The Brattleboro Selectboard discussed the “base budget” – a budget with no changes to services from current levels – at Tuesday’s Election Night meeting. As is, they said, it would be a 22% increase. Board members agreed it was a difficult budget, but none had any big ideas for getting the increase to a more manageable level.
Citizens attending had ideas – eliminate raises, cut Municipal Center hours to 32 hours a week for most employees, cut positions, and throw it all out and build up from what is truly necessary were suggested. Personnel costs, they noted, were the big numbers.
In a flashback to the era of Barb Sondag we heard the Town Manager ask the board to simply tell him what services they’d like to cut from the people of Brattleboro…
Preliminaries
They, as polls in swing states suggested, start late. : )
….
Chair Daniel Quipp – I want to mark the retirement of Lenny Howard – thanks for decades of service to the community. I first started working with him as assistant chief. Very compassionate and firm, and wanting to protect the community. he led the fire department excellently and set standards. I want to thank him. Secondly, the scheduling of this meeting. Several wished it wasn’t happening tonight. We tried our best to have it not happen tonight. People are at home distracted – we tried to do it last night or Wednesday, or Thursday… couldn’t make it happen. It could have started at 7pm, but it didn’t occur to me. The focus will be on the budget tonight. I heard your feedback and we tried. Also… (reminds people about participation rules).
Town Manager John Potter – I second what you said about Chief Howard, sad to see him go but happy for his retirement. Always helping us be better. Town’s budget open house is next Tuesday at the library – discuss it directly with Town staff. Planning Dept is having a 2nd forum about the Canal Street corridor plan – enhancement to Cana Street out to Exit 1 from the Hinsdale bridge. 68% of Brattleboro voters have put ballots in as of 6 pm. Thanks to poll workers and voters. Open until 7 pm tonight… at American Legion.
Liz McCloughlin – with daylight saving, I implore people outside to wear reflective clothing and have flashlights – you can’t be seen. Black dogs with black coats is dangerous.
Public
Dick Degray – I want to thank some people. I came out of semi retirement to do West B flowers and want to thank the people who helped… Rashed, Mary and Casey. Judos to them for their hard work.
Jester Jersey – can you hear me? Good evening – I am a new member of BCS – Brattleboro Common Sense – today is an election day. While many are able to vote, 16 year olds have not participated. No 16 year old was able to weigh in on national elections. Brattleboro 16 year olds could vote on local elections – they have been empowered. We’d like to lower the age to 16 across the country. I, BCS and others are having a local awareness day next Saturday.
Consent Agenda
A. First Class Liquor License, Outside Consumption Permit and Annual Entertainment License – North Chair Brewing LLC
B. Dorothy Lousie Kyler Fund – Authorize $5,000 Grant Application
C. Gas Compressor – Authorize $16,725.48 Replacement
D. Parking for Holly Days – Authorize
E. Approve Special Representative Town Meeting Warning (Special Representative Town Meeting to reconsider “Acceptable Community Conduct” to be held on December 12, 2024 at 6:00pm) – Approve
consented!
Marigold First and Third Class Liquor License, Outside Consumption Permit, and Annual Entertainment License – Ratify
John Potter – at your last meeting you considered licenses for Marigold. There was discussion around it and we got off track on requirements for the entertainment license. The Town Attorney wanted to clarify once he heard what you did.
Bob Fischer Atty – hours of operation are from 8 am to 2 am. As a local board, you can condition your approval on ordinances you have – entertainment and nuisances. You can condition the approval. You were regulating the hours they could serve liquor, which you can’t do. You can make it conditional on complying with an entertainment license. If they make noise after a set time. If there is a violation you can bring the liquor licensee in and revoke or suspend it. That’s your hook for regulating. It is in the interest of the business to abide by the entertainment rules, or everything could be revoked. We’re asking you to issue the entertainment license with conditions, then issue the liquor license upon compliance with the entertainment license.
Daniel – we overstepped our boundaries, we all make mistakes. We want to ratify the licenses.
Liz McCloughlin – I’m happy that this is brought to our attention. Strange that we didn’t know this. It shows the inability of us to regulate our local issues due to the state laws. Our legislatures should look into that as an aspect of local control.
(Entertainment til 12 on Friday and Sta. 11 other nights. )
Mark Baxter – live on Main Street adjacent to the River Garden – it creates a horseshoe in the back right by the rear doors and loud music in a densely used part of town… you are asking them to amplify things in a historic areas of town. You’ve granted other licenses that close at 9, or 10, or have no outdoor serving. There was a controversy when the River Karen first opened – it was agreed to have entertainment end by 10, and I ask they close doors when there is amplified music.
approved 4-1 (Franz against)
FY26 General Fund Base Budget – Discussion
Daniel – we have a big memo here and hopefully people have access to it. There are copies for people in the room. This is big important business.
