Two sets of budget numbers were prepared at the request of the Brattleboro Selectboard since their last FY15 budget meeting. One involves specific cuts the Selectboard was considering; the other takes a look at a 1% across-the-board cut for all departments.
At Tuesday’s somewhat heated meeting, the board considered and voted on which cuts to include in their revised budget for presentation to town meeting representatives on June 2, ending up with a combination of the two approaches. Members of the public also weighed in, sometimes with great passion. Accusations were thrown, apologies offered, and and ideas were suggested.
By the end, the board had a list of requests for the Interim Town Manager to include in a revised budget that they hope to adopt and have ready for representatives in June.
The Police Fire Committee Resolutions
Members of the Police and Fire Facilities Committee offered up a pair of resolutions to the board at the start of the meeting.
Steve Phillips, co-chair, said that they had been charged with giving technical and financial input to the Selectboard. He said the committee had voted unanimously to advise that they were not in favor of a “band-aid” approach to the project. The committee felt that voters had asked for a long-term investment and that it should be done that way.
The second resolution of the committee was to proceed with efforts to substantially improve the fire stations, either renovate the police station or build a new one elsewhere, and to consider exploring the idea of a combined police and fire station where Central Station is currently located.
Project Manager Steve Horton gave the board a range of options, most of which were above $11 million. One was to keep going. Others reduced the scope, or furnishings. One eliminated the third floor of the Central Station plan. Other new ideas included buying property on Putney Road for a new police station.
Plans to stay within the existing $5 million bond, to work on life and safety issues and a few “must-haves,” were deemed short-term plans to solve problems for five or ten years. In other words, the band-aid approach the committee wants to avoid.
David Gartenstein introduced a new, pricey consideration. The town has been informed by the state fire inspector that the Municipal Center must be brought up to code, regardless of any work on the police station. “The town will be on the hook for it.”
Horton explained that the letter the town received said “you are grossly behind the times,” though, he said, there are a lot of old buildings out there. He said the town needed to respond with a plan within 30 days to improve stairwells, remove asbestos, add fire-rated doors, and sprinklers. He said it could cost $420,000.
Gartenstein thanked the committee for their report and told them the board would look again at the issue after the special Representative Town Meeting June 2.
Specific Cuts
Specific cuts were the first item in the board’s FY15 budget discussion. The proposed cuts under consideration were:
- No additional Police/Fire bond – $261,473.
- Reduction of capital spending on sidewalks – $50,000
- Savings from buying just one police cruiser – $40,927
- No animal control officer – $42,109.47
The first three were adopted with relative ease, with Donna Macomber voting against the police cruiser cut and David Schoales voting to keep the bond in the budget.
The issue of the Animal Control Officer (ACO) inspired much discussion, mostly in defense of the position.
Police Chief Wrinn said again that the position was necessary, but in a spirit of compromise he suggested cutting it from full-time to 30 hours a week.
Annie Guion at the Windham County Humane Society said that there are models that could be developed so that the ACO position could pay for itself, and offered to help work to make it happen. She agreed the position was vital. “Animals and citizens will suffer without it.”
Mary Cain said that she had called for help in the past and the ACO wasn’t helpful.
Terry Carter said that the police academy doesn’t do much training regarding the handling of animals due to a lack of funds. She suggested some officers be trained and be on call.
David Gartenstein reminded her to stay on topic, regarding the cutting of the ACO position.
Susan Bellville said she has had problems with tenants and unlicensed pit bulls since the town has been without an animal control officer. “This could become a problem. They don’t have proper shots.”
Carolyn Conrad of the Humane Society said that spotting animal cruelty is an “early entry” to intervention for social problems and criminal behavior. She urged them not to cut the position.
Anne Sargent brought up the police shootings of bears, a dog, and a raccoon. “An animal control officer would mean better responses to such events.”
Diane Mazucchi said that an ACO helps find lost animals. Brad Hamilton said without one, more burden is placed on the Humane Society.
In the end, the board voted unanimously to keep the Animal Control Position, but cut the job to 30 hours per week to save about $10,000.
One Percent Across the Board
Interim Town Manager Patrick Moreland provided the Selectboard with information about a 1% reduction shared equally among all departments, but didn’t recommend that the board choose this path.
Rather than vote on them as a whole, the board chose to take each “across-the-board” cut on an individual basis. The board went down Moreland’s provided list, department by department.
