Templeton new growth:

Looking back through some Templeton annual Town reports, I found these numbers;
From the report of Templeton Assessors -

2010 shows new growth of   $58,417.00
2011 shows new growth of   $87,149.00
2012 shows new growth of   $34,386.00
2013 shows new growth of   $33,592.00
2014 shows new growth of   $50,761.22
2015 new growth of              $69,582.00  (from 2017 revenue document)
2016 new growth of              $94,321.00  (from 2017 revenue document)

Average for this time frame  $61,172.00

Please do the math and check that out and ask yourself this: Why would someone with a PH D use a figure of $80,000.00 for a new growth figure in a 2017 budget (so called) document and to use that number to state you have a balanced budget. What fact did that individual, Robert Markel, have or use to come to that conclusion?   The Gardner News, Wednesday, August 10, 2016, Robert Markel, PH D writes that Templeton has a balanced budget for 2017 and he further writes that there were balanced budgets in fiscal 2015 and 2016 while he was Town Administrator. So why, may I ask, are we faced with another special town meeting to fix, amend, adjust, whatever, the 2017 budget, (so called) and one item is to restate estimated new growth and motor vehicle excise tax? Those two items were some of the changes proposed at a meeting back in July. Who knows what the selectmen will propose in the end.


posted by Jeff Bennett

To any selectmen who has a face book page or other social media outlet, I will read your pages and I will accept things that check out for use on a blog. Anything that may reflect on town business, is fair game. It is the world we have now. If anyone thinks that employers, news media, corporations, employment search firms, the government, the military etc, do not mine these things for information, well I have some ocean front property in Phillipston for you. If you want to put words somewhere and you want no one else to look at them, start an "old fashioned" diary. However, if you feel inclined to post "unable to sleep because I am so pissed", well expect someone may read that and post it in other places.
Members of the selectmen, members from the planning board on the elementary school building committee yet not one of them asked about or spoke about these issues BEFORE the vote at town meeting? My opinion is that they were worried about the sales pitch not working. Reminds me of the housing boom. Don't worry your mortgage is 2 thousand a month and you only make 1500 a month, you can afford it. Case in point, I was at a meeting of the elementary school building committee and before a vote, I had a question, so I raised my hand and said "Mr. Chairman" and before I could ask, Stephen Hemming told the chair that he thought the committee should have the vote then take the question. What the hell kind of meeting is that. The kind where no boat rocking is wanted or allowed. Time to get the voting list for the town meeting of November 9, 2015 and for the ballot vote and see who was present, then listen to who is now speaking for or against. If their name is not on either list, well there is your answer, you did not bother to show up, you did not bother to accept the ticket bought and paid for. A couple of meetings back, there was discussion by the planning board on whether the conservation commission had anything to do with this, now! Why was all of this not asked BEFORE Town meeting vote, by the committee or members of planning board or conservation or selectmen? Now when people do have questions and are allowed to ask, some people now get "pissed off". Well, some may be mad that a planning board voted that way, but there are more people mad that you did not get the budget right, again, after you told them everything was/is fine. The sales pitch is unraveling faster than the Templeton 2017 so called budget.


posted by Jeff Bennett

Before anyone goes off the deep end about a news school, perhaps we should look at current finances and whether the town can really afford it before the Town goes in the hole for more. This is about the fiscal 2017 budget and what was put before town meeting, you know, the here and now. So far, there is not even a report from the Town Treasurer nor the Town Accountant in the annual Town report. Both are required by law! People voted at Town meeting to no addendum, so where is the new report? The town accountant stated she can't do a report for 2015 until all the audits are done. To that, I say bull#$$#@, there was work done in both the accountant and treasurer office, I mean I hope there was, being paid over 50 thousand dollars. People were paid, debts paid, town money invested, interest was paid or collected, bills were paid, money was borrowed, etc, etc. Work was done and it is a requirement of law that the work has to be recorded, so why do the selectmen not get to this now? Get the basics set first, before you go into debt for 24 million or whatever the final number will be. There has already been money spent on short term borrowing in 2017 and now the selectmen talk of using money from OPEB to cover overspending in the first month of the fiscal year. This is in the here and now. Remember the OPEB, it is required by law and it cannot be touched for other purposes. Perhaps that was just another lie from this board of selectmen. Perhaps in the world of politics, it is not a lie, but bad information or it was the best we can do with the information we had. Perhaps it is a few people in key positions who really do not know their jobs? Speaking from experience, that does not work out well and if you wait too long, hoping they will catch on, that does not work out well either. Before we get really deep into a 47 million dollar project, lets get basic things straight first. I believe that only makes sense. Time to show people what they really can do at town meeting, if they wish to!



posted by Jeff Bennett

Since the current selectmen seem incapable, unwilling and unable to come up with a workable plan, never mind a workable spending plan, perhaps it is time for town residents to do so at Town meeting. Require that a percentage of fiscal year spending go into town savings, as into the stabilization plan. Last night, selectmen spoke as if they are considering using money from the recent OPEB fund to subsidize the fiscal 2017 mess, Hey they are solving issues, just ask John Columbus. They also voted to appoint another interim town administrator. One possible problem is if they keep this one even four months, will there be enough money to hire a full time administrator? The biggest problem appears to be the so called balance budget that they sold town meeting is anything but and they seem unwilling to adjust the pay raises that range from 1 % up to 16%. They claim that this was necessary to bring some positions up to equal other area towns. I have to wonder if they have any idea of how this looks to taxpayers? With the selectmen now having to scramble to find money to cover these increases, I wonder if any of them actually looked at what they presented to town meeting before hand? I wonder if any thought was given to a 3 year step plan, as in what ever the base pay was before, beginning July 1 you will increase 5% of that number with the plan being another 5% increase for next year and the following year, while also being eligible for a yearly cost of living increase that should be based off of what ever increase people on SSN get, if any.But it seems this group wishes to continue to spend more than there is available. Can you say recall?


posted by Jeff Bennett

If you have any questions, please contact the Public Records Division at 617-727-2832 or pre@sec.state.ma.us.

