In case you have forgotten;
from Special Town meeting of March 29, 2014.


ARTICLE 5 To see if the Town will vote to approve or disapprove the three million, five hundred thousand dollar ($3,500,000.00) debt authorized by vote of the Narragansett Regional School District on March 5, 2014 to pay costs of (i) replacing the existing oil-fired boilers serving the High and Middle Schools with a wood chip-fired boiler, to be located in the existing boiler room, (ii) construction of a wood chip storage facility to be located adjacent to the boiler room, and (iii) all other costs incidental and related thereto, or to take any other action relative thereto. Submitted by the Select board at the request of the School Committee.  A motion was duly made and seconded to allow a short presentation. A motion was duly made and seconded to move the question.

 Passed/March 29th @ 12:20

A substitute motion was duly made and seconded that the town vote that three million, five hundred thousand dollars ($3,500,000.00) debt authorized by vote of the Narragansett Regional School District on March 5, 2014 to pay costs of (i) replacing the 3 existing oil-fired boilers serving the High and Middle Schools with a wood chip-fired boiler, to be located in the existing boiler room, (ii) construction of a wood chip storage facility to be located adjacent to the boiler room, and (iii) all other costs incidental and related thereto, be hereby approved.

Passed/March 29th @ 12:21

The debt for the high school addition may be coming off in 2019 but this amount will still be coming out of the towns budget which equals that much less available for the Town to have for services and departments. I believe the pitch was money saved on fuel would pay the costs but the bond offering seems to indicate otherwise.  

Municipal Bond Offerings | Edward Jones

click on the link and look for offering for Narragansett regional school district.

Jeff Bennett

Do not forget this. . . .

Bonds for the Bio mass system and you can find details here;

Municipal Bond Offerings | Edward Jones

click on that link and under current bond offerings, you look for Narragansett Regional school district and click on that and read and enjoy.

Some information in that document is as follows;

Fiscal 2016 Operating costs, showing the Town, % of total and its share

                             Fiscal 2016                                                           Fiscal 2016

Town                 Operating costs          % of total                    capital costs                 % of total

Phillipston        $1,546,129.00                22.26                         $  94,262.00                   17.97

Templeton          5,398,510.00                77.74                           430,553.00                    82.03

                              Fiscal 2015                                                            Fiscal 2015

Town                  Operating costs          % of total                       capital costs              % of total

Phillipston           $1,510,958.00               22.751                        $  92,584.00                  17.65

Templeton              5,130,328.00              77.249                           431,969.00                  82.35

Apportionment of debt service on the bonds

        The payment of pinciple and interest on the bonds will be apportioned to the member towns. Payments of principal and interest on the bonds are to be apportioned to the member towns as a capital cost on the basis described above. The apportionment for fiscal 2016 will be as follows:

Town                                           % of total

Templeton                                       82.03

Phillipston                                       17.97

I think it is time for the Board of Selectmen to vote to increase the Phillipston share of Templeton dispatch costs. If Phillipston share is not in the 100 thousand dollar range yet,  it needs to be increased to that range now. Since Templeton pays 80 % of freight on the school, I feel Phillipston should pay more for dispatch services, as Phillipston has no expense of a building, equipment, benefits nor debt service for the new addition to the police station. Time for selectmen of Templeton to look out for benefit of Templeton taxpayers and demand more funding from Phillipston txpayers. I see this as only fair since dispatch costs for the Templeton taxpayers have increased significantly.

Sounds like another question for Templeton selectmen to answer.

