Shutesbury Board of Selectmen with the Finance Committee
Meeting Minutes for February 26, 2008

Select Board members present:  Chairman Rebecca Torres and Ralph Armstrong.
Also Present: Town Administrator David C. Dann and Leslie Bracebridge,
recording.
Finance Committee members present: Chairman Eric Stocker and members
Russ Wilson, Al Springer, Mark Poscik, Lori Tuominen, Patrick Callahan
and Elaine Puleo

Selectmen sat in on the Finance Committee meeting which opened at 7:05 P.M.
Minutes of the February 12, 2008 Finance Committee meeting were
approved as written.

Reports from other committees:  
* Lori reported that there will be an open forum for Library Facility
  Needs Assessment Committee (LFNAC) on Saturday morning at 10 AM.
* Al Springer reported that the Personnel Board is looking at the
  concept of a Lake Manager position, but the position would only be
  needed for a temporary period of time.  Also a Personnel Board
  member, Becky added that Bill Elliott has provided a number of Lake
  Wyola oversight functions voluntarily for 15 years and is gradually
  stepping down.  If Bill will continue with water testing through the
  end of this year, and if the dam is funded this year, mandated
  measurements associated with the dam repairs permitting might be
  achieved without creating a new position.  Some (of Bill’s)
  functions have been distributed among other town officials and some
  functions do not need to be continued.  Someone with a chemical
  engineering background would be ideal for a voluntary water quality
  testing position.  Two ideas offered were to find a skilled person
  within the town, able to carry on voluntarily testing and also to
  inquire if there is a student program at the University that might
  like to could continue the testing.
* David reported on Dam Management Committee efforts to get state
  funding for dam repairs: Representative Kulik and Senator Rosenberg
  have both requested line items in their respective budgets and their
  fall-back positions would be to request funds from the next
  environmental bond bill.  Becky added that his most recent letter is
  Senator Rosenberg’s 4th effort to get state funding.

Becky also described a postcard drive amongst Lake Wyola property
owners to try to reach legislators across the state.  Key points
developed at the 2/16/2008 Lake Wyola Advisory Committee meeting for
the content of the postcards include:
1. Postcards for Advocacy
* Postcards should give a quick history, request supportive funding,
  be handwritten and signed.
* Sample ideas to be incorporated into the message (taken from the
  2/16/2008 Dam Management Committee meeting minutes) include:
o “There has been legislation introduced by Rep. Kulik to support
  repair of the Lake Wyola Dam.
o The newest state park; Lake Wyola Park, Carroll Holmes Recreation
  Area depends on this dam.
o The town is committed to keeping this recreational opportunity
  available to people in Western Mass and we’re reaching out to the
  state for support.”
o The phrase, “municipal-state partnership” is the current
  phrase that can “work magic.”
o The term “supportive funding” should be substituted for the
  term less desirable term “earmark.”
o Shutesbury has already spent close to $60,000 on engineering and
  permitting.
o David will send Skip a list of the state’s legislators and their
  addresses.
o LWAC members will take postcards to distribute to friends and family
  to send at the right time, when the right time is identified.
Patrick felt that if the funding is left in both the House and the
Senate budgets, it is more likely to be approved.  Another 100
postcards will be requested of the Friends of the Historical
Commission.

Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) Audit of the 1994
(completion date) Elementary School building renovations:
* A 30 minute hearing on Shutesbury’s appeal of the Melanson &
  Heath audit, concerning disallowed expenses, will take place before
  the MSBA’s Project Management Subcommittee on March 6 at 4:30 PM
  at 40 Broad Street, Suite 500, Boston.  The full MSBA Board will
  vote on the appeal on March 31, 2008.  (Some of the above details
  were taken directly from the announcement letter by this secretary.)
* In 2001 the town handed over all materials to a representative of the MSBA.  
* Nothing was heard for 5 years.  
* In 2005 the town received a letter saying there was a disallowance
  of $323,000.
* The town received another letter in 2006 saying that an audit would
  be done by Melanson & Health.
* Their disallowances were $500,000 accompanied by a complete list
  with reasons.
* The Town Accountant and the Town Treasurer looked for whatever
  invoices could be found that were identified in the letter as
  missing and found 225,000 worth of invoices.  Copies of the found
  invoices were sent to Melanson & Heath.  Melanson & Heath have
  received the invoices and the invoices will be referred to at the
  hearing.
* A question to be asked at the hearing: “Why was the first audit
  not acceptable?”
* The team that will go to Boston will look at the best and most
  powerful way to have the MSBA accept the $225,000 worth of evidence
  of missing invoices.
* An “in person” presentation is considered to be the most
  powerful. Careful consideration will be given to the right number of
  people to represent Shutesbury without using up the 30 minutes and
  the most productive points to make.
* Of the $500,000, about $125,000 was legitimately not allowable.  We
  have 205,000 of admissible invoices.
* Audit rules require keeping copies of all invoices for the life of
  the building.
* Materials in support of the appeal were sent since in the fall.

