January 25, 2021 ~ Budget Committee Recommendations

2021-01-25 · Budget Committee · 1:33:17 · watch on YouTube →

The budget committee met on the evening of January 25, 2021 at the select board's request, after it had already forwarded its recommendations on the 2021 budget. This was a discussion meeting rather than a working session: members listed changes they want in the budget documents, information they want departments to supply, and questions department heads should be prepared to answer, to be written up and sent to the select board and on to the incoming town manager. Most of the discussion was about how much line detail the budget should carry, with several members asking for labor to be broken out and Allan and Milt (?) warning that the town votes on a bottom line and that the committee should not micromanage departments. Ruth (?) said the detailed spreadsheets exist and are public but that staff had been instructed not to supply much detail, and she agreed to add a column comparing each request to last year's actual spending. The chair then read back the articles where the committee's figures differ from the select board's, and Ruth walked the committee through the draft referendum warrant. No votes were taken at this meeting.

No written minutes could be matched to this meeting. The transcript records that the speaker changed but never who was speaking, so any name attached to a statement below is inferred from context and is marked (?).

What was discussed

1. 0:06
   Call to order and purpose of the meeting

   The chair opened at 6:33 on Monday, January 25, and said the committee had already sent its 2021 recommendations to the select board, which then requested this follow-up to gather ideas on changes, additional documents and questions for future budgets. The material is to be forwarded to the town manager for use when the committee reviews next year's budget. Six members took part; two could not attend and Lee Fischer (?) was working until 7.

2. 0:06
   Request for more specific budget breakdowns

   Lois (?) said what she heard at the previous meeting was a need for more specific breakdowns in next year's budget, and for explanations of why the numbers are what they are. She named the fire department, public works and the cemeteries, noting the committee did not know whether the cemetery request had even been checked with public works.

3. 0:06
   Emailed suggestions from Rick Emmens (?)

   The chair read an email from a member who could not attend, suggesting department heads add lines to their labor budgets. For fire, categories such as training hours, fire calls, EMS calls, per diem staff and administrative staff; for public works, plowing, ditching, mowing and paving hours.

4. 0:06
   Department representatives at budget meetings

   A member said she would like departments to be represented at the initial joint select board and budget committee meeting, so the committee could question, for example, the cemetery crew about its equipment request. She noted no planning board member sat on either body this year, which left the committee short of information on that budget.

5. 5:26
   Which meetings departments should attend, and members' own preparation

   Members debated whether representatives should come only to the joint opening meeting or to all of them, and several said the committee should do more homework and email questions in advance. It was noted that five or six members had watched the select board meeting where departments made their initial presentations, which was unusual and probably saved time, and that Zoom made attending easier than the cable channel.

6. 5:26
   Conveyance letter proposal

   Paul (?) proposed asking a group such as the cemetery committee for a short letter with its budget setting out what changed from last year and why. If the letter did not answer the questions, the committee could then ask them to appear.

7. 5:26
   Level of detail in the fire department budget

   Paul (?) said the fire department budget is almost $500,000 but only half a page, while the smaller administration budget runs a page and a half. He said budgets of that size are usually two pages and that grouped lines have to be broken out.

8. 11:27
   History of the shorter budget format

   Milt (?) said the condensed format came from the select board, which had asked departments to combine lines rather than supply the detailed reports of earlier years. Allan agreed that the fire department budget used to be extremely detailed.

9. 11:27
   Allan's caution against micromanaging

   Allan (?) said the old line-by-line detail produced recommendations to cut individual lines, while the townspeople ultimately vote on one final figure. He also said any new requirement would have to apply to every department, not one, and that the committee should not try to micromanage departments; if it lacks confidence in a manager it should say so professionally.

10. 11:27
    Labor detail and who else sees it

    Paul (?) said he wants to know how much of the fire labor line is per diem, call pay, officer stipends and training pay, and roughly what the pay rates are. His argument was that if the figures are not in the budget, no one but the fire chief and the person writing the checks knows them, and the select board uses the same document.

11. 16:27
    Whether extra detail would change the outcome

    Milt (?) asked Paul what would actually change in the committee's deliberations if it had the labor detail. Paul answered that it might change nothing, but the committee would understand the budget better and ask fewer questions, and that the information should be publicly available regardless.