For its 1% cut, the Town Manager’s office suggested reducing the Assistant Town Manager position salary by $2,052. Moreland said he couldn’t advocate a cut to the Town Manager salary, nor to the Town Manager’s Secretary’s, so he proposed taking it from his own compensation.
Lynn Russell told the board that average salaries for town managers in Vermont were in the $59-73,000 range, and that she objected to trying to pay more to “attract” someone to Brattleboro. “People need to come here for what Brattleboro is.”
Mary Cain suggested looking to Colchester, where staff rearranged their health benefits and paid higher deductibles. “We’re not the only town facing this problem,” she said. “Call them.”
The board voted 2-3 against the Assistant Town Manager salary cut in a split that would ripple through other votes throughout the evening, with O’Connor and Allen pushing for deeper cuts and Gartenstein, Macomber, and Schoales willing to keep a few more things in the budget.
The same split vote saved cuts to salaries, a wage freeze and various small cuts in the Finance Department, totaling $3,192. The Finance Director warned that it would increase the disparity between union and non-union pay scales, which could be seen as punitive and unfair.
The board voted unanimously for cuts to computer land records, saving $1,805 from the Town Clerk’s office budget. The Town Clerk noted that the people getting pay cuts were the 30 or so employees that were non-union, and that they were already at the bottom of the pay scale.
The suggestion to reduce the amount spent to create the annual Town Report passed 5-0, but a plan to reduce spending for ASL interpreters at Selectboard meetings was removed from the discussion by an amendment of David Schoales.
Planning Services will be reducing their budget for legal notices and postage to save $1,250. The board decided to leave in $1000 for professional services.
The board was moving rather quickly through the list, and some gallows humor was evident. Augusta Andrews rose to inquire about their sarcasm, saying it was difficult to tell what was real. The board pressed on.
The Library offered to cut spending on the telephone, office equipment, conferences, training, mileage and special programs to reach a savings of $6,185. Jerry Carbone said the big discount on phone service was a surprise to them in the last week. “A free gift!” He said there would be some cuts to book discussions and the craft supplies.
David Gartenstein warned that there would be budget pressure to cut the cost savings equivalent of an employee, adding that the pressure applies to all departments.
Mary Cain told the board that Colchester was restoring hours to their library after years of cuts. She urged an increase of hours at our library.
Augusta Andrews asked that they please not cut the craft table. Anne Sargent said it made no sense that we were still floating a $5 million bond while making these cuts.
The Brattleboro Selectboard voted unanimously for the proposed library cuts. The Assessor’s Office, though, was spared from shaving $1,550 from staff salaries.
At this point, John Allen said that he thought the board was to be considering a 1% cut across the board, and wondered why they were voting individually on each item. They continued to vote individually on each item.
The Fire Department will reconfigure vacation buy-backs, incentive pay, and holiday pay to save $18,311. The board voted unanimously for this and for the Police Department to cut staff salaries by $19,308, by reducing the Animal Control officer position to 30 hours per week. (The board voted twice on the ACO. The savings comes just once, however.)
Mary Cain pointed out that Colchester was reducing the number of police cars, and perhaps Brattleboro could buy some. “I’m moving to Colchester,” said John Allen. Gartenstein said Colchester, being a suburb of Burlington, was completely different than Brattleboro.
Spoon Agave suggested the board take a voluntary 1% cut to their stipend. “It’s not much, but we are nickel and dime-ing.”
The board made no motions to cut Central Dispatch equipment, training, and supplies to save $4,112. The expenses were spared.
The Municipal Center budget for building and grounds maintenance will not be reduced by $1,873. The O’Connor-Allen votes in favor were again outweighed by those of Macomber, Schoales, and Gartenstein.
The discussion of reduced budgets for autumn line stripping and public safety equipment for the Department of Public Works, as well as reducing amounts for professional services, equipment rentals, and preventative maintenance to save $15,500, was awkward.
It began with David Gartenstein thanking the DPW for the recent line striping work. He recognized Terry Carter to speak to the pedestrian safety equipment.
Carter chastised Gartenstein for making patronizing comments, then went on to say that the safety equipment was needed. She reminded the board that four pedestrian deaths had occurred recently. Gartenstein added that there was a truck and bike accident just yesterday.
John Allen made a motion to cut the full amount.