Town Accountant Gail Weiss discussed with the Finance Committee:
* The FY 09 comparison of Assessments for school transportation costs.
* Assumed budget gap of $225,000 for FY 09.  Revenues are “a bit
  fuzzy” because state revenues are dependent on the outcome of the
  casinos question.
* Overall, the FY 09 town budget increased by 4%.
* The big question is how Chapter 70 pans out.
Leading up to a discussion of a possible 2½ override Accountant Gail
Weiss reviewed a hand-out comparison of the rates of increase in the
expense budgets versus revenue budgets for the years of FY 04 to FY 09
inclusive.  Comments included:
* Shutesbury may get lower revenues from the state due to the MSBA audit.
* This year’s snow budget is overspent.
* Rather than wait until next year when “our backs are to the wall”
  we should have the override this year.
* The Treasurer needs $300,000 in free cash to work with or she will
  have to start short-term borrowing.
* Response to a suggestion that capital items could all be override
  debt exclusion included:
o The debt schedule is stabilizing.
o The debt schedule could be analyzed to see if it can be adjusted,
  but for example, the police cruiser required $1,000 for repairs this
  year.  It would have been replaced before the repairs but that its
  replacement got “pushed back” a year.
o Debt excluded overrides pit departments against each other.  
o Look at what has been gained, from this plan.  
o Our debt level is as high as it’s ever been, maybe because we
  didn’t replace soon enough.
o We must keep maintaining so they are kept up.  
* Discussion of fire truck replacement.  
* The possibility for an override is to look at some long term
  projections; departments will still be asked to stay at a 3%
  increase.
* The town is using free cash to close the deficit every year now.  To
  stay free of the deficit, will ask the departments to stay at 3%.
* Four years was deemed the minimum stretch between override votes.
  The last override was in 2005.
* Departments should be asked for an alternate 1% budget across the
  board.
* Previous years of low revenue projections are being trimmed and are
  more accurate now.
* Taking cash reserve projections out another 2 years will show that
  free cash will get down to 7% .
* Expenses are increasing at an average of 5% and revenues are
  increasing at an average of 3% which together are slowly putting the
  budget “in the hole.”
* A request was made to see an expense projection at 4% and a revenues
  projection at 3% for the next two years and keep one budget using
  free cash and the other not using free cash.
* Support for an override could be gained by creating a 1% budget that
  eliminates all capital and then divides the remainder amongst all
  departments, except the regional budget because it is already
  reduced, and eliminate the bussing expense in the elementary budget
  before backing down to the 1 %.  Departments would have to be
  the champions” of the budget. Certain department cost assessments
  cannot be changed.  Debt and fixed costs cannot be cut. Some
  promoted reduction of capital just like any other department in this
  1% budget.  Each department will be urged to write a statement of
  what can be cut.  The 1% budget will be prepared by March 11.
* The Select Board unanimously voted to put out a notice to town
  departments advocating for an override, and that they are looking
  with the Finance Committee at a budget that does not require free
  cash to balance the budget because free cash is diminishing rapidly,
  and Selectmen will ask departments to develop budgets with a net 1%
  increase after fixed assessments and debt.
* The Finance Committee unanimously voted to produce a 1% budget. 

The net effect of the change in transportation is $14,000.  It will be
a separate line item into the future, which will create an incentive
to try to reduce it.

The next meeting of the Finance Committee will be March 11, 2008.  
The next Select Board meeting will be March 4, 2008

Selectmen and Finance Committee both adjourned at 9:05 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,


Leslie Bracebridge
Administrative Secretary

080226 Selectmen and Fin Com Combo 1