12. 16:27
    Supplemental reports as a compromise

    Jill (?) suggested a summary budget backed by attachments or material supplied on request, citing the summary of per diem and call pay ranges the committee received about two years ago. She also pointed to the fire department's activity summary of calls, which helps newer members judge whether the request is proportionate.

13. 21:44
    Detail already supplied, and the instruction to withhold it

    Neil (?) observed that the cemetery committee submission from Tia Wilson (?) explained each line, and that fire and public works supply slides, so some of what is being asked for already exists. He asked Ruth why the committee could not simply see the departments' underlying spreadsheets; Ruth (?) said they exist and are public information but that staff "were actually instructed not to give a ton of detail", and that the select board does not want the detail when it reviews the annual budget either.

14. 26:48
    How the detail is compiled in the office

    Ruth (?) said she and Calvin go over his budget line by line, sorting items such as electricity, phone and internet, so pulling those apart in the printed budget would be straightforward. Members said that where individuals on the committee need that detail it should be provided, but that receiving it also obliges members to prepare before meetings.

15. 26:48
    Why the 2021 budget process was rushed

    Ruth (?) said the schedule felt rushed because it was: the town intends to hold the vote by referendum, so the warrant had to be ready for printing by February 1 rather than the usual March 1 deadline. That compressed roughly two months of work into a much shorter period.

16. 26:48
    Line titles that do not say what they cover

    Paul (?) cited line 3502, maintenance and repairs, and line 3510, equipment maintenance, as titles that leave the committee guessing which is the building. He said the lines should state what they are so members do not have to spend meeting time asking.

17. 26:48
    Justification for equipment and vehicle requests

    Jill (?) asked that departments supply a short report with any large request showing they had done the homework, such as maintenance history comparing the truck being replaced with others in the fleet, and the reason a pickup is needed. She gave the cemetery tool request as another example.

18. 32:14
    Bids, grants and alternatives

    The same member said the recurring questions - did you go out to bid, did you look at leasing, did you apply for grants such as the fire department's air packs - get asked year after year without the answers being prepared in advance. She asked that departments document those answers once for new select board and committee members.

19. 32:14
    Whether per-vehicle maintenance costs can be tracked

    Paul (?) replied that departments probably do not track maintenance by vehicle unless they use work-order software, so the request may be more than they can meet. Members settled on asking instead for a short narrative hitting the high points of why a vehicle needs replacing.

20. 32:14
    Standard budget template from the town manager

    Jill (?) suggested the town manager give department heads a standard fill-in-the-lines spreadsheet, since the level of detail has swung from itemising every square of toilet paper to a single figure for white goods. She said the committee might do best to flag a few areas and leave the format to the manager, who will have views of their own.

21. 37:49
    One chance to question department heads

    Members noted that under this year's compressed schedule the joint meeting was the only occasion to see department heads, and that neither department head was present at the committee's own meeting the previous Thursday. In past years members could ask a department to return on another night; this year questions had to be asked on the spot or by email.

22. 37:49
    EMS billing and collections

    Paul (?) asked how much is billed and how much is collected for EMS services, saying the question is raised every year and he does not believe it has ever been followed up. Ruth (?) said the town's medical billing is done through Freeport, that she does not track it, and that the chief has requested the figures from Freeport at various points.

23. 43:15
    Value of the collection figures

    Neil (?) said the committee has no control over collection rates, though the original question when the EMS service started was whether it would pay for itself. Paul (?) described previous experience where a billing agency collected 40 to 55 percent, a change of contractor raised it to about 75 percent, and adding a collections contractor nearly doubled EMS revenue; a five-year summary was suggested rather than a single snapshot.

24. 43:15
    CIP committee reporting

    Jill (?) asked for a better summary from the CIP committee of anticipated funds going out and coming in, and recommended the CIP committee set out the pros and cons of saving for a future purchase against borrowing when the time comes. That way there is a prepared answer when residents ask why money is put away in advance.

25. 49:07
    Reserve balances, the 10-year plan and the $30,000 carried forward

    Paul (?) said the departments' replacement schedules do not include reserve balances, so Ruth compiles them separately in what she calls her 10-year plan, which creates confusion. He said he was disappointed that each select board member said the item was not in the plan and then voted to carry only $30,000 forward, and that the CIP committee should have presented directly to the select board rather than through the joint meeting.

