article 17. Mr. Shaffer said that once Amherst agrees to an assessment level, and the other towns in the region agree as well, the issue of how that is apportioned will take care of itself. He said that under the Department of Education's interpretation of the statute, Amherst would be required to pay the 3% assessment level because it has been approved by three other towns, unless there is a successful effort to renegotiate the assessment.
School Superintendent Jere Hochman said that Town Counsel agrees with the Schools that the interpretation of the statute change should be that all four towns must approve the assessment, but that the DoE thinks it is still three out four. He said that the two interpretations mean that one side won't get what it wants – either Amherst will be forced into the 3%, or the other towns will be forced into a lesser amount. He suggested that 2% would be a compromise between the 1% Amherst wants and the 3% the other towns want, and would avoid the legal challenges that either side could pursue.
Ms. Awad said that she thought the compromise was a good one, but couldn't support taking that $119,000 from reserves or from the elementary school budget. Ms. Brighty said that the Finance Committee had already considered the possibility of using the reserves for 3% when that had appeared to be the situation. Mr. Hochman said the Regional School Committee would not consider the compromise if the extra money were to come from an override, from cuts to student programs, or from cuts to public safety.
Mr. Weiss asked if the Regional School Committee had considered the use of the E&D funds. Ms. Brighty said that doing so would put Amherst's contribution at 1% and that there would be no incentive for the other towns to agree to that. Ms. Brewer said that that would have been an option when it decreased the assessment rate of all the towns and eliminated the second study hall, but would not be an option now because it would only be decreasing Amherst's assessment.
Ms. Greeney talked about the possibility of the other towns reconsidering their unwillingness to use E&D funds if the alternative is that Amherst reconsiders and rejects the assessment formula from Article 16. Mr. Hochman said that either side could dig their heels in and pursue their legal options, but that that would create a big mess and a protracted debate. He said the compromise allows both sides to “walk away together.”
Ms. Greeney expressed concern about using Town reserves for that money but said she would support an override for that amount. Mr. Weiss talked about what is and isn't required in a motion regarding specifying a source of funds, and said that only a motion that specifies that it is contingent on an override is bound to that source.
Mr. Hochman said that it was up to the Town to determine how it comes up with the money, and that reserves were only mentioned because the Finance Committee had already talked about that as a possible source for these funds. He said that unless there were an agreement not to seek an override for this purpose, the proposal would no longer be supported by the Regional School Committee, calling that a “deal breaker.”
There was more talk about source of funds in a motion and how a motion on this issue should not include an override contingency. Ms. Brighty noted that it couldn't be contingent because there is no other number to fall back on without those funds. Ms. Awad asked what the situation would be if the 2% deal were taken off the table. Ms. Brighty said it would revert to 3%. Mr. Weiss said that brought “the nuclear option” back into play, and Ms. Greeney agreed, saying Town Meeting could then decide what it wanted to do about Article 16.
Vince O'Connor said that if the budget is not balanced or if an override were to fail, it could be dealt with in the fall. He said that the mailing of the tax bills is the real budget deadline. He said that Town Meeting could also be reconvened during the summer to make final adjustments. He said the Select Board and the Finance Committee should accept the 2% deal, saying “The alternative is really obnoxious to all of us.”
Isaac BenEzra asked how Amherst could be forced into a 3% budget for the region before Town Meeting has voted. Ms. Brighty and Mr. Hochman said that it depends on the scheduling of the different towns' Town Meetings, and ours occurs last.
Ms. Greeney said that her understanding of the Finance Committee report is that the Regional School Committee voted a 3% budget assuming that the override would pass, and now the Town is left to solve the resulting problems. She said she felt the voters were “strong-armed” by this.
Ms. Brighty said that was an error in the Finance Committee report, and said that the School Committee is comprised of four towns and voted on 3% because that was the amount needed, and they weren't just looking at Amherst's restrictions.
Ms. Brewer made a motion to recommend the 3% budget of $27, 567,000 and 2% assessment of $12,266,148. Mr. Weiss seconded it. Ms. Awad asked if it was implicit in the vote that the 2% deal is accepted and that it can't be contingent on an override. It was agreed that that was the case.
