Ask DLS: Snow and Ice Removal
How do communities budget for snow and ice removal during a particularly snowy winter?
G.L. c. 44, § 31D authorizes a city or town, under certain conditions, to spend in excess of its available appropriation for the costs of snow and ice removal. The rationale for the exception to the general rule of G.L. c. 44, § 31 that departments cannot incur liabilities in excess of appropriation is that some of the costs of snow and ice removal are extremely variable from one year to the next, depending upon the weather, and are impossible to budget for accurately. Typically, the sorts of costs that would vary unpredictably with the weather would be overtime costs for internal plowing crews, the cost of sand and chemicals to be spread on the roads, and the cost of hiring plows and drivers during storms. On the other hand, expenses for regular, recurring departmental activities that are predictable and do not vary with the weather in any given winter cannot be paid for by deficit spending. Municipalities must budget for such planned and regular expenses. Authority to deficit spend on snow and ice removal is contingent on the amount of the current year’s appropriation equaling or exceeding the prior year’s appropriation.
What are examples of expenditures that vary with the weather?
The repair or replacement of a snowplow blade, or the repair of a transmission on a snowplow truck could qualify as costs of snow and ice removal if the blade were damaged or the transmission failed during the snow-plowing season. Another allowable expenditure would be the cost of fuel for snow and ice removal. The deficit spending must be directly related to the removal of the snow and ice, and it must be an expense that the municipality could not have realistically budgeted for.
Would the regular maintenance of DPW equipment or other municipal vehicles be an allowable expenditure under G.L. c. 44, § 31D?
No. The cost of snow tires for police and fire vehicles, or regular maintenance of DPW vehicles that are used year-round cannot properly be charged as costs of snow removal. The same is true for the purchase of radios for the trucks used in plowing; their acquisition is a fixed one-time cost that does not vary with the amount of snow that falls in a winter. Scheduled maintenance or repair of such equipment, or even the emergency repair or replacement of equipment damaged in operations having nothing to do with snow plowing, could not be funded as a deficit in the snow and ice account.
Street and drain cleaning activities regularly and typically performed every year must be paid for with budgeted funds, but if unusual weather conditions result in extraordinary cleaning activities, those costs could also possibly qualify for deficit spending. G.L. c. 44, § 31D authorizes, under certain conditions, deficit spending only for those expenses directly related to the removal of snow and ice that are variable from year to year depending on the severity of the winter.
What are some of the allowable expenditures of a particular snow and ice removal line-item if a municipality is not deficit spending under G.L. c. 44, § 31D?
The scope of the appropriation is for local officials to determine. Municipalities are entitled to expend from the appropriation for purposes within the scope of that appropriation.