26. 54:53
    The joint opening meeting has worked

    Members said the change to holding a joint meeting at the start of the process has helped, particularly for department heads who previously had to repeat their presentations. Several described watching recorded select board meetings afterwards and skipping to the agenda items that matter to them.

27. 54:53
    Budget against actual spending

    Milt (?) asked for a figure showing the difference between what was budgeted and what was actually spent, and was told the two prior years on the spreadsheet are already actuals. Another member played devil's advocate, saying that cutting a department for underspending encourages year-end spending, while a third said that when public works had money left over for paving and a flagpole the town had objected and the money was not spent.

28. 1:00:45
    Effect of moving to a town manager

    Members expect the incoming town manager to be the first review of department budgets, sending them back before they reach the select board or the committee. It was also noted that a manager signing off on the warrant adds a layer of accountability on spending that does not exist now. Several members thanked Ruth and said they would be sorry to lose her.

29. 1:05:57
    Percent change measured against last year's actual

    Neil (?) asked for a column showing the request as a percentage change against last year's actual spending rather than last year's budget, and Lois (?) said she was asking for the same thing. Ruth shared her spreadsheet, showed the existing over/short column in red, and built the new formula on screen; she said she would add it.

30. 1:10:59
    Possible breakdowns for public works and fire labor

    Ruth (?) described ways labor could be split: winter against summer, since workers compensation treats four months as winter, and overtime against regular time, though public works has little overtime because Calvin manages hours during snow events. She also suggested lines for full-time, part-time and on-call staff, and separating the per diem line added to the fire department a couple of years ago. She noted administration already carries about ten bullet points explaining major increases and decreases, and is a less variable department.

31. 1:10:59
    Review of the committee's recommendations - Eureka Center

    The chair began reading back the articles where the committee's figures differ from the select board's, counting four as he started and later referring to six. On the Eureka Center, instead of transferring $490 the committee recommends a total of $2,754, made up of $490 from fees and the remainder from undesignated funds, to fund a repair project money was raised for last year; the second figure is garbled in the recording but is consistent with $2,264.

32. 1:16:15
    General assistance

    The committee recommends a total of $600 with $420 transferred from undesignated funds, on the reasoning that the town never spent that much until last year and $1,000 has historically been too high. It was also noted that if the need exceeds $600 the selectmen can take money from the general assistance fund without a special town meeting.

33. 1:16:15
    Planning board and telecommunications

    For the planning board the committee changed the total article amount to $31,742, a 2 percent increase over last year's actual, in line with the overall budget increase and because it had no explanation from the planning board about its needs. For telecommunications it recommends $50,000 transferred, closer to the income received, because past years have spent above income against an untapped balance and the franchise contract is nearing its end with franchise fees possibly not continuing.

34. 1:16:15
    Solid waste and bulky waste

    Members checked whether solid waste was still a difference. The select board's figure of $310,000 had already had $10,300 for bulky waste removed, as the board was considering a separate article; that was done before feedback from the hauler, whose name is garbled in the recording.

35. 1:16:15
    Rules on committee email

    Ruth (?) said members may share material with any individual on the committee, but a message to the whole committee followed by replies to the whole committee would amount to an illegal meeting.

36. 1:21:46
    Next steps and the select board's vote

    The chair said he would collect notes from Jill and Neil and forward one document to the select board on the committee's behalf. He encouraged members to watch the select board's Zoom meeting the following evening at 6:30, link on the Durham website, where the board votes on actual article amounts and may or may not rewrite its articles to match the committee's figures.

37. 1:21:46
    Draft warrant walkthrough

    Ruth shared the draft warrant on screen, noting most articles are unchanged and the board is consolidating some funds. Where the two bodies differ, the ballot shows the select board recommendation, the budget committee recommendation and a required option to choose neither; she said the town's lawyer has reviewed the format and thinks it will work.

38. 1:21:46
    Fire department operations

    A member interrupted to add one further article the committee differs on: fire department operations, where the committee's amount is to raise $472,753. The stated reason was that a reduction in the labor line is appropriate because the amount has been fairly steady since 2019.