Lynn Russell made an impassioned call against a $13,500 increase in the salary for the DPW department head. “I have a huge problem with a huge raise for the head of the department,” she began. “I don’t get it. Almost unanimously people called for financial frugality and common sense.” She said she was appalled.
Gartenstein said her numbers were incorrect and the position, like other department heads, was only getting a 1% raise, of about $800.
Russell apologized for her remarks, but said she wouldn’t have been misinformed had the board responded to any of her inquiries.
“If a citizen is confused, the Selectboard isn’t doing its job,” said former board member Dora Bouboulis. She said it wasn’t necessary for the Selectboard to be angry about it.
Donna Macomber said it was appropriate to advocate passionately for what you believe in. “We’re doing our best to keep it respectful. It was hard to answer the number of emails that were coming.”
John Allen said that respect had to go both ways. He said some emails had been frustrating, and people were “taking their frustrations out on us for information that was public.”
The mood had shifted towards uncomfortable.
“The women all cringed when we were interrogated,” said Mary Cain. “We are passionate and encourage you to refrain from some of the remarks that seem demeaning, the off the cuff remarks. Try very hard to understand that isn’t easy for any of us.”
“David, you made a patronizing comment about dog training being irrelevant. I had two minutes,” started Terry Carter. “David, please pay attention.”
“I’m listening,” he replied.
“We want police officers to be trained to handle animals, David…”
“I’m checking on timing, an appropriate role for the chair,” said Gartenstein.
“Try to pretend I’m a white male of social and financial prominence,” said Carter.
“The only comment I made was that the $5,000 in traffic safety is something you have advocated,” said Gartenstein. “I changed my position to keep that money in the budget.” Carter said she wasn’t talking about that. “I like you, David. Don’t get me wrong.”
Kate O’Connor said that as a woman on the board, she thought Gartenstein was always respectful. “No gender bias, no class bias.”
Gartenstein reminded the board there was a motion to cut the DPW budget. Schoales was out of the room, and the vote was split 2-2, sparing the DPW funds.
The proposal for Recreation & Parks will be a cut of $2,000 for Skating Rink propane use and cemetery maintenance. Repairs to the Gibson Aiken Center to fix fire escape doors were spared. Department head Carol Lolatte was reminded that budget pressures would continue, and costs for non-resident users should reflect true costs of programming.
There would be no reductions in the budget for the Town Attorney, Risk Management, benefits, current bond payments, Human Services, Auxiliary, Recycling, Regional, BaBB, or Capital expense line items.
John Allen said he would still like to take $300,000 from the reserve fund.
The board decided to not have another informational meeting. Jane Southworth thought that was a bad idea and might lead to an extra long Representative Town Meeting.
Dave Emory said he thought the cuts proposed tonight wouldn’t do much for his taxes, and reminded all that the school taxes need much more scrutiny. “For years it seemed the Selectboard gets the blame for taxes. There is another side: the school side. The schools slide away from the wrath you take. Maybe they’ll step forward and do the same thing.”
Spoon Agave agreed that the cuts wouldn’t amount to much, saying they wouldn’t effectively relieve any problems. “It’s almost irrelevant.” He said the voters wanted something from leadership that says we’ll look at deeper problems, recognize them, and begin to figure out how to address them. Agave described the current budget process as providing “headaches and heartaches.”
Public Participation
The Selectboard passed over their scheduled discussion of Pay As You Throw and went directly to public participation.
Lynn Russell apologized again, and pointed out that Brattleboro could learn from places like Colchester and Keene. She suggested the Police station be located where Dotties currently sits at the parking garage. She encouraged more creative thinking.
Bellville reported that taxpayers had been overly optimistic about taxes keeping pace with growth, and that hadn’t been the case. She thought the Selectboard should do more to attract new business. “You are seeing frustration from a lack of growth.”
Terry Carter apologized again, too, for “being out of order.” She wanted to acknowledge the hard work the board was doing.
The evening ended when Mr. Body asked about his status as Town Service Officer, asking why is the state running the town.” He then spoke about his near 75 years in town, and how much he loved Brattleboro. “The bickering pisses me off,” he said, but he added that perhaps we do have problems.
New Assistant Town Manager?
(Sorry for the delay on this one, folks. The meeting made me dizzy.)
