a 2018 report from Washington DC based Institute on taxation and Economic Policy:

22. Massachusetts

> Effective tax rate for top 1% of earners: 6.5%
> Effective tax rate for middle 20% of earners: 9.3% (22nd lowest)
> Avg. income for top 1%: $2.51 million (2nd highest)
> State & local tax revenue from sales taxes: 13.8% (9th lowest)
> State & local tax revenue from income taxes: 32.7% (6th highest)

from Templeton special town meeting October 26, 2004:

Article 6 To see if the Town will vote to accept the amended Regional Agreement for the Narragansett Regional School District of Templeton/Phillipston, a copy of which is available for review in the Templeton Town Clerk’s office, or to take any other action relative thereto. 

On a motion duly made and seconded the Town voted to accept the amended Regional Agreement for the Narragansett Regional School District of Templeton/Phillipston, a copy of which is available for review in the Templeton Town Clerk’s office as well as available to voters in a handout adjacent to the Special Town Meeting warrants. Passed Unanimously @ 7:18

Although this happened in calendar year 2004, the STM happened in FY2005 (July 1, 2004 - June 30, 2005) the STM is found in the 2005 annual town report, page 140.

I would be willing to try, but . . . Trust??

One way to fund road work:

Lastly, amendments in 2003 to Ch. 40, Sec 5b allow a municipality to establish special purpose stabilization funds and to build balances in them through a type of override, which also has characteristics of a debt exclusion. Through initial approval, by twothirds vote, of town meeting (and the selectmen), a city council or a town council, a referendum can be placed before the voters asking whether to raise tax revenue, by majority vote, above Proposition 2½ limits for the purpose of the stabilization fund. In succeeding years, solely through an annual vote of the selectmen, city council or town council, the override can be continued, lowered or deferred entirely and resumed, or not, in a later year. Like an override, the additional tax can continue year-after-year without town-wide or city-wide referendum votes beyond the year of inception and, each year, the amount available to be raised increases by 2½ percent. However, like an exclusion under Proposition 2½, the levy limit increase need not be permanent. It can be discontinued in any year.

Combine this with chapter 90 money and possible CDBG grants and free cash, the town could make progress on paving / road infrastructure improvements that directly affect taxpayers / residents. A choice has to be made by town meeting and selectmen if we are going to continue piece meal or really do something for town residents. Good roads often equals to better condition and less dollars regarding snow / ice removal. Your choice, all I can do is try to get a consensus from select board to put this before voters. Simple overrides have been presented in the past and failed, I want to try something different.

I also want roads / infrastructure on capital plan, including water and sewer, drains, etc. as they are things that belong to the town, whether light & water commissioners agree or not.

One more time - Begin process of accepting private roads that do not currently meet accepted standards ; create schedule and process to bring them to standard as a service to taxpayers/residents. This has been to town meeting once and I would propose to bring it one more time. The purpose is simple, one of the things in the chapter 90 program used to determine how much chapter 90 money Templeton receives in the grant program is road miles. No, we have not kept or gotten existing town accepted roads in good condition yet, but it does not mean we should not offer same service to all taxpayers/residents. It also does not mean any "head of line" status, it means we begin planning for all roads in Town. If town meeting votes no again, well, those on private roads will remain second class residents and why should they pay taxes if they do not receive same service or expect same opportunity as rest of town residents.

The Massachusetts Chapter 90 program often serves as the main or sole source of funding for road construction/repair for most cities and towns. The program authorizes funding to every municipality in the state based on a formula consisting of road miles, population, and employment. The current formula places an emphasis on three areas with the following percentages:

Road Mileage — 58.33 percent

Population — 20.83 percent

Employment — 20.83 percent

In Pignatelli's bill, the proposed new funding formula aims to take 5.5 percent of funds from the population and employment categories and applies an additional 11 percent to the road mileage category, allowing smaller communities to gain 17-18 percent in funding:

Road Mileage — 69.334 percent

Population — 15.333 percent

Employment — 15.333 percent.

The Chapter 90 program funding formula was created almost 50 years ago in 1972 and has not been upgraded since. The formula itself has no legislative history, and is overseen entirely by the Department of Transportation. Pignatelli was inspired to file a bill updating the new formula as a direct result of the critical infrastructure challenges facing small communities.

This is important and I feel it deserves one more try, for the residents.

from the MSBA website:

Templeton Center School - building complete.

MSBA paid to date - $21,137,638.00

MSBA remaining - $1,623,141.00

Total project budget - $45,058,033.00

These figures show the Town cost of project is $22,297,254.00 + borrowing / bonding costs.