Jeff bennett

Announcing New Complete Streets Funding Program

 The new Complete Streets Funding Program, authorized by the 2014 Transportation Bond Bill, offers Massachusetts municipalities incentives to adopt policies and practices that provide safe and accessible options for all travel modes – walking, biking, transit and vehicles – for people of all ages and abilities. Online Portal MassDOT has launched an interactive web portal to assist municipalities through the policy development, prioritization planning, and project approval steps of the application process. In addition, a Complete Streets Funding Program Guidance document, explaining the program requirements, model policy guidance and scoring system, and eligible infrastructure, is available online.
 Primary Requirements To be eligible for up to $50,000 in technical assistance and up to $400,000 in construction funding, a municipality must meet three primary requirements:
 • Attendance of a municipal employee at a Complete Streets training
 • Passage of a Complete Streets Policy that scores 80 or above out of a possible 100 points (Tier 1)
 • Development of a Complete Streets Prioritization Plan (Tier 2)

MassDOT offers technical assistance to conduct a needs assessment, network gap analysis, and/or safety audit to determine a targeted investment strategy for Complete Streets infrastructure. Upon completion of these requirements, a municipality is eligible for construction funds (Tier 3). Reimbursement for technical assistance and project funding will be managed by the appropriate Highway District Local Aid Office. Available Funding: $12.5M total for FY16 and FY17 (must be spent by June 30, 2017). Community Compact Cabinet Four points will be automatically added to the policy scores of all Community Compact Cabinet members, and any Community Compact member that has selected Complete Streets as one of its best practices will receive an additional four points. For more information and to register to become a Complete

From Mass. DOT site

Jeff Bennett

from May Town meeting 2015

LONG & SHORT TERM DEBT SERVICE                                            $    1,709,097.00
TOTAL - TOWN BUDGET                                                                         7,420,057.00

SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS
School Committee Stipends                                                                                          0
5 Elected Templeton Members - NRSD School Committee expense                                 0

 Narragansett Regional School Assessment                                              $   5,396,832.00

 Montachusett Regional Vocational School Assessment                             $      611,480.00
TOTAL SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS                                                           $   6,008,312.00

TOTAL TOWN AND SCHOOLS                                                                $ 13,428,369.00


4000 Operation of Plant

Director of Buildings and Grounds                                                                    $   67,461.94
Custodial Salaries                                                                                              476,400.51
Custodial Supplies                                                                                               33,689.33
Building and Grounds Travel                                                                                      124.30
Fuel $ 413,295.17 Electricity                                                                                217,862.61
Maintenance of Grounds                                                                                        53,170.22
Maintenance of Buildings                                                                                     163,278.13
Maintenance of Equipment                                                                                     20,079.80

The above is from Templeton annual Town report of 2014, so the question is, with one less building to take care of, as the district is scheduled to turn back to the Town, control of the Templeton Center school, there should be some savings in the above dollars, somewhere, to use to pay members of the school committee who feel they should be paid for volunteering to be on the school committee. Perhaps they could explain to their students the act of volunteering, civic duty and becoming involved with out looking for money or anything else, just a sense of helping to try to make things better. Perhaps there is an economics lesson in there as well?

Jeff Bennett

from the website of the DESE
A target local contribution establishes an ideal goal for how much each city and town should contribute toward its foundation budget, based on the municipality's wealth. Two measures of municipal wealth are used: aggregate property values and aggregate personal income levels, with each given equal weight. The target is recalculated each year based upon the most recent income and property valuations.

Jeff Bennett

Board of Selectmen		Salaries	$19,308	Upgrades
Town Clerk		Salaries	$13,841	Upgrade and move to a 40 hr schedule
Town Buildings Maintenance		Salaries	$2,950	From 5 to 10 Hrs for Town Hall custodian
Cemetery & Parks		Salaries	$13,837	A seasonal worker
Cemetery & Parks		Expenses	$6,557	Admin. Assistant
Highways		Salaries	$31,500	Asst. Mechanic/Laborer
Highways		Snow & Ice	$25,000	TA Recommendation
Highways		Vehicles Fuel	$31,300	Additional fuel
Police Officer		Salaries	$91,553	Total salary = $69,553; Benefits = $22,000
COA		Salaries	$7,803	11 additional hrs -Elder Family Services Coord.
COA		Salaries	$14,275	20.5 hrs additional hrs for Activity Coordinator
Veterans		Salaries	$10,760	Restore salary of Director to $20,000
Library		Salaries	$3,011	Upgrade for Library Director
Library		Salaries	$2,727	Upgrade for Library Staff
Tree Warden		Expenses	$1,500	Contracted work requiring a boom lift
Recreation		Salaries	$3,720	Increase Recreation salaries
Stipends for School Committee		School Salaries	$9,000	Restoration of stipends
TOTAL The above is a list of requests from dept. heads for FY17. Jeff Bennett			$288,642

Changing of the tune??