I want to add that there was an odd moment in the discussion of the Town Manager hiring process. Gartsentein said something to the effect that after they hire a new Town Manager, they would hire a new Assistant Town Manager. Assistant/Interim Town Manager Patrick Moreland gave him a confused look, then the meeting continued.
My guess is that it was an error, but no one said anything. The board seemed tired, punchy, and were trying to pack a lot in.
So much for "we need to change the way we do business"
So they start getting into nickels and dimes and they still don’t find much they are willing to cut.
So much for “We need to change the way we do business”.
It is starting to feel like they dangled library and rec department staff cuts in front of the town to scare everyone, and are now making only the most token of miniscule cuts in the hopes of placating enough people to keep on going as usual.
These tiny, nibbling at the corners cuts will be dwarfed by what will now be spent on bringing the municipal center to code, let alone paying an architectural firm who knows how much more money to draw up another plan.
How much more of that 5 million dollar bond is going to be handed to people to draw pictures of a building that may suffer the same fate as the plans that this town spent $600,000+ on.
What a waste of money. Looks like they are just gonna keep running around in circles, writing checks.
Where is the project manager’s sense of frugality when it comes to design and planning?
It seems the march to 3% continues unabated.
I absolutely believe that the
I absolutely believe that the huge cuts to the library and parks and recreation were used as scare tactics. And I have no doubt that the remainder of that original 5 million dollar bond will be frittered away on more useless ‘consulting’ fees and fancy sketches of buildings that will never come to pass. Brattleboro is on a downward spiral of frivolous and poorly thought out spending which should be reined in before the town goes bankrupt.
I’m really puzzled as to how the municipal building came to be in such serious disrepair without anyone noticing? It’s a public building -doesn’t it get inspected on a regular basis? And ,if it doesn’t -why? It seems to be a theme that things are ignored until they reach crisis level and then the taxpayers are told that it will take millions of dollars to ‘fix’ things.
What the hell is happening here? Is there anyone running the town who knows what’s going on? Is there any common sense at play here at all?
A crazy meeting, to be sure
Completely understand the need to re-group after that meeting, Chris. It was one best viewed safely at home, beverage in hand.
I think a few things have been made clear for now. The police/fire project will be shelved except for what can be done with the rest of the already borrowed funds. It’s a Band-Aid approach that won’t get cheaper as the years go on. Wouldn’t it have been smart to ok the combined facility project at exit 2 for just $10 million a few years back?
Another thing that seems clear to me is that people want the same services for less money. I don’t see how that’s possible. We “host” so many people during the day who use our services without paying for them. That nice woman who stood up at BAMS and said she was from Newfane, but used our library? If her purse was stolen while she was there, she’d be using our police department. If her car caught fire? You get the idea.
That 1% tax would be one way to “charge” people for the services they use while they’re here. And I really don’t think it would drive people across the river to shop elsewhere. Brattleboro’s downtown is full of specialty shops, not stores that compete with the big-box stores in Keene anyway.
The people who are convinced there’s waste in the budgets should attend meetings early in the process. The heads of the departments explain their needs every year. Ask questions and get answers.
I keep reading about arm-chair quarterbacks who complain that a department’s computer budget is “too high”, but do they ask what it’s being spent on?
I know where I work, we have certain software that’s basically ‘leased’, in that we have a contract to use it, and in order to continue, we have to buy their maintenance and upgrades. That can really add up. We aren’t buying new computers every year–we’re paying for the systems we use.
People have also written that we should completely remove all of the overtime budgeted. And when there’s a fire, we want the firefighters to check their watches and say “oops, my 8 hours are up. gotta go”?
The only way for this process to avoid what’s happening this year is for people to be involved from the onset. Then, if you feel that an expense is too high, you can make them argue in defense of it and make an informed decision. Too much of what’s been said here, and at the meetings is based in ignorance, and it’s easy to stop being ignorant.
I did actually
“I keep reading about arm-chair quarterbacks who complain that a department’s computer budget is “too high”, but do they ask what it’s being spent on?”
I did actually, both publicly and through e-mail. I never received any clarification or answers. No one I have spoken to has any clue why those numbers are so high, only speculation.
If a department that has only a handful of employees is spending nearly the equivalent of an entry level annual salary on leasing software then I think that such an expenditure is worth a closer look, especially when it is repeated across multiple departments and certain enterprising individuals and companies have made a killing by gouging those less familiar with computers and new technology, particularly in municipalities and education.
