Interviews with the 2024 Candidates for Budget Committee

The format of this interview is that I have tried to come up with questions aimed at drawing out where the candidates stand on some of the difficult or controversial issues that face the Budget Committee. Each candidate got the same three questions and was asked to respond via email. The candidates’ responses are presented here verbatim and in alphabetical order by candidate.

All of the candidates have provided thoughtful and detailed answers that not only describe where they stand, but also illuminate aspects of how the town’s budgeting process operates and the fiscal challenges that face the town. Nottingham is fortunate to have five candidates come forward to volunteer for this difficult, time-consuming, and unpaid position. On Tuesday, March 12 the voters will select three of these candidates for 3-year terms on the Budget Commitee.

Question 1

Each year the Budget Committee predictably will find itself in some level of disagreement with the Board of Selectmen over recommending warrant articles to the voters. Usually, the selectmen are unanimously in favor. Frequently the committee will have a few members who are opposed. Occasionally it will have a majority who are opposed. What do you think drives this difference of opinion?

Thomas Butkiewicz

First, a quick answer: Different priorities: Some members say taking care of the town’s employees is a priority. Some members’ priority is keeping taxes low so our town is affordable to live in.  Some members simply trust the BoS and school board (or are the designated representative from those boards) and will vote to give them whatever they ask for.  

Now, a detailed answer:

One should not assume the Budget Committee will disagree with the BoS.  Before I joined the committee in 2020, it was a rubber-stamp committee that almost always voted unanimously in support of every warrant article put before it by the BoS.  The 2019 and 2018 town reports show only one BC member cast a single vote cast against any of the BoS’s warrant articles each year. The BC was suffering from groupthink, which is the tendency for groups to prioritize conformity and suppress dissenting opinions, leading to poor decision-making.

When I joined the Budget Committee in 2020, I was the only Republican out of the eleven members. Such one-sided membership over the previous years had resulted in unchallenged assumptions, overlooked alternatives, and a failure to thoroughly scrutinize proposed budgets and spending plans.  The Budget Committee was failing its basic duty to be a fiscal watchdog for taxpayers, and to act and a check-and-balance on the spending desires of the town and school.

This last year, we have luckily had a more balanced membership on the Committee, and we regularly engage in actual, meaningful debate of the expenses and spending plans of the town and school.  This open debate is good for our town and good for taxpayers.

But, such debate often does not happen unless someone is willing to “rock the boat” by being a dissenting voice and asking difficult questions of town and school officials.  Some people complain about my confrontational and outspoken approach, but I have successfully ensured that the committee engages in objective and critical analysis of budget proposals, rather than simply going along to get along and taking the path of least resistance. I routinely challenge wasteful spending, unnecessary expenditures, and budgetary decisions that may not align with the best interests of taxpayers.

Budget decisions often involve complex trade-offs and competing priorities. I ensure that taxpayers are adequately represented and considered, preventing the committee from being overly influenced by the agenda of the town and school and the perspectives of their representatives.

My willingness to challenge the status quo, ask tough questions, and demand rigorous analysis and justification for budgetary decisions helps prevent groupthink and ensure that the Budget Committee fulfills its fiduciary responsibilities to taxpayers.

Donna Danis

Having served on the Budget Committee for four years prior to being elected to the Select Board, I have experience with both sides of the process and view respectful debate as a good thing for voters.

During the budgeting process, the role of Select Board is to identify and put forth expenditure recommendations that are in the best interest of the Town. They do this based on historical recurring costs, known cost increases, salary requirements, and new expenditures deemed necessary for effective management and safety of the town.

Under, RSA 32:1 The purpose of the budget committee is to "assist voters in the prudent appropriation of public funds." During the budgeting process, the committee's job is to ask informed questions that respectfully challenge recommendations made by the Select Board. When voters see "The Budget Committee recommends this article by a vote of 6-2," for example, it means there was thoughtful discussion and varying perspectives. Voters then have the responsibility to research both sides of the question and cast their vote accordingly. 

This process between the Board and Committees provides a good system of checks and balances. There will always be different perspectives, but respectful debate is healthy and in the best interest of the Town. 