Looks more like a 50% rate from MSBA rather than the ole 63.11% and you may confirm these numbers at MSBA web page.

WINCHENDON — The school district, under the umbrella of a Barr Foundation grant through Mount Wachusett Community College, is helping gather data on student success and readiness for career and college. They join other districts in a search for ways to make the high school experience productive and better for everyone.

Lauren Mountain, current director of United Way Youth Venture at MWCC, recently told members of the School Committee that the college and Murdock High School have partnered with the Youth Venture program since 2002. Three years ago the college began introducing Changemaker Communities, essentially a professional development program working with educators to help them learn skills of teamwork, empathy, leadership and problem-solving.

She said Changemaker paired really well with Youth Venture because students were learning the same skills by experiencing them as social entrepreneurs — responding to something within their community and addressing it.

“It was a natural transition for us to go from Youth Venture to Changemaking, and from Changemaking now to this new opportunity for the 2020 calendar year through the Barr Foundation.”

MWCC was selected as a recipient of the Barr Foundation’s new “Portrait of a Graduate” grant program, described as a collective vision of what all high school students will know and be able to do by graduation. To create the portrait, educators, parents, students and community members work to determine the definition of student success in school and beyond.

Mountain said that MWCC was one of 14 awarded communities in New England for the Portrait of a Graduate Grant.

“It is essentially a planning grant for us to look at the gaps in high school readiness, their ability to be successful in college, career and community,” Mountain said.

Mountain explained that she conducted interviews of leaders at participating school districts, including Fitchburg, Leominster, Gardner and Winchendon. Also included in the grant are MWCC’s Early College Dual Enrollment and Pathways Early College Innovation School.

As a partnership, leadership from the different schools are trying to determine what success looks like. They are also reaching out to alumni to ask them to define their success, including the factors that caused their success and what helped to make them the person they are today.

The grant allows the group time to study the data received in depth. To find the data, Mountain explained there will be a lot of interviews with stakeholders, including educators, staff, students, parents, employers, family members, the community as a whole, and service providers including health, and other external support services that help make a student successful.

Mountain told the School Committee that the grant team is helping to bring many voices to the table. Their focus is to answer the question about students’ readiness for college. Mountain noted that currently when taking in the remediation rates, the answer is no, students are not ready. Data reveals that students are taking basic English and math courses, and are basically not ready.

“If you look at the workforce there would be a percentage of people not exhibiting the skills needed. Is it the school’s fault or do we all need to come to the table and work together?” she said.

The administrators are working with Mountain as a team to find the reason why students share gaps in readiness. The working team is looking at models of learning that might help change the data. They will help bring other district voices to the table to spend time looking at the national frameworks. They will go on site visits to different schools, even nationally, to see how things are done outside of New England.

When the data is gathered at midyear, the team will pull it all together to try and make sense of it. Mountain said the goal is to align what they learn with what is in process for the district’s turnaround plan and other education initiatives, and then find ways to incorporate what is working and cut waste.

Mountain added that what is introduced will change what the high school experience looks like because students and teachers will have helped in its creation.

Change is difficult, but administrators came to an understanding that they must be open to doing something totally different. Mountain added that the project will not work without community support. She suggested that the School Committee could help get the word out to people who don’t necessarily buy into the school district, as well as those who attend every PTO meeting, telling them all voices are needed to change what is currently not working.

According to the Barr Foundation site, the grant was awarded to MWCC on Dec. 4 in the amount of $250,000. The term of the grant is 12 months.

Gardner, Fitchburg, Leominster and Winchendon have also recently partnered in the planning process under a separate Barr Foundation grant to find out what would ensure high quality principals in the schools.

In a press release that announced the Portrait of a Graduate grant, Fagan Forhan, assistant dean at MWCC, stated, “The rate of change in the world today is exponentially faster than it has ever been, and it is essential for us to look at what students should know, and be able to do, at the point of high school graduation as they prepare to enter higher education and/or the workforce in a world that is very different than the one most of us grew up in. The school districts in our region have been working deeply together for a number of years, and are poised to truly move the needle on the educational experience — and outcomes — for youth in North Central Massachusetts.”

 The link below should take you to DESE website where you can look up Narragansett school district projected funding. Keep in mind, the numbers will probably change but you will be able to get an idea of where we will be starting and can compare DESE numbers to any numbers the district puts out and develop questions.




http://www.doe.mass.edu/finance/chapter70. 

y Doneen Durling
Reporter

Posted at 6:00 AM

ASHBURNHAM — There have been concerns expressed after a recent discussion on voting whether to allow School Choice within the Ashburnham-Westminster Regional School District. Though many community members have said that they wish to cut back and even stop accepting School Choice, others have expressed their concerns over impact.