I also believe it is right and proper for the taxpayers to question such expenses in search of a legitimate answer, justification, or explanation. Thats why I am still waiting to hear what a department with a handful of employees is spending 30k a year on with their computers.
“That 1% tax would be one way to “charge” people for the services they use while they’re here. And I really don’t think it would drive people across the river to shop elsewhere. Brattleboro’s downtown is full of specialty shops, not stores that compete with the big-box stores in Keene anyway.”
Downtown represents a small fraction of the businesses that operate in Brattleboro. Most commercial activity in Brattleboro is not “specialty” shops. From what I understand just about every business owner who operates stores in both Brattleboro and NH report seeing very clear data that large ticket purchases in Brattleboro are a fraction of what they see in their other store(s) over the river. I trust that verifiable and actually factual data over someone’s “opinion” of other people’s behavior.
People DO drive to Keene to make purchases to save 6%. They would only do so more if it were 7%. A 1% option tax, given that Brattleboro is not an oasis, is short-sighted IMO. Capturing a bit more money from tourists at the expense of driving more day-to-day business across the river isn’t going to help us in the long run.
addendum
I would also add that in my opinion, blaming our problems on these “services moochers” ignores the reality that these people who utilize Brattleboro’s position as the area’s “hub” are generally doing so in a manner that generates commercial activity. Are we really going to gripe about the Dummerston or Guilford resident who drives on Brattleboro’s roads not paying taxes towards those roads when they are coming to town to shop at a Brattleboro grocery store?
I also remind the readers that, from what I understand, RTM members were told that the necessary improvements on our police/fire project could not be accomplished for 5 million. Then *later* we are told that we will be paying rather expensive firms already engaged with this failed project to explore that very possibility, as apparently it had not been particularly well explored before.
I want to say I am not opposed to the police/fire project, nor am I opposed to spending what is necessary to do it right and with the best bang for the buck.
What I *AM* opposed to is raising the tax rate any further to do it, as it is already far too high.
If the town needs this project, and it sounds like it does, then it needs to look within and make structural changes to be able to afford it. Just like the residents who have to cut back on their monthly expenditures *somewhere* when the fuel and medical insurance costs go up, but their income doesn’t.
I for one, would like to see that budget-cutting attention focused on the bureaucratic side of the operation, rather than front-line departments like public works, police, fire, library and rec. Just like whenever a school budget is cut, its the teachers and educators who get laid off while the administrators who control the purse strings all get raises and celebrate their frugality by cutting the teachers. I’d rather lay off a few of the highly paid administrators and get a few more paras in there with the kids doing what a school is supposed to do.
For example, I’d much rather keep the library staffed as is and eliminate the assistant town manager position. I’d rather have the public works folks trying to keep our infrastructure from crumbling around us than having the finance department spend $30k a year on software.
Driving to Keene
Yes, people drive to Keene to save on the tax, especially on big-ticket items. But the other reasons they go there are because they can find what they’re looking for, with enough selection to make a considered choice.
Where in Brattleboro can you outfit three kids with new underwear, socks, jeans and tee-shirts at affordable prices? Heck, where you can you outfit a grown man in the same items without taking out a second mortgage?
People go to Keene because they can make a day of it–have lunch at a restaurant they’ve seen advertised on tv (and which offers coupons to entice you there), they can shop at Target and Walmart and JC Penney…and yes, even at Home Depot. Brattleboro discourages that kind of store, but not everyone can afford to shop downtown and not everyone wants to dress their family in used clothing, no matter how eco-friendly it might be.
If I could do all those things in Brattleboro, I wouldn’t bother to go to Keene. But I can’t, so I do. So do a lot of people, judging by the numbers of VT plates in the parking lots over there.
I believe that Brattleboro passed an ordinance (or at least it was heavily discussed) a few years back that limited the square footage of new retail space. So businesses that might have come here have now looked elsewhere because Brattleboro didn’t offer them an opportunity to grow.
We need to encourage businesses to open here, to strengthen our tax base and bring in the dollars that are needed from SOMEWHERE to support the services people don’t want to see cut.
(And keep asking about those computer lines–and any other lines–I believe it’s public information and they should be required to respond with exactly what is being paid to which vendors. Maybe they don’t have to say “why”, but you’d think they’d want to explain.)