John Potter – so, what this is about is the base budget, which is what it would to take to continue services just as they were in 2025. What would that take> There are n policy proposals, just what has been approved and what we have done in the past. We’ll discuss if this is the suite of service you want to provide. We will have a discovery period to understand what polices this implements and if there are changes to make, and the other part is decision making in January to decide on a final budget recommendation.
These projections – what we found is that the cost to run a municipal government continues to go up, just like everything else. No exception with municipal costs. To delver the services people are used to will require increase costs – about a 9% cost for expenditures – no solid waste decision in this. It will be very different from before. The big areas that are different are the downtown safety action plan, approved by you, and other capital needs and benefits. Unfortunately, this increase of 9% is happening when we see revenues will be done – these will need to be picked up by something – so a property tax rate. PAYT bag revenue is down $300k. We are not expecting and fund balance to keep tax rates down – no surplus projected to handle that. Long term surplus in past budgets is not available due to the recruitment in the police department. We are taking a conservative approach to ambulance reimbursement. Not enough data yet on that. We did add a little to that revenue due to us charging base on a non-transport. The combined impact – $170 more per $100k of assessed value. We don’t suggest you accept this as is. The median home would have a tax increase of $300. Not including solid waste, of course. If you do nothing it will be less than a dollar day (!) impact.
Right now, we are assuming in the base budget of continuing services is that things are the same, except for the downtown safety action plan, and no solid waste solution is in this budget. We also assumed personnel would follow collective bargaining agreements (etc). Another assumption is services and supplies increase at a rate of 6% – fuel and electricity. Human Services was consistent with past. Sustainability fund transfers as before. Capital transfer as planned. Revenue assumptions are that rooms and meals tax will bring in an extra 5%.
On page 4 of the memo, there is a table that shows expenditure of the base budget – shows what we spent before, what we expect to pay in the base budget, and the change. We expect staffing will be up 10.6% – benefits are up about a million, department expenses up $100k. Services and supplies are down – removing a nonviable solid waste solution. Fund transfers are up $700k. Debt service is down $100k. Total change in expenditure is about 9%, or 2.1 million increase without solid waste solution added.
Projections around revenues – here again we have what we had before and what we project. The big thing here is reduced fees for service and reduced use of fund balance, so property taxes go up to 2.6 million, offset a bit by other revenues.
Budget alternates – in here are 5 different alternates to start the conversation. We can look at others, too. The 5 items are from tax rate reduction to tax rate increase – you could do another cost of living adjustment – down to 3.5% staff wide – saving $55k. You could cut ASL folks. You could choose to donate less to Moover. You could choose the solid waste option with the town not providing collection of trash – just recycling and compost. Or you could choose every other week trash and recycling, but weekly compost. That could have a 22% impact in the tax rate. Probably less than if people paid for their own trash collection. This are the alternates. If you have other areas to explore we can add to this.
I did want to mention we have an online budget book. Kim Frost put it together.
Finally, next steps. Questions to the board tonight – budget open house next Tuesday at the library to discuss the budget with department heads. The next regal meeting of the board will review feedback from the open house and start in on follow ups to this meeting. So, we’ll continue the discovery process into December and look at alternates, gather feedback at the open house and at your meetings and the RTM focus groups in December. You take action in January. So tonight we are looking for a few things – any feedback on the assumptions for the base budget – are these assumptions correct or should we think differently. Clarifying questions are welcome. Importantly, if you could identify policy areas for us to consider for savings – if you want to get the tax increases down – or if you want to see it increase, such as the pool and other things not in this base budget or in the budget alternates. If the process needs to change, let us know.
Daniel – thank you. That’s a lot of work. I appreciate everything that went into this. I would like to do the questions methodically so we don’t get lost. Base budget assumptions…
Franz Reichsman – question about the base budget –
Daniel – assumptions?
Franz – we added a substantial sum for the downtown safety action plan, are they included here?
Potter – yes in the FY26 base budget.
Franz – we added to the fy25 budget
Potter = we are spending the reserve for the FY 25 costs so not in the FY25 budget.
Franz – so we won’t be restoring our reserve fund either in this?
Potter – not in the base budget
Daniel – hopefully we’ll start a list of things to consider further. Just surfacing questions right now.
Richard Davis – wan’t there an IT position created?
Potter – base budget shows staffing as it is in FY25, it was approved in FY25 so we assume it will continue.