Jillian Eldredge

My observation is that the Budget Committee has a wider spectrum of political beliefs represented within its membership, including some members who typically oppose nearly all spending proposals, despite their validity. Additionally, I think that the Board of Selectmen looks at the budget in more broad strokes while the Budget Committee is tasked with a very detail-oriented look at each individual line item within the context of our financial reality. This contextualized “closer look,” in my opinion, creates instances where there is sometimes valid disagreement between committee members. We ‘put our money where our values are’ and disagreement over individual articles is an expression of a difference in spending priorities and management philosophy. Difference of opinion and a spectrum of political belief are essential to the BC and to democratic life.

If elected to the Budget Committee, there are a number of things I would like to see. One is more coordination and communication with the BOS and another is more consensus within the Budget Committee. Both of these items require increased communication and pragmatic agreement towards common financial goals. These are difficult to achieve, but the financial moment we find ourselves in demands it.

As a  voting taxpayer myself, I know how important BC recommendations are and how many voters rely on them. Something I would like to see implemented is a “voter’s guide” – a brief document that puts forward the rationale for each warrant article. It could succinctly state the majority opinion as well as any dissenting opinion regarding individual articles so that voters can receive better context on BC recommendations and vote accordingly. I think this is an achievable goal that would make progress on the town’s overall need to better communicate with residents about our most pressing issues. If elected, I hope to advocate strongly for more communication like this as an aid to voters.

Jeffrey Morrison

I think that there are two reasons for this. The first would be that the Budget Committee has twice as many members as the BOS. In the three years that I have served on Budget, I have seen one member resign, one unofficially resign and also two members decide not to finish out their term in the interim between budget seasons. My best guess for the second reason would be that the BOS meets year round, every other week and handles much more than just a budget. There are many residents that attend the BOS meetings with questions or complaints and this may cause the members of the BOS to stick together a little more compared to Budget Committee. 

Brent Tweed

As a member of the budget committee I attempt to ensure taxpayer money is spent judiciously.  I give a high priority to warrant articles that maintain town infrastructure including buildings and roads.  This should be a top priority.  Often, when there is a difference of opinion on the budget committee on a warrant article it is due to those opposed to a particular warrant article who choose to spend taxpayer money in a more judicious manner.

Question 2

The Town overspent its legal fee budget of $30k by $53k last year - without being involved in any litigation. In June the Town must defend itself in court regarding a charge from its former Fire Chief that he was improperly dismissed. In addition, the Town may be sued by one or more residents who have recently had their wells poisoned with road salt. However, the budget for legal fees is once again $30k. Do you think this is a reasonable figure to budget? Why or why not? Why do you think the Budget Committee and the Board of Selectmen approved that figure?

Thomas Butkiewicz

We asked about that line amount in a Budget Committee meeting, and the BoS was confident that it was sufficient.  I can only assume that they have made plans to attempt to resolve the town’s pending legal matters in a cost-efficient manner, rather than drawn out legal battles. 

If I recall correctly, most of the overage in this line last year was the cost for a questionable “investigation” of the fire chief that was initiated by the former temporary town administrator, who seemed to have an axe to grind, and is no longer employed by our town.  I hope that now the town can resolve this situation amicably without further cost to taxpayers.

I opposed efforts at deliberative session to significantly increase this line, because budgeting more money for legal services can inadvertently create incentives for lawyers to run up unnecessary charges. In many law firms, lawyers are expected to meet billing targets. Setting a larger budget means lawyers have to bill more hours to meet those targets. This can lead to a situation where lawyers prioritize maximizing billable hours over the efficiency or necessity of the work being done.

When lawyers know they have a large budget at their disposal, there is less emphasis on finding cost-effective solutions. Instead, they may pursue strategies that involve more billable hours or additional services.  Lawyers can also be risk-averse, preferring to undertake additional work or precautions to mitigate any potential risks to the town, even if those risks are minimal or manageable without incurring additional expenses.

I am hopeful that the BOS’s decision to set a $30k budget is evidence of a concerted effort to establish clear expectations and guidelines regarding utilization of legal services and to avoid unnecessary charges.

Donna Danis

The Select Board manages to the overall budget number approved by voters, not to individual line items. With the 4% tax cap, the Select Board and Budget Committee undoubtedly had to make some tough decisions. 