School Committee Chairman William Ewing sought to clarify information from a previous discussion concerning accepting students from out of district. The state must know by May if the committee intends to allow School Choice. If the committee votes not to accept School Choice for the 2020-21 school year, all those currently attending in-district will be grandfathered and will be allowed to stay until they decide to leave or they graduate. No new students would be accepted.

In previous years, students accepted under School Choice from other districts sometimes helped to fill budget gaps. When the district accepted 200 students, it could count on another $1,000,000 every year, and as long as those students filled empty seats in a classroom, it all worked out.

When there were too many students in one room to balance the teacher-student ratio, the district would have to hire another teacher, eating away at the $5,000 per student received from the state.

Many people in the two member towns looked at the per-pupil cost and noted that the $5,000 did not cover what it was costing them to educate the children in their own towns, and expressed those concerns to the superintendent.

The School Committee and superintendent saw that community members had a point, and thus decided to whittle down the incoming School Choice students. The number dropped from more than 200 to approximately 140 last year, and this year 117, giving the district $585,000 without expanding the classrooms.

Ewing said he has received a couple of emails and phone calls from concerned residents that prompted him to provide clarification.

“When it comes time to vote on School Choice, which happens in May, I believe, or has to by that time, it’s either yes or no,” he told the committee on Jan. 21. “There was confusion as to whether we could set limits. The School Committee does not vote on the numbers, however, the numbers are based on a variety of factors.”

Ewing explained that students from out-of-district are accepted while factoring in class size.

“We do indicate some preference there,” he said. “We also have a policy, which is based on homes in the district. We have asked the administration to try and gradually reduce the numbers as time goes along.”

As the two communities grow, it becomes even more imperative to decide whether there will be room enough in certain schools. In the last few months the district has grown by 29 students. With the current building going on in both communities, the number is sure to grow.

Ewing noted that if the committee votes no, there is a requirement that the district hold public hearings, and as part of the no vote there would be a resolution that indicates the reasons for voting no.

“Other than that, everything is very straightforward,” said Ewing.

Currently, out of the 117 School Choice students in the district, 28 of them seniors.

Students shared concerns about School Choice with committee member Jennifer Storm, saying that if it was closed it would be a detriment to arts, academic and athletic programs.

Ewing told the committee that if they vote School Choice down this year, it is possible to vote it in at any time in the coming years.

The committee is waiting on an impact report from the business manager before making a decision.

from MGL chapter 164:

Section 56. The mayor of a city, or the selectmen or municipal light board, if any, of a town acquiring a gas or electric plant shall appoint a manager of municipal lighting who shall, under the direction and control of the mayor, selectmen or municipal light board, if any, and subject to this chapter, have full charge of the operation and management of the plant, the manufacture and distribution of gas or electricity, the purchase of supplies, the employment of attorneys and of agents and servants, the method, time, price, quantity and quality of the supply, the collection of bills, and the keeping of accounts. His compensation and term of office shall be fixed in cities by the city council and in towns by the selectmen or municipal light board, if any; and, before entering upon the performance of his official duties, he shall give bond to the city or town for the faithful performance thereof in a sum and form and with sureties to the satisfaction of the mayor, selectmen or municipal light board, if any, and shall, at the end of each municipal year, render to them such detailed statement of his doings and of the business and financial matters in his charge as the department may prescribe. All moneys payable to or received by the city, town, manager or municipal light board in connection with the operation of the plant, for the sale of gas or electricity or otherwise, shall be paid to the city or town treasurer. All accounts rendered to or kept in the gas or electric plant of any city shall be subject to the inspection of the city auditor or officer having similar duties, and in towns they shall be subject to the inspection of the selectmen. The auditor or officer having similar duties, or the selectmen, may require any person presenting for settlement an account or claim against such plant to make oath before him or them, in such form as he or they may prescribe, as to the accuracy of such account or claim. The wilful making of a false oath shall be punishable as perjury. The auditor or officer having similar duties in cities, and the selectmen in towns, shall approve the payment of all bills or payrolls of such plants before they are paid by the treasurer, and may disallow and refuse to approve for payment, in whole or in part, any claim as fraudulent, unlawful or excessive; and in that case the auditor or officer having similar duties, or the selectmen, shall file with the city or town treasurer a written statement of the reasons for the refusal; and the treasurer shall not pay any claim or bill so disallowed. This section shall not abridge the powers conferred on town accountants by sections fifty-five to sixty-one, inclusive, of chapter forty-one. The manager shall at any time, when required by the mayor, selectmen, municipal light board, if any, or department, make a statement to such officers of his doings, business, receipts, disbursements, balances, and of the indebtedness of the town in his department.