The vote was tied at 2 to 2 with one absent. Ms. Brewer and Mr. Weiss voted in support and Ms. Awad and Ms. Greeney voted to oppose. It was decided that they would vote again once Mr. Kusner was back to break the tie.
Because Mr. Hochman would not be available on May 31st, it was decided that the Select Board would move to postpone discussion of the school budget to June 4th, even though it might not come up on May 31st anyway.
Operating Budget – Elementary Schools
Andy Churchill, Chair of the School Committee, said that after receiving much feedback on their previous decision to not revisit their 3% budget vote, the School Committee had reconsidered and were now reluctantly recommending a 1% budget. He said that people didn't want a short-term fix that could sacrifice a longer-term solution next year, and they didn't want programs that benefit kids outside of the school day – such as recreation – to be cut in order to benefit programs benefiting kids during the school day. He said it had been a 4-1 vote, with the one dissenter saying that 2% should be proposed. Mr. Hochman noted that that individual was also vehemently opposed to seeking an override for the funds.
Mr. Weiss said he was aware of talk about the schools' Medicaid reimbursement of about $130,000 going to free cash and how some think the schools should receive that money. Ms. Brighty said that the reimbursement goes to the general fund rather than free cash and that it is budgeted for general fund expenditures. Mr. Churchill said that having the schools receive that reimbursement should be a topic of conversation for the future.
There was discussion about this issue and how it is similar to the library wanting to keep its overdue fines, and the various incentives, disincentives, fairness issues and logistics associated with returning such monies to those areas versus the Town keeping them. It was suggested that this subject be addressed early in the budget process next year.
The motion to recommend a 1% elementary schools budget at $19,456,715 was approved 4-0, one absent.
Community Preservation Act Committee Chair Peter Jessop said that that committee solicits boards and agencies for input and holds a public hearing to get suggestions from the general public on what the funding priorities should be for each CPAC area. He said that long list leads to a spirited committee discussion about what recommendation should be brought to Town Meeting. He said that CPAC relies heavily on the prioritization determined by the reporting committees. He said that this year's requests totaled about twice as much funding as was available, and that no area received funding for all of its requests. He said that the recommendations do not necessarily reflect areas of expertise or deep interest on the part of CPAC, but that it is that committee's mandated mission to weigh the proposals carefully and submit a recommendation to Town Meeting.
Mr. Weiss noted the controversy around the proposed South Cemetery fence, and concern about $290,000 in unexpended historical preservation funds from past appropriations.
Edith MacMullen, Chair of the Historical Commission, said that the process of spending the appropriations is done according to a careful, multi-step preservation plan. By way of example, she said that the Dickinson Museum landscape study work had been done and that they were now waiting on the historic preservation restriction, and that the West Cemetery entrance was awaiting work by the DPW. She said that it is not as simple as taking a single step and then spending the money, and that all of the projects were at various stages of progress.
Ms. Awad asked about the status of the East Common survey. She said that much was being held up by that delay, and said that viable economic development needed to be encouraged in that area but was awaiting the survey's completion. Ms. MacMullen said a contract was signed but the work had not yet begun. Mr. Shaffer and Mr. Ziomek both said that getting it done was a top priority.
Betsy Johnson said that she has lived in South Amherst a long time and has relatives in the South Cemetery. She said that she has never seen vandalism there and said that a higher priority should be restoration of its headstones.
Vince O'Connor distributed the CPAC minority report and said that there was too much unexpended historical preservation money from past years, and that the appropriation should be reduced until the backlog is reduced.
Ms. Awad said she was willing to move to recommend the appropriation without the $40,000 for the South Cemetery fence. She moved to recommend $101,100 in CPAC funds for historic preservation. The vote in support was 4-0, one absent. It was noted that this was actually a rejection of the CPAC recommendation and approval of an amendment.
The wine and malt license was approved for the Taste of Amherst in a vote of 4-0, one absent.
The meeting adjourned at 7:38 p.m.
-- Stephanie O'Keeffe