In terms of legal fees, it's difficult to predict what will or won't come to fruition. However, if there is a need to expend more in legal fees, it will come for another area of the budget that may be underspent. Deliberative session attendees overwhelmingly rejected a motion to increase the overall budget by $100K based solely on the concern that legal fees may be higher. That rejection signaled voter support for the Board and Committee's strategy.

Jillian Eldredge

It would seem to me that maintaining a $30k line item for legal expenses, given some of the current litigation facing, or likely to be facing, the town is illogical. However, I am not familiar with these conversations within the committee and so perhaps there are reasons for maintaining the line item as is.

To my knowledge, however,  there is only one pending legal action against the town. Any others have not yet been (and may never be) filed. Also, the legal process is slow and attorneys bill on different schedules and have different contracts. I’m not familiar with the town’s contract for legal services and whether retainers are in place. It’s very possible that any billing from legal activities may not hit until next fiscal year.

Spending is extremely limited under the 4% tax cap and we have many needs and expenses that we can clearly quantify. I do wish the legal budget had been substantially higher and I would have advocated for that, but perhaps it was a situation of prioritizing known expenses over potential ones.

Jeffrey Morrison

I will say that this question was asked of the BOS in early December during our Budget meetings (line #85). The response was that the town was hoping not to have any new upcoming litigation. We know that was also brought up at Town Deliberative and the resposne was that the BOS would find the funds to handle it. They as a board have the ability to move monies from area to area and as a whole, they are only restricted by the bottom line. I am okay with that response if that is how they would like to handle it. I am not big on budgeting for potential lawsuits. If someone would like to sue the town, have at it. Especially if the town is at fault. I also do not want to have a budget line that could potentially invite litigation either.

Brent Tweed

$30,000 is likely not an adequate number for legal expenses.  Unfortunately, the town seems to have received bad legal advice in the past which has caused us to be involved in unnecessary legal disputes.   The handling of the investigation and firing of the previous fire chief is but one example of bad decisions which have cost the town thousands of dollars in legal fees.  The chemical trespass ordinance is another example.  

From my perspective on the budget committee, the town's budget is already bloated.  Our proposed total appropriations (operating budget plus other warrant articles recommended by the Selectmen) for 2024 is $6,305,830 which is 9.4% higher than last year (total appropriations for 2023 were $5,756,365).  This is over 3 times higher than the lastest CPI annual inflation rate of 3.1%.  Additionally, the proposed school budget is $16,704,210 which is 7% higher than the $15,613,991 budget passed at the 2023 deliberative session.    

Any additional money added to the legal expense line item adds to the bottom line town operating budget (which as I've already shown is already bloated).  If the Board of Selectmen need to spend additional money on legal expenses they are not restricted to $30,000.  They are free to move money around at will within the budget.  The only number they are legally bound to is the bottom line number.  So, there is plenty of money in the budget for the Board of Selectmen to spend on legal expenses.  Unfortunately, it will take away money from other line items- which is why the town should consider hiring a new lawyer so we can get some better legal advice and not have to pay all of these exorbitant legal fees.

Question 3

The town’s Capital Improvement Program has many big-ticket items scheduled for the next few years, such as a new police station and an expansion to the school. Are there any items on the CIP plan that you have particular concerns about? If so, please describe those concerns.

Thomas Butkiewicz

I do not think the one-time expenses planned out in the CIP are of as much of a concern as the growth in town and school operating budgets. Some CIP items will not have as much impact on our tax bills as one might expect from their listed cost:

Many big ticket items, such as the highway grader, are largely paid for using funds that have 

been already collected over a number of years, which lowers the impact to any single year’s taxes (see WA#13). 

Others have offsetting revenue: The $350k new ambulance in 2028 can be paid for using the “Ambulance and Equipment Replacement Special Revenue Fund”, which accumulates reimbursing revenue the town receives for ambulance services it provides.

I think that unsustainable growth of yearly operating budgets is more concerning than most of these large, one-time expenses for several reasons:

The town and school operating budgets represent recurring expenditures that will continue year after year. As these yearly budgets increase, the subsequent years' budgets are built on a higher base, leading to a compounding effect. This can result in exponential growth in expenditures over time, making it increasingly difficult to control costs.

Increases in yearly budgets also create future obligations and commitments that are difficult to reverse or scale back. For example, hiring additional employees or starting new programs can create long-term financial commitments that are challenging to undo.