So, are there salaries for L&W commissioner's? If so, how much and who set them?

For the Athol Daily News

Published: 6/16/2019 9:50:17 PM

PHILLIPSTON – The Select Board recently received a report on the financial health of the town following an audit conducted by public accounting firm Roselli, Clark & Associates of Woburn. The management letter received by the board covered the fiscal year ending June 30, 2018.

Company partner Tony Roselli briefed the board on a number of items, but began his presentation by discussing the impact of interest rates on municipal finances.

“One of the things that is appearing in most of the management letters that I’m looking at across the state,” said Roselli, “I have about 60 communities that I do audits for, is the interest rate. The Federal Open Market Committee has had a lot of action in the last year. They are the arm of the federal government that increases or decreases interest rates. They’ve moved interest rates up in the past 12 months. What’s happened is, that’s had a nice effect on bank interest; it’s moved bank interest rates up to close to three percent.”

“So, what I’m noticing,” he continued, “and it’s not just here, it’s not an indictment of what’s going on here, it’s more that this is what I’m seeing everywhere. And that’s that the (town) treasurers for years didn’t worry about interest rates because back in 2008 and 09, after the financial collapse, interest rates dropped to 0.1 percent. Well, those rates hopped up last year and it kind of caught treasurers off guard.”

Roselli explained that the town currently has about $1.5 million in deposits sitting in accounts bearing interest of only 0.0 to 0.5 percent. As a result, he said, the town earned only about $11,000 on its deposits.

The management letter said, “We recommend the town treasurer evaluate the town’s depository balances and accounts and evaluate the possible benefits of reallocating other portions of the town’s excess funds to...financial institutions that offer very liquid safe short-term investments.”

Such a move, he said, could earn the town upwards of $25,000 on its deposits.

He then zeroed in on the town’s Community Preservation Fund.

“The Community Preservation Trust Fund,” said Rosell, “showed no interest earned, which is impossible. The CP Fund should either be in its own bank account or, if it’s in a pooled account, there should be an allocation to put interest in the fund. I recommend just putting it in its own bank account and having it earn its own interest.”

Town Accountant Kelli Pontbriand said many of the steps outlined by Roselli have in fact been taken in the past year.

The management letter pointed out that the town is still owed $708 in property taxes back five years or more. He suggested the town simply write off the loss.

He also pointed out that more than $6,600 is owed to the town for motor vehicle excise takes bills that are 10 years or older.

“What’s great about motor vehicles,” said Roselli, “is if you don’t pay your taxes the Registry tags you, so, if you don’t pay your motor vehicle (taxes) you’re not going to be able to renew your license or your registration. However, the Registry just did a massive computer conversion last summer and they basically got rid of anything greater than 10 years old. So, you’re never going to collect that, in my opinion. I would suggest just writing them off. I think this would help really clean up the ledgers.”

Among recommendations made in the management letter is the development of a more centralized procurement process.

“Department heads,” said the letter, “essentially handle their own purchasing with no input from the executive level or town accountant's office...We discovered that that there is no requirement that the town accountant or executive secretary maintain copies of any contracts and there is no central purchasing function.”

Overall, Roselli seemed to express confidence that the town is financially healthy, while adding steps remain to be taken to tighten up certain bookkeeping procedure.

Where your money goes and why the state government is always trying to get more tax dollars: Templeton is not the only ones making bad deals for taxpayers!

By State House News Service

When Gov. Charlie Baker lifts the curtain on his fiscal year 2021 budget next week, many Beacon Hill observers are going to flip right to the education section to see how great of an increase public schools might get under the new funding law. But there's another spending area that will grow by an even greater percentage -- the annual payment towards the state's pension liability.

Baker's budget office filed the new, three-year pension funding schedule Wednesday, detailing how Massachusetts will boost its annual pension payment by more than 9.6 percent each year -- and by more than 30 percent over the three-year period -- as it works to stash away money to cover the $41 billion unfunded portion of the state's expected pension liability of more than $96 billion.

To remain on track to fully fund the liability by 2036, the state's annual pension contribution will have to grow at a clip far more rapid than the forecasted growth in state tax revenue.

The funding schedule doesn't just limit some options for lawmakers as they craft the state's annual budget, but it also impacts the approximately 314,637 retired or active state employees and municipal teachers who are part of the Massachusetts State Employees' Retirement System or the Massachusetts Teachers' Retirement System.