New Provisions

Records Access Officers

Agencies and municipalities are required to designate 1 or more Records Access Officer (RAO).

The contact information for the RAO must be posted conspicuously, including on the agency's or municipality’s website, if available.

The RAO has a duty to:

• Coordinate the agency's or municipality’s response to requests for access to public records;
• Assist individuals seeking public records in identifying the records requested;
• Assist the custodian of records in preserving public records; and
• Prepare guidelines that enable requestors to make informed requests.

Electronic Records

Under the new version of the law, RAOs must provide public records to a requestor in an electronic format unlessthe record is not available in an electronic format or the requestor does not have the ability to receive or access the records in a useable electronic format.

Additionally, as of January 1, 2017, agency RAOs will be required to provide on a searchable website electronic copies of commonly requested records, including: final opinions, annual reports, minutes of open meetings and agency budgets.

Response Time

Under the current law, a records custodian must respond to a request for records in writing within 10 calendar days.

Beginning January 1, 2017, a RAO must permit inspection or furnish a copy of a requested public record within 10 business days following receipt of the request. RAOs may petition the Supervisor of Records for an extension if they are unable to grant access to the requested public records in this time period.

Fees

The Supervisor of Records’ Public Access Regulations allowing records custodians to charge 5 cents for black and white paper copies or computer printouts of public records for both single and double-sided sheets was codified and will remain effective with the new law.

Beginning January 1, 2017, if a response to a public records request requires more than 4 hours of employee time, an agency RAO may assess a fee of the hourly rate of the lowest paid employee with the skills necessary to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce a requested record. However, the fee shall not exceed $25 an hour, unless approved by the Supervisor of Records.

Beginning January 1, 2017, if a response to a public records request requires more than 2 hours of employee time, a municipal RAO may assess a fee of the hourly rate of the lowest paid employee with the skills necessary to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce a requested record. However, the fee shall not exceed $25 an hour, unless approved by the Supervisor of Records. Municipalities with populations of 20,000 people or fewer will be permitted to charge for the first 2 hours of employee time.

Administrative Appeals

As of January 1, 2017, if an agency or municipality fails to comply with a requirement of the new law, the requestor may file an appeal with the Supervisor of Records who will then issue a determination on the public status of the records within 10 business days of receipt of the request for an appeal.

Attorney Fees

Under the new Public Records Law, if a requestor prevails in a court action against an agency or municipal RAO, the court may award the requestor attorney fees or costs.

posted by Jeff Bennett 

 

SUBMITTED BY             Ann-Marie Geyster                DISTRICT                       Narragansett RSD
PHONE                          978-939-5661                        DATE RECEIVED                         12/22/14
FIELD REP                    Deb Wagner                          DATE SUBMISSION COMPLETE  12/22/14

EXCESS AND DEFICIENCY CALCULATION 

BEGIN:
            UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE/EXCESS AND DEFICIENCY                          163,647
LESS:
         OTHER RECEIVABLE, OVERDRAWN ACCOUNTS, DEFICITS
 Preschool Revolving                                                                                                        23,196
 HS Donation                                                                                                                       283
 STARS GT                                                                                                                          601
 Phillipston Police Scholarship                                                                                                 91
 Frenier Fund                                                                                                                          21
 Biomass Boiler Project                                                                                                     24,938


 OTHER ADJUSTMENTS:
                                                                                                                                                -
                                                                                                                                                -
                                                                                                                                                -
TOTAL CERTIFIED UNENCUMBERED EXCESS AND DEFICIENCY                              114,517

UNENCUMBERED E & D IN EXCESS OF 5% CALCULATION 

OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET                                                                        18,721,986

5% OF BUDGET                                                                                                             936,099

TOTAL IN EXCESS                                                                                                                  -

REVIEWED BY:              DEB WAGNER                         PLEASE SEE CERTIFICATION LETTER
DATE:                                   03/19/2015                 FOR DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTS APPROVAL


posted by Jeff Bennett

Something to be aware of:

According to a document from the department of revenue, that was submitted by the Town of Templeton on march 27, 2014, this showed a deficit or in the red amount of $26,899.00. When I see the numbers provided and do the simple math, addition and subtraction, I come up with $26,900.00. The main point of interest to me is, with this amount showing in the red or a deficit, why was anyone from the selectmen talking a fund surplus of any amount, never mind $750,000.00? When you have paper work showing red, negative numbers or deficit, why talk of surplus?

The thing that immediately comes to my mind is being told what someone thinks I want to hear, "all is okay, there is going to be surplus money, we have it under control. This makes it look good and makes it possible to get something big passed, like a 47 million dollar school.

The fact remains, this document existed, was provided to the DOR by the Town and the selectmen chose to tell a different story. There was no mention of this when talking about the financial records of 2013. You decide if you should trust or believe anything from the current board of selectmen.


posted by Jeff Bennett