Members of Harvard’s Board of Selectmen, Finance Committee, School Committee, Board of Health, Library, Municipal Buildings Committee, and Water Commission met recently for the second time to take on the challenge of working toward a town budget to present to voters at Annual Town Meeting, scheduled for April 2, 2011. The Dec. 2 meeting was a follow-on to the first “all boards” meeting held in September, when the Finance Committee asked town boards to project a budget beyond fiscal year 2012, through fiscal 2017, for both personnel and expenses.
To date, budgets have been submitted by all but a few departments, and one-on-one discussions between departments and the Finance Committee are set to begin Jan. 5, 2011. The target for arriving at a final budget is Feb. 9.
Setting the stage
Town Administrator Tim Bragan reviewed the “Level Funding Plus” approach to this year’s budget, which asks departments to keep level funding while allowing for step increases in town employee salaries. The budget model assumes a 4 percent payroll increase and 1 percent expenses increase. Bragan warned that state finances are “a wild card,” and noted comments by Michael J. Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, who estimates the structural deficit of the state budget to be $2.1 billion and predicts a 5 to 10 percent cut in state funding to cities and towns. On a positive note, Bragan said, state revenues beat the first four-month estimates by $413 million.” He noted that “Black Friday” sales in the state and across the country showed consumer spending was up by 6.4 percent over last year and said that if this trend continues, it will make cuts to state aid less likely. He said the Finance Committee would be watching the numbers from the state month by month.
Looking at capital requests
Bragan introduced the topic of the capital budget by pointing out that permanent funding for capital projects needed to be addressed. (Capital projects are defined as assets with a useful life of at least three years and a cost of at least $10,000.) He acknowledged that the one-time funding from Free Cash would feature prominently in the budget discussions. Voters at the 2010 Town Meeting established the Capital Stabilization and Investment Fund and provided that $400,000 in funding be transferred each year from Free Cash to Stabilization for proposed capital projects. Although this year’s Free Cash total is relatively high, at $1,005,556, the amount of money in that account varies from year to year.
George McKenna, chairman of Capital Planning and Investment Committee (CPIC) and member of the Finance Committee, presented the fiscal 2012 capital requests, currently totaling $894,000, which includes such items as a radio system upgrade for police, the extension of the water main from Town Hall to the Hillside Garage, repairs to the Department of Public Works building floor, a flailing mower for the DPW, a replacement brush truck for the Fire Department, and energy projects and infrastructure upgrades for the schools. McKenna said that cost estimates for these and other capital budget requests are preliminary, and that the CPIC had not voted or approved any of the requests yet.
Brainstorming about funding sources
During open discussion, those gathered talked about possible ways to generate revenue for the town or secure funding for special programs.
Mark Hardy of the Pond Committee suggested that there is an opportunity to generate electricity via the pond drawdown process. He also said that the water chestnuts “appear to have been beaten back,” so the town’s weed harvester might be made available for rental by other towns as a revenue generator.
Selectman Tim Clark suggested that the Finance Committee look to “self-funded enterprise models,” like that used by the town ambulance, for some departments. He remarked that the town center sewer is scheduled to pay for itself and suggested that the water department and the Transfer Station might also be able to use such a model. He also suggested that the Finance Committee pursue grant programs that would allow hiring a town planner, economic development administrator, or energy administrator, or perhaps all three. He also said that the committee should look at the possibility of increasing the Community Preservation Act surcharge from 1.1 percent to 3 percent to fund significant upgrades to municipal facilities. “It’s one of those programs for which we could actually get matching funds,” he said. “Those that charge 3 percent get significantly larger matching funds.”