The fiscal 2021 consensus revenue agreement announced Monday provided the first confirmation that the pension contribution will continue to grow faster than state revenues.

Legislative budget writers and the budget managers at the Executive Office of Administration and Finance agreed to make a $3.115 billion transfer to the pension fund in the next budget, an increase of $273 million or about 9.6 percent over the fiscal 2020 contribution. State tax revenue is expected to grow by 2.8 percent in fiscal 2021, which will start on July 1, top officials also agreed on Monday.

As revenue growth decelerates and the pension fund contribution increases by almost 10 percent, the same budget could funnel an additional $427.8 million or 8.3 percent into public education funding, according to a budget model prepared by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation using data released from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Other analysts believe a smaller, but still sizeable increase is possible.

MTF said its fiscal 2021 budget model demonstrates "the financial squeeze caused by low-growth tax revenue expectations and rising spending" related to the new education financing law, the state's share of MassHealth expenses and pension obligations.

"After two consecutive fiscal years of above-trend tax growth and manageable spending increases, an initial analysis of the state's finances suggests policymakers will face tough choices as they begin budget development for state fiscal year 2021," MTF wrote in its fiscal 2021 budget preview released Wednesday.

The 9.6 percent annual increase in the pension fund contribution is in keeping with a recommendation the Public Employee Retirement Administration Commission (PERAC) made to A&F Secretary Michael Heffernan in the fall, and the schedule Heffernan filed Wednesday adheres to the PERAC recommendation for the rest of the three-year funding plan as well.

PERAC decided in November to recommend that A&F adopt a funding schedule that assumes the state’s contribution will increase 9.63 percent each year until fiscal year 2035, with the final payment coming in fiscal 2036.

State faces $900 million budget gap, watchdog warns

By Matt Stout Globe Staff,Updated January 15, 2020, 12:00 p.m.

The state could be facing a nearly $900 million budget gap next fiscal year thanks to slowing tax revenue and growing costs, including those under Massachusetts’ sweeping new K-12 education law, a Beacon Hill watchdog is warning.

The analysis by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation suggests that lawmakers may have to consider “tax increases or spending cuts” to balance the state’s $43 billion-plus budget. It would mark a stark reversal from recent years when officials’ primary money problem was jostling over ways to spend an unexpected windfall amid back-to-back years with a $1 billion surplus.

But as Governor Charlie Baker readies his annual budget proposal — and House lawmakers a transportation financing bill that could raise taxes — the non-partisan foundation suggests policy makers will face “tough choices.” That includes finding an estimated $428 million in new money for local schools and closing a gap of $880 million between estimated revenue and the state’s obligatory spending for the fiscal year that starts in July.

“I try to err on the side of being conservative in my assumptions. I wouldn’t be surprised if people actually doing the budget writing are looking at a gap that’s bigger,” said Heath Fahle, the foundation’s policy director and the author of the 20-page report.

The analysis acknowledges that the gap may not appear in public-facing budget documents released by the governor or lawmakers, making it difficult to compare to past years. But one legislative leader recognized this year’s budget will be “tighter.”

The business-backed foundation has warned of similar gaps before, including in its forecast for fiscal year 2017 when it pegged it at between $800 million and $1 billion. That year proved a fiscal struggle: Tax revenues lagged the state’s optimistic projections, and lawmakers ultimately trimmed their next spending plan so much that one lawmaker called it “the harshest state budget since the last recession.”

State budget writers have since leaned on relatively modest projections, including this year. Baker’s finance secretary and the Legislature’s two top budget writers said this week they’re estimating tax revenue to grow 2.8 percent in fiscal year 2021. That’s well below the 6.9 percent revenue jumped in 2019, and halfway through the current fiscal year, tax collections are up 4.7 percent, according to the Department of Revenue.

The consensus estimate provides a starting point for Baker in crafting his budget proposal due on January 22, a day after the Republican delivers his State of the Commonwealth speech. Representative Aaron Michlewitz, the House budget chairman, called the 2.8 percent projection “responsible and fiscally sustainable.”

In building its own estimates, the Taxpayers Foundation relied on a more conservative growth forecast, at 1.7 percent. It underlines the feeling among some economists that the state’s flush revenue stream may soon ebb.

The foundation report notes that the state’s workforce is aging, which could drive down income and sales tax collections. And the better-than-expected tax collections of recent years leaned, in part, on changes under the 2017 GOP-led federal tax overhaul. The cash bonanza also relied on surging revenues from capital gains taxes — levies on investment profits — which tend to be volatile.