Liz – I view this process as the firsts step and also feel that the selectboard role and town manager role need to be thoroughly examined, a lot of the nuts and bolts are the responsibility of the Town Manager. Guidance we give to him, then he can decide and come back to us. We’ll have suggested, so he’ll come back with their suggestions. I suggest a cost of living reduction vs. staff reductions might be an issue and thing in terms of 2% for human services be looked at and scaled back. I also think to not address the pool at this time. I have more ideas. That is it for assumptions.
Daniel – the COLA built in is 4% as is in FY25. We’d like to see what else we could consider – lowering it. And the human services assumption is based on ram guidance, not law, so we could do something different there. We will relitigate that at RTM. That’s ok. I’d add capital planning – we used to do long term financial plan in the spring and in our next budget cycle we should do that in public for their feedback.
Potter – staff will be able to have that conversation when we load data in to our opengov system.
David L – There was an initiative – surface stormwater utility. This is a grim story to tell this evening. The storm water utility was to generate a substantial amount? What is the status?
Potter – not likely affect the general fund, so not germane, but we have been talking with legislators. We have a lack of capacity to develop a program like that – to research and put together a program. Not sure if the opportunities in Brattleboro are that good.
David – so any money from the storm management fund would go back into a utility fund – could it be transferred to other funds?
Daniel – good question for another day since we don’t have that utility yet.
Dick Degray – collective bargaining – department heads and others aren’t under collective bargaining – Salaries for department heads should be frozen at current levels. CLA for social security is 2.5%. I can’t get a 12% raise because my taxes are going up. You said Rooms and Meals would be up .5% – in there at a 1% change and you said .5? $651 increase? Did we get the first check?
Potter – it is a 5% increase projection – you are looking at change in the budget, not from the actuals – we projected off of known receipts. A little more conservative. We have started to get some receipts in… at the next financial update.
Daniel – non union staff salaries – we’d like to see us consider salaried with no increase. We aren’t committing to anything… we see this is a budget with a hefty increase so we are looking at what we might be able to do. Just cuz it is on a list doesn’t mean we will do it.
Potter – each thing you add is significant staff work to do…
Daniel – more assumption stuff?
Degray – the town manager is in for a 9% increase…. police chief 8.2%…. etc.
Daniel – I understand your point…
Derby reads all the increases.
Daniel – point taken, we just won’t do …
Degray – if it wasn’t for Franz no one would look at it.
Peter Case – I don’t know about that…
Daniel – everyone understands this budget is very challenging. Everyone wants to find the sweet spot of services and tax rate. I’m committed to doing the several month process making hard decisions. Starting of adversarially is not the right way to start. We want to plan to look at different areas. Let’s be cordial and exploratory again.
Franz – I appreciate the remarks. There is a sense this isn’t a true budget – it doesn’t include solid waste, which is part of our current services. To be a base budget would mean not cutting services. It seems to me what will happen is that the momentum will be toward maintaining our current level of services. If we include said waste, the $1.5 million should be reflected in our thinking. If we are looking at a 14% tax increase and add in 8% for solid rate, it is a 22% base budget increase, in the way I’m thinking about a base budget. That is one of my assumptions.
Daniel – let’s move on. Any clarifying questions for staff?
Daniel – it is important to not the main drivers are the downtown safety action plan that we adopted in September for fy25 and fy26. We will need to visit with the police to hear more about the downtown safety action plan – whether the size and scope is something we still want and the implications of doing something differently.
Liz – it is always great to hear from the police chief. It was a decision we needed to make and how long the effort continues is something the board will continue to monitor. I have no interest in examining that. There are many other things in the budget, but not that.
Franz – it is important but I’m interested in what would happen if we made it smaller.
Richard – I said it before. We need to review it now within the context of the budget.
Peter – while we review it, we need to hold the line as hard a pill it has been to swallow. People thank me multiple times a day. Pulling back is not good.
Daniel – we are identifying broad areas to take a look at. The feedback we get might be that it is worth it. Or maybe not. We need that discussion. The other area is solid waste. We are planning of having a decision in the next month. Franz’s point about replicating what we have, Option B is in this budget. I can’t imagine us telling people in town to go figure it out yourself. Again, no decisions tonight but we do need to talk about solid waste.
Peter – I’d like to see that number in this budget. If we work hard to reduce this then add it back it… we need to include it. The $1.4 million.
Daniel – put it in and people can react to a 22% tax increase. Want to talk about capital?
