Deliberative Session, February 3, 2024
The deliberative session took four hours, including a short intermission. Only one warrant article turned out to be particularly contentious. However, several of the warrant articles encountered modest resistance. A few of them were subjected to minor wording changes, but other than this they’re all going to the March town ballot substantively the same as proposed.
Brooklyn, the therapy dog, and the rest of the Nottingham Police Department were out in force for this event. Fortunately, their services were not needed, but as always, appreciated.
Article #6: Fire Chief Compensation
Warrant article #6 was contentious. It was the only issue that necessitated a vote count.
There was a motion to nullify the warrant article by changing the $60k to $0. Much debate ensued from this. One speaker made derisive comments about the town’s former Fire Chief. This was met with jeers from the audience and a rebuke from the Moderator. This was the only 5 seconds of drama at the event.
Selectman Shirland said that this warrant article was to bring the compensation into line with that of neighboring towns, listing those of several towns. A member of the audience pointed out that Deerfield’s Fire Chief compensation was not mentioned and that it was similar to Nottingham’s existing compensation. Budget Committee member Tom Bukiewicz said that the department had a qualified candidate who was willing to accept the current stipend.
Shirland said that the stipend for the position would not provide any benefits or be subject to FICA.
The motion to lower the stipend to zero failed, 36 to 78.
Budget Committee member John Decker presented a compromise motion at $20k. This also failed.
4% Tax Cap
Budget Committee Vice Chairman Owen Friend-Gray reported that last year the town had used an incorrect interpretation of the 4% tax cap - the first year it was put into effect. Last year the tax cap was understood to limit the Budget Committee from increasing the operating budget by 4%. This year the cap was understood to apply to the total amount raised by taxes, meaning taxes for both the operating budget and the warrant articles. This new interpretation appears to have come late in the budgeting season. Expect more discussion about this during the next budgeting season.
Other Issues
Article 20 to repurpose remaining funds from the tricentennial celebration to be similarly purposed for celebrations got substantial debate. The tricentennial fund has $42k left in it. The Tricentennial events ended up being almost entirely paid for from donations, but the town had put in $45k from taxes and most of this remains in the fund.
Several questions and complaints were put forth about the current operating status of the Fire Department, such as the fact that the Fire Department certification of the room in which the deliberative session was being held had lapsed.
There was debate about whether the amount set aside in article #5 for fire equipment was adequate. Figures for replacement fire equipment were cited. These figures were in the high six figures. Tanker #1 is the fire truck with the nearest expected replacement date: 2026. A figure provided in the session for how much was in the fund had to be corrected during the session to include a $300k certificate of deposit. There’s also $114k in cash.
There were concerns about the bylaws established by the Fire Department. This debate was cut off by the Moderator because the deliberative session did not have a legal warrant to discuss them.
State Rep Hal Rafter said the legislature is considering legislation that will pay for half of the cost of the new ballot-counting machine the town needs.
Supervisor of the Checklist Dee-Ann Decker said a special meeting may be required to appropriate funds for a ballot-counting machine if the current warrant article fails.
A motion was made to adjust the budget line in the operating budget for legal fees, from $30,001 to $130,000 on the grounds that since 2002 the town has had legal expenses under $30k only three times. Last year we spent $83k. This year the town has major litigation against it. A $30k budget for this is unreasonable and fiscally irresponsible. Selectman Morin rebutted this saying that any deficiency in a budget line item gets made up from unspent budget from other line items that failed to spend their budgets. For example, through the police department not being fully staffed.
Motion by Selectman Bartlett to reduce the amount to $0 in article #13 for the highway truck fund failed.
Watch the video:
Doug, did budget committee member Tom Bukiewicz indicate who on the department was qualified and would accept the stipend, and what their qualifications are? It's interesting given that the department comprised of people who are arguably subject matter experts on providing protection would adjust their bylaws to require that a fire chief meet specific training and certifications requirements - seems to imply they don't feel there is a qualified candidate internally. Did he define what he considered "qualified"? I would be curious to know how he arrives at that conclusion, as it seems contrary to the position the fire department has taken.