“The swings in capital gains becomes a margin of error,” Fahle said, calling those collections the difference “between a good year, an average year, and a bad year.”

Michlewitz, a North End Democrat, said in a statement that he can’t comment on whether there will be a budget gap as the foundation describes until Baker files his proposal. But he didn’t dispute the state could be entering leaner times.

“We respect the work MTF does, and agree that it will be a tighter budget than we’ve seen in previous years,” Michlewitz said. “Once the Governor files his budget and the committee begins talking directly with agencies and stakeholders about their detailed budgetary needs, we will be in a better position to answer those questions.”

A spokesman for Michael J. Heffernan, the state’s secretary of Administration and Finance, did not directly address the report, but in a statement, said the Baker administration has “focused on returning structural balance to the budget” since facing a yawning deficit early in Baker’s first term.

Senator Michael J. Rodrigues, a Westport Democrat and the Senate’s budget chair, did not respond to requests for comment. The House and Senate typically release their spending proposals in the spring, and will have to reconcile any differences before sending a final budget to Baker’s desk this summer.

The potential budget gap is driven, in part, by increasing costs, especially in education.

Lawmakers last year passed a long-awaited bill that reshapes the state’s school funding formula while promising $1.4 billion in extra direct local aid. But the new law doesn’t include its own dedicated funding source, meaning the costs — which lawmakers estimated at roughly $300 million annually, including inflation, over seven years — will have to be carved out from existing tax revenue.

The Taxpayers Foundation projects the added spending will be closer to $428 million for the coming fiscal year, given that “the bulk of the changes” under the new law are “front loaded,” according to its report.

Put another way, more than 80 percent of the $521 million in new money the foundation is projecting for the state’s coffers would go toward K-12 education, squeezing the resources available for transportation, health care, or other priorities.

The foundation also projected added spending in the state’s Medicaid program, known as MassHealth, and a $273 million increase in the state’s contributions toward its pension fund.

On the other side, Baker and lawmakers are also accounting for drops in revenue, including a cut to the state’s income tax rate, which dipped to 5 percent on Jan. 1, and the return of taxpayers’ claiming charitable deductions on state tax returns in January 2021. Over a full fiscal year, those deductions could cost the state $300 million in revenue.

Baker has opposed raising taxes or fees to balance the budget, even though he’s signed a variety of increases into law.

Meanwhile, every seat in the state Legislature is up for reelection in November.

By ZACK DeLUCA

Staff Writer

Published: 1/12/2020 4:27:30 PM

Modified: 1/12/2020 4:26:45 PM

NORTHFIELD — The Pioneer Valley Regional School District School Committee is holding a special meeting Thursday to vote on whether to recommend for the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) to close Warwick Community School.

The potential closure comes nearly a year after the committee voted to close Pearl Rhodes Elementary School in Leyden and amid months of discussion around financial constraints, with Warwick community members fighting to keep their town’s elementary school open.

At approximately 10:30 p.m., about three and a half hours into last week’s meeting, members voted eight to four to hold a special meeting on Thursday (Jan. 16). All three School Committee members who are from Warwick, and one from Leyden, were opposed.

“Our administrative team recommends that Warwick Community School merge with the Northfield Elementary School for the fall of 2020,” Superintendent Jonathan Scagel said. “We feel it is in the best interest of our student body, teaching faculty, families and district as a whole.”

According to Scagel, the recommendation regarding the Warwick Community School closure was discussed and unanimously agreed upon by the administrative team consisting of Scagel, all four school principals, director of special education, curriculum coordinator/grants manager and the director of finance during a meeting Wednesday. He said the consolidation from closing the school would help to maintain programs and help the remaining schools become sustainable.

“We believe it is essential for the survival of our district,” Scagel said.

School Committee member and Warwick resident Susan O’Reilly-McRae said the Warwick community “felt it was not listened to, or respected by this committee.” Leyden member Sharon Fontaine responded, saying she felt the committee had gone “above and beyond” to hear the concerns of Warwick residents.

During last week’s meeting, David Young, a School Committee member and Warwick town coordinator, threatened to bring a lawsuit against the committee if it were to vote on closing the school.

“Citizens from Warwick will see this committee in court,” he said.

Thursday’s meeting will be held at 7 p.m. at Pioneer Valley Regional School, unless legal counsel dictates that it needs to be held in Warwick. Young petitioned, to no avail, to hold the meeting at Warwick Community School, so residents could be heard.

“We all wear different hats,” said School Committee Chair Kristen Gonzalez. “Our role here is to do what’s best for the whole district.”