Degray – something Peter said – there is an officer downtown and people are feeling that things are happening. The Chief has 22 officers on the street. I don’t think she’s had that many before. She’s been trying to get to 27. She asked for 3 more. I would have said – let’s see what happens at 27 officers. I agree with e BRAT team. Honestly – you overreacted by giving 3 more police officers… not until we get to 27. I’ll pay taxes on ghost employees. There might not be 5 people by the next budget cycle. Supporting 3 people when we probably won’t get them and we have to pay taxes on them. Things are getting better with one officer downtown, and when BRAT gets down there is will be better. Where you are right now, even if you reduce them, you are still at a 17% increase. Get to 27 and see what that does.
Daniel – any clarifying questions…
Kate O’Connor – we have the list of capital projects and equipment, but not the spreadsheet with the long term plan and can things last another year. That would be helpful to have.
Franz – is that online?
Potter – in 2023-24 RTM book. The equipment plan is more complex and not online.
Moreland – lots of time and work went into this – we’ll get the other plans in there quickly.
Daniel – service reductions or savings? I have about 10.
Franz – in this budget, where so much is on personnel, if you are making a meaningful reduction in the budget it is a reduction of personnel. For a substantial decrease in what the town spends. It will deal with the number of people who work here.
Richard – personnel is the biggest are in terms of money – maybe no increase for non-union people. Need to make painful decisions. That would be a starting point. WE need to make cuts to make taxes affordable.
Daniel – In order to priced the level of services, I’m not looking to cut staff of salaries. We can look at other things – the capital plan is larger than it was in previous years. I know there is a good reason. Things have been deferred. We should talk of other ways to reduce or delay capital expenses. With regard to delay – the EMS transport revenue is conservative, maybe in a month we’ll have some date to build a better projection, this could maybe inform ways to save elsewhere. That’s risky and might not pay off.
Liz – COLA, human services, prior ARPA decisions, a hold on the pool (not in the budget now), and a general review of capital costs and budget as a whole.
Peter – so, I’ll sound like the Chair – in my line of work, I know what it looks like when staff continues to be cut. Those reductions go to the bottom line and responsibilities get dispersed, making it harder for those who remain, things stop working smoothly. A year down the line, things start to appear – burnout and exhaustion. They find other employment and we lose other people. If we look in that capacity – maybe look at positions budgeted but not yet filled, not taking jobs away for any department.
Richard – capital budget – could you expand on what you meant?
Daniel – road paving, sidewalk replacement, retaining walls, culverts… all critical stuff. We pave fewer miles of road and we hear about it as it is. The amount we do is under what we need to be doing… we could look at reducing the scope of them. That has a level of service impact – more potholes, less safe sidewalks, bridges and culverts…. we should be investing in them. WE need to consider all those things.
Liz – I appreciate you saying it. You love paving projects… that is a big ask on your part. One way to skin that cat is to look to what DPW can do vs outside contractors.
Daniel – doing work in house savings.
Potter – we have a $16 million backlog… less chipping away at that if we do these changes. We’ll show you upsides and downsides to all of these.
Liz – the big picture – I want state revenue sharing – we can see the importance of that, but it is long term. We can see that we all nee to understand Brattleboro is a hub town, costs are high, and post COVID costs are high and inflation is high, and needs are great.
Daniel – PILOT – $180k in revenue – could we look at this agreements to look for something more advantageous to the town? This is educating the board and the community so we can make a decision we can live with.
John K – I brought this up at RTM… we have the highest sales use tax at 7%. VT taxes a cut. We give the state a gift. We have a story to tell about why we need that revenue. Lean of legislative delegation to bring some money back., as roads and things to serve the entire county.
Degray – I think you should be cutting the selectboard stipend… seriously reducing it. It was raised to get more people interested in running. We haven’t been over inundated with people to sit in those seats. I also think we should look at this building be open 4 days a week, and have people work 4 days a week, department heads 5 days a week. We’re not going to get there without the recurring costs. You can’t cut discretionary spending. The meat of this is personnel, so if you don’t have the stomach for it, and it sounds like you don’t… don’t hire the IT coordinator…. seriously have a conversation about 32 hour work weeks.
Daniel – a proposal from Dick. Investigate further? We could look at it. I don’ like the sound of it…
Craig M – I don’t envy you. I feel your pain. I can pay my taxes, but folks making $30/hr and $100k a year – they’ll be paying $10k in property taxes – it is an extraordinary increase. It is $300 after years of “just another $300”. If you are looking at a 225 increase, I suggest you take everything out of the house and only bring back what you can afford. Build up from the bottom. An essential core functions of municipal government, then build up from that core function budget. 22% – you won’t be able to lop enough off. The state education tax isn’t your fault but we are looking at another double digits. We are getting close to breaking.