39. 1:21:46
    Explanatory mailer instead of ballot narrative

    Asked whether any narrative would accompany the articles, Ruth (?) said not on the ballot itself, but she will produce a mailer as she did last time and make it available to people at the election.

40. 1:27:14
    Article covering budget articles not approved

    Article 4 asks the town to raise and appropriate an amount not to exceed the 2020 municipal budget for any budget articles that are not approved, so an article where voters choose neither recommendation reverts to last year's figure. Jill (?) said the wording read at speed as though the whole budget were being held at 2020 or below, and asked that "not approved" be underlined; Ruth agreed to bold or underline it.

41. 1:27:14
    LD1 property tax levy limit

    Article 28 is the property tax levy limit article. Ruth (?) said she had not yet worked out what the levy limit is and must do so before the following night, but that the town will exceed it; it was not needed last year because the budget decreased. She explained that if the town votes against increasing the limit the whole budget would have to be redone, and members noted the school system is exempt from LD1 and that to their knowledge the town has never voted it down.

42. 1:32:18
    Warrant wording and adjournment

    Lois (?) asked what it would take to change "board of selectmen" to "select board" in the warrant; Ruth (?) said she usually writes select board but the older articles are copied forward each year, and suggested raising it with the select board or the Maine Municipal Association. With no further business the meeting ended with thanks to Ruth.

What was decided

• 43:15
  Agreed by discussion, with no vote taken, to recommend that the CIP committee set out the pros and cons of saving toward a future purchase against borrowing at the time of purchase, and provide a clearer summary of anticipated funds in and out.outcome unclear
• 1:05:57
  Ruth agreed, without a vote, to add a column to the budget spreadsheet showing each request as a percentage change against last year's actual spending rather than last year's budget.outcome unclear
• 1:10:59
  Confirmed for the record, from an earlier meeting and with no new vote taken here, the committee's Eureka Center recommendation: a total of $2,754, with $490 from fees and the remainder from undesignated funds, in place of a $490 transfer.outcome unclear
• 1:16:15
  Confirmed for the record, with no new vote taken here, the committee's general assistance recommendation: a total of $600 with $420 transferred from undesignated funds.outcome unclear
• 1:16:15
  Confirmed for the record, with no new vote taken here, the committee's planning board recommendation of a total article amount of $31,742, reflecting a 2 percent increase over last year's actual.outcome unclear
• 1:16:15
  Confirmed for the record, with no new vote taken here, the committee's telecommunications recommendation that $50,000 be transferred, an amount closer to the income received.outcome unclear
• 1:21:46
  Agreed that the chair will combine his notes with Jill's and Neil's and forward a single document of the committee's suggestions to the select board on the committee's behalf. No vote was taken.outcome unclear
• 1:21:46
  Confirmed for the record, with no new vote taken here, the committee's fire department operations recommendation to raise $472,753, on the reasoning that a reduction in the labor line is appropriate.outcome unclear
• 1:27:14
  Ruth agreed to bold or underline the words "not approved" in the warrant article covering budget articles that are not approved, so voters do not read it as capping the whole budget at the 2020 figure. No vote was taken.outcome unclear

An outcome reads "unclear" where the recording does not state it plainly. The recogniser drops short words, and "the motion does not carry" is one missing word from its opposite.

Worth knowing

• 21:44
  Asked why the committee cannot see the departments' underlying spreadsheets, Ruth (?) said they exist and are public information, but that staff "were actually instructed not to give a ton of detail" - and that the select board does not want the detail either when it reviews the annual budget.
• 26:48
  The 2021 budget process was compressed because the town intends to hold the vote by referendum: the warrant had to be at the printer by February 1 instead of the usual March 1 deadline.
• 1:21:46
  On the articles where the select board and budget committee differ, the ballot will show both figures and a required third option to approve neither; a separate article means any budget article not approved reverts to the 2020 amount.
• 1:27:14
  The town will exceed the LD1 property tax levy limit this year, so article 28 asks voters for permission to do so; Ruth had not yet calculated the limit, and said that if voters refuse the entire budget would have to be redone.

Elsewhere

← 2021-01-07 Budget Committee2022-08-01 Budget Committee →All meetings