Tom Wyatt, vice chair of the Warwick Education Advisory Committee, said the group will continue to pursue options for the future of Warwick Community School if the School Committee votes to recommend closure.

Moving Warwick’s kindergarten, first-grade classes to Northfield

The School Committee also voted seven to five to have Warwick’s kindergarten and first-grade students attend Northfield Elementary School for the 2020 to 2021 school year, regardless of the outcome of next week’s meeting.

“We just don’t have the enrollment numbers,” Scagel said of this decision.

According to Scagel, the decision came after a “tough and complicated” process. He said there are only two “eligible” in-district students for next year’s kindergarten class. These students are only considered eligible because they have not yet enrolled with the school district, he explained.

O’Reilly-McRae urged the committee not to make a decision without further discussion. School Committee member Michael Townsley, of Bernardston, and Scagel both reminded the committee the district is “under financial constraints.”

Committee member Abigail Pratt, of Leyden, asked Scagel what class size would be considered “financially sustainable.”

Scagel estimated a class of 10 or 12 students is appropriate. Moving students to Northfield Elementary would result in a class size of 19 students for the first grade. Scagel said the committee has to consider the cost of teachers’ salaries and benefits. If class sizes are too small, the income is not enough to support the cost for employment.

He said the district had been looking at the budget and considering cutting staff. While some staffing cuts have been based on declining enrollment, Scagel said others have been due to budget constraints that threaten to undercut what the district can provide.

Young, who was vocally opposed to moving the grades and the potential closure, questioned why students couldn’t be moved to Warwick Community School to balance the class sizes, saying the school had the “best educational attainment.” Scagel responded by pointing to Northfield Elementary as having the highest MCAS (Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System) scores in the district.

There are only two Warwick kindergarten students in the district, Scagel said, and they are enrolled in Northfield. One of these students has attended Northfield Elementary by choice since preschool. The other student was sent there after the committee voted to consolidate kindergarten classes last year. That student will now return to Northfield Elementary for first grade.

The student’s mother, Shauna Mallet, has spoken at past School Committee meetings to protest this decision. While Mallet could not attend this week’s meeting in person, she submitted a letter to the committee that was read during citizens’ comments. In her letter, Mallet wrote that the decision to move students has “put her family in distress.”

Zack DeLuca can be reached at zdeluca@recorder.com or 413-772-0261, ext. 264.

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts 

Office of the Inspector General 

Hereby designates 

Adam D. Lamontagne 

as an Associate Massachusetts Certified Public Purchasing Official 

(Associate MCPPO) 

November 25, 2019 

This designation expires three years from the date of issuance 

Glenn A. Cunha Inspector General

 October 15, 2019 at 1:10 am | UPDATED: October 15, 2019 at 10:24 am

The Transportation Climate Initiative is the latest attempt by Beacon Hill politicians to rebrand an increase in the state gas tax. Remember, despite what Boston officials tell you, T-C-I is nothing more than political doublespeak for T-A-X. It’s a backdoor attempt to institute a carbon tax without a vote by our lawmakers.

Massachusetts is one of 12 states in the TCI collaboration, trying to replicate California and Quebec by putting a price on carbon in the transportation sector. The participating states are: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Virginia.

It was just revealed last week that they plan to carry out their policy design through a “cap-and trade” system for motor fuel carbon emissions, or as most working people will see it, a gas tax. The gas tax would apply to gas and diesel fuels but exempt jet and boat fuel. The exact amount of the increase has yet to be disclosed. The public should expect to hear more on that in December.

According to the TCI website, one of the primary health benefits they will project in their modeling will be the increase in “biking and walking associated” with the implementation of TCI for “residents of TCI jurisdictions.” If you read between the lines, their aim is clear. They want to make fuel so expensive that taxpayers will be forced to walk and bike to work. But don’t worry, it will benefit your health. Let’s hope we don’t have a cold winter!

The TCI website goes into more detail on what their end goals are. For instance, they talk about environmental justice, “addressing equality needs and concerns,” and they tell states that they “may choose to pursue complementary policies and programs to further enable green house gas emissions reductions from transportation.” That’s a direct and clear warning to any Massachusetts taxpayer, employer and resident.

Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Kathleen Theoharides claims the difference between TCI and a gas tax is the point of regulation. She doesn’t believe it’s a tax and doesn’t think she needs legislative approval. This is irrelevant to consumers who will soon be paying more at the pump to support increased government spending. For normal people, this is a tax.