Daniel – it is really important that we develop real world scenarios for model households – $40k income, $90k income, etc and show what their real world taxes would be. I’d like su to have real work models so we can tell people what they can pay. Second – building the budget form base up – we didn’t do that.
Potter – if you want us to give us some ideas about what services aren’t essential, I’d need to know what those areas are.
David – I appreciate what Craig said, but there is a problem for renters. Landlords make adjustments in rents – clearly they will pass it along. WE want to address affordability of housing in town. This will have negative effects.
Daniel – we have been considering police station downtown. We could consider slightly downsizing it, and taking some of that money to our capital needs. That’s a possibility.
Liz – I recognize that the entire program is being paid for by revolving loan fund. I’d like to know how that could be paid for town capital expenses.
Potter – might not want to spend it on salaries or operating expenses.
Daniel – but maybe spend it on equipment for a one time reduction.
Degray – Liz mentioned ARPA – are you allowed to recommit the funds?
Potter – She means the special projects list – we committed to spend it and it was spent on salaries. There is some remaining balance there.
Daniel – other thoughts on services reductions or savings? There will be other opportunities.
Potter – the sooner you can identify reductions – it is not just a$300 increase on the median home, but if you reduce it what is the value of the lost service that was provided?
Daniel – further on service reductions?
Kate O’Connor – what Craig was saying – you have to consider the taxpayer but also something else. Not just this year but also what you are doing in future years. You can build a house of cards. I sat there and worked for the governor. You have to reduce now. There will be qa time when you hot a ceiling and cut programs, personnel, and services. If you don’t get this under control now, we will have huge financial programs in the future. It’s crushing taxpayers, but consider the long term impacts. Two of you may be on the board.
Kate – continued engagement will only make this better. Be collaborative and productive. Let’s keep that going. Process! John gave us a process with a serious of meetings, focus groups with RTM, the budget meeting next week. I’m feeling that we need to make sure there is more time for budget meetings. As many as we need to have to walk through these decisions, so we can know the budget is one the public is behind. I hope. I think a few more meetings – probably December 10, 17th. Board?
Pete – wide open on the 24th.
Franz – as many as we need to have.
Degray – a couple of things . John just used the $100k benchmark. The median home is up over $250k and above. I hope you’d add the impact of it up to scale. Today the Assessor’s office gave me a grand list 2023. Three new buildings. That tells you something about affordability. A level of service? No one knows you are talking about a 21% tax bill increase. The pool… it closes August 15th because lifeguards leave. We have hot weather beyond that. We survive without the pool. WE can survive a service cut – open just 4 days – I didn’t hear any plans from you to bring the budget down. There should be no sacred lambs. If you have a sacred lamb you are doing us no service. We’re worried about closing building for day?
Potter – $183k is the media price that I quote from. The tax rate is $300 on that. Half of the homes will see less and half will see more. A $360k home would be $50 increase. Rather than look at an overall percent, what will it actually cost people.
Daniel – any more on process? No? We’re done with the initial consideration and did a lot of good work and partnered pretty well.
Franz – next week’s forum is really important 4-6 at Library on Tuesday.
Potter – we’d like to hear other service reduction ideas… where is the wiggle room in each budget? What do you want to stop giving the people in Brattleboro?
Daniel – could we have budget notebooks again?
Kate – can you rerun the budget with the trash numbers in it…
Daniel – we are asking for that. Adding in Option B.
Potter – you already have all the info – if you want to accept that alternate we can add it back into the base budget.
Post meeting observation/thought - Town staff misunderstood Miskovich
Craig Miskovich suggested they “take everything out of the house and only bring back what you can afford.” He said they should build up from the bottom, from the essential core functions of municipal government, and then build up from that core function budget.
Town Manager John Potter responded with a question to the board – tell us what services you’d like to cut.
But that isn’t what Craig was asking. He didn’t suggest making a list of things to cut. He suggested starting from nothing and building up. That’s quite different.
Starting from nothing and building up would not be that difficult of an exercise.
Brattleboro could look to surrounding towns to see what “essential municipal services” might be. A small staff and a DPW taking care of roads works fine for many of Brattleboro’s neighbors. That plus a crew of volunteer firefighters serves many towns well.
Is that enough government to get by? “What else should be added in?” becomes the question. What can be done privately or with volunteers?
Many would prefer to see a budget that shows a 3% or less increase 22% is rather insane.
Also
The board should now plan to get almost zero federal funds for a while. Highways, FEMA, etc.