Unchecked growth in yearly budgets can easily become unsustainable, ultimately leading to the need for drastic cost-cutting measures that can be highly disruptive. One-time expenses, while significant, do not typically pose the same long-term sustainability risks if properly planned for and managed.

Consider the graph below, which plots the growth of Nottingham’s town and school operating budgets alongside inflation rates:

You can see that while the town has managed to keep its budget growth mostly in pace with inflation, the school’s budget has been outpacing inflation for many years now.  School spending has increased by 27% in just the last 5 years, and has almost doubled since 2008, despite enrollment being mostly flat (enrollment in 2008 was 506, current is 518, see graph below) 

Dealing with the school’s budget increases can be a frustrating process for the Budget Committee, as we are not able to adjust budget lines that are set by a contract or obligatory by law.  Unfortunately this encompasses the vast majority of the school budget, and thus it is difficult to identify where spending can be actually be controlled.  Ultimately, the school board is responsible for setting the terms of these various contracts, and they need to put more effort into negotiating better deals for taxpayers.

If you are likewise concerned about preventing unsustainable growth of our town’s operating budgets, I ask for your vote so that I can continue to serve as a representative for taxpayers and help keep Nottingham an affordable town to live in.

Donna Danis

The CIP is a planning tool, not a schedule of committed expenditures. Every department head provides input to the plan and it is reviewed yearly by the Town, School, and CIP Committee. Very often items will roll over to another year, or even be removed from the plan. It is also important to note that many items on the current plan would be funded through sources other than new taxes. For example, a new ambulance would be funded through a capital reserve fund. (Seven of the 34 items on the current 6-year plan would be funded through a capital reserve fund, revolving fund, fund balance, and the Cable Franchise Fund.) When the Town or School puts forward a big-ticket item, they have to present a strong justification to voters. Since we don't know when items will actually be presented to voters and we don't have the detailed justification, it's not possible to say which are or are not of concern at this point in time. 

I do believe we need to use the Capital Improvement Planning process more as a real collaborative tool for prioritizing all large expenses across the Town and School.

Jillian Eldredge

I’ve read both your post on the police station and on the CIP. I’m thrilled that there is a committee in Town trying to take a serious look at our future financial needs. As you have often reported, our facilities are literally crumbling around us and we face many critical infrastructure needs. A forward looking financial plan which addresses our needs over the near and far term is exactly what this town needs to move from a reactionary position to a proactive fiscal and managerial approach to our biggest problems.

What concerns me is that this report was stuffed into the back of the Annual Report and shelved. This document needs to be living and breathing and reflect the input and priorities of residents. We need listening sessions and facilitated conversations. Committees and departments need to start going out to residents and making the case for why their projects are important and what’s at stake. We need to have hard conversations to prioritize these needs in the context of our financial abilities. We need to balance what we want with what we can afford. As a town, we need to work together to balance everyone’s needs and concerns in order to come to a consensus-led, long range financial plan that charts our course over the next 5 and 10 year term. I’ve accomplished this as a non-profit leader, and as a Budget Committee member I would advocate strongly for this work to be done. Of course, political realities being what they are - this is a very tall task - but as many in town are noting these days, Nottingham is at a crossroads where the work and decisions we undertake now are going to affect an entire generation of residents.

Jeffrey Morrison

I think that 2027 might be a bit premature for a new Police Station, but I think it it will be needed at some point.I do agree with the proposed location next to the Fire Station and it does make sense to me to have it near the school. 2026 for the grader. It makes sense to me to budget and prepare for a new one, but also run the life out of the existing one. 2025 school expansion. I am not up for spending 2.5 million. If impact fees and grants could be utilized as well as demonstrating frugality, I could potentially support it. It would come down to pricing on that.

Brent Tweed

The main concern I have with the capital improvement plan is the $2,500,000 that was added in this year (to be spent in 2025) for additional school building space.  The legislative body already voted in 2021 against an approximately $6 million school building addition.  School enrollment has been flat and/or declining and the current school building was designed for a student population that is greater then our current enrollment.  Preschool has historically been provided by the private sector.  The decision to add preschool to our current school without taking space consideration into account was perhaps not the wisest decision, nevertheless even with the addition of preschool, the school building is still designed to handle our current student enrollment.