Luckily, some on Beacon Hill are more transparent regarding the scheme. State Rep. William Straus, the House chairman of the Transportation Committee, recently described TCI as a gas tax, saying “All states raise their gas tax the same amount at the same time and agree not to call it a gas tax, but I think the public is smarter than that.”

According to the Massachusetts state constitution, all state taxes must originate from the House. Gov. Charlie Baker does not have authority to unilaterally raise taxes. Even if the governor doesn’t want to describe the TCI as a tax, in order to justify bypassing legislative approval, the governor would be wise to take this before the State House and Senate. Legal authority or not, Baker has a moral obligation to seek legislative approval before asking every resident who drives a gas or diesel powered vehicle to spend much more at the pump. In our view, such an important piece of the legislation should require buy in by the elected representatives of our state government.

Make no mistake: this is a very slippery slope for Massachusetts. Although this is still in the early stages, lawmakers from other states in the TCI agreement are seeking legislative approval. The Baker administration, whether legally required or not, should also act in good faith and seek legislative approval. There must be an open and transparent legislative process on the details of the agreement.

Sewer Collections will move to Templeton Town Hall.
Town Administrator Carter Terenzini in conjunction with the Sewer Commissioners announced that the Sewer collections will move from the Sewer Department to the Treasurer/Collector’s office in Templeton Town Hall at 160 Patriots Road, Rm 2. effective immediately. The Hours of Operation for the Treasurer/Collector are Monday from 7:30 am to 6:30 pm and Tuesday through Thursday from 7:30 am to 4:30 pm being closed on Friday. After hour payments (checks only please, in an envelope) may be dropped in the box outside of Town Hall. Bills may also be paid online by going to the Town's home page (www.templetonma.gov) and clicking on Pay Bills Online, then Sewer.


The bills used to be collected in the Sewer Department itself, but Selectmen worked with the Sewer Commissioners to make the move to the town’s Treasurer/Collector in Town Hall. Officials have worked on this plan since about 2009 when the Department of Revenue and different auditors recommended the change. Assistant Town Administrator Adam Lamontagne, said “We are proud of the collaborative approach between the Selectmen’s office, Treasurer/Collector’s office and the Sewer Department to make this a reality.”

Posted Jan 6, 2020 at 6:00 AM

 

GARDNER — A new year, a new truck for the Gardner Fire Department.

The department welcomed a newly purchased fire truck at the station on Dec. 29, according to Chief Richard Ares, who said the vehicle would be replacing an engine that has served the GFD well for three decades.

“This is (the new) Engine 3, and we’ve had the previous Engine 3 since 1989, so it’s 30 years old,” Ares said.

The new vehicle offers firefighters a number of upgrades from the previous engine, including the ability to carry more water to the scenes of fires.

“This one has a 1,000-gallon water tank, which will be helpful to us for the areas of town, such as out by Clark Street or up past the college, that don’t have hydrants,” Ares said. “We’ll be arriving on-scene with more water than we currently have.” Ares said the current Engine 3 carries a tank with a water capacity of 750 gallons.

An upgraded truck was something the department had needed for a while, Ares said, especially since the older vehicle was unable to meet current emissions standards.

“We were well overdue,” he said. “The usual lifespan (of a fire truck) is about 25 years, according to national standards, so we were roughly five years over that (deadline),” he explained.

The new vehicle, which was manufactured by Sutphen, cost nearly half-million dollars, but Ares said 90 percent of that amount was paid for by a FEMA grant that he had been applying for over the past several years. The total bill to the city was $49,800.

“It’s a very competitive grant, especially for fire apparatus,” Ares said. “I actually applied for this grant for three years in a row before last year when we were awarded it. The city only had to come up with 10 percent of the total cost.”

In addition to the ability to carry more water, the new vehicle offers upgrades over the previous truck including increased reliability, a 25-gallon foam tank, permanent hose fixtures, and an enclosed cab with a raised roof. That means firefighters will have more room to maneuver when putting on gear in the truck.

“For example, if the guys are going to a water or ice rescue, they can begin getting suited up on the way to the call, which we weren’t really able to do before,” Ares said.

Mechanics were busy installing tools and equipment on the new vehicle, Ares said.

“You don’t want to just throw things onto (the new vehicle), you want everything placed where it will be most efficiently used,” he said.

Ares added that crews will spend some time training on the new truck before it makes its public debut, but he said that it should only be a few weeks before the vehicle is used on an official call. The pump on the new vehicle is similar to the one the department currently uses, so Ares said most of the training will likely focus on getting drivers used to maneuvering the larger vehicle through the city’s streets.

“I hope to have it in service by the end of the month,” Ares said.