The following is an email from Templeton Town Administrator Robert Markel.

"All -

Attached is the list of new initiatives and requests from Town departments.  I thought that the Selectmen might make decisions regarding which requests will be funded on Monday night, but they need more time.  

As you can see, the departmental requests exceed available, unallocated revenue in the budget by more than $100,000.  Also, the School Superintendent informed us on Monday that the $225,000 in additional funding that I included in the budget for NRSD is not enough.  They are seeking an additional $82,000 in order to comply with DOE target shares.  

I informed department heads on Tuesday morning that they should begin meeting with the TAB to explain their budget requests.

Rm "

Perhaps this change is a result of televised meetings of the Advisory Board where members expressed frustration with an earlier email stating selectmen and Town Administrator recommending dept. heads NOT meet with the AB.

What ever the reason, this is a positive step in my opinion as a resident of Templeton. One head scratcher is under the TOWN dept. heads initiatives and requests; stipends for school committee listed under school salaries, in the amount of $9000.00 for stipends for school committee members.

There must have been a change in the law because the Town and school district are two separate legal entities which is why after the Templetonn taxpayers pay the school assessment, the town has no control of the school budget, that is the job of the school superintendent and school committee. So if school committee members want a stipend or a salary, take it out of their budget just like the light and water commissioners still do. And if that is part of the schools budget shortfall, do like the town of Templeton did, do away with stipends or salaries for all elected people. (exception is the light & water commissioners)

Since John Columbus stated when he was running for election, "the town has to be run by the book" and I think he needs to read that book, all selectmen should understand that the Templeton municipal light & water dept. really is part of the Town and they had to come crawling back to ask permission for a loan because as the DOR told them, they are NOT a separate legal entitiy but the Narragansett region school district is, the Town of Templeton is only obligated to give one pile of money and they have to dish it out where and how needed.

Jeff Bennett

10.06: Annual School Spending Requirements

(1) The Commissioner shall determine each school district's actual net school spending in the prior fiscal year and the estimated net school spending in the current year from information contained in the End-of-Year Financial Report.

(2) The sum of the following expenditures for public education from local revenues and M.G.L. c. 70 school aid, reported in accordance with 603 CMR 10.04 and 10.05 and the guidelines published by the Department, shall be considered a school district's annual net school spending for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of M.G.L. c. 70:

(a) district and school site administrative services and materials

(b) student instructional services, materials and equipment

(c) student support services; including attendance, health services, food services (not including the cost of food), and school security

(d) student activities; including athletics, performance groups and clubs

(e) operation and routine maintenance of school facilities and equipment

(f) extraordinary maintenance of school facilities

(g) health insurance and retirement contributions for current school district employees

(h) non-employee insurance

(i) rental or lease of land, buildings, or building space for student instruction or school administration purposes for a period not exceeding three years

(j) interest on short term borrowing in anticipation of revenue to fund current year operating expenses, except in a year when state aid payments to the district or municipality have been delayed or forfeited for failure to comply with student or financial data reporting requirements;

(k) tuition and related charges for students attending other public schools, collaborative programs, or private schools by agreement of the school committee or assignment by a state agency;

(l) assessments, minus any reimbursements, for school choice and charter school students attending schools outside the district;

(m) the cost of health insurance for retired teachers in a school district where such costs were considered by the Department to be part of the district's net school spending in fiscal year 1994.

(3) In calculating actual or estimated net school spending, a city, town or regional school district's total expenditures for the items specified in 603 CMR 10.06(2) shall be reduced by the school district or municipality's general fund receipts for tuition received for students attending the district's schools, earnings on investments by the school district, rental fees for the use of school district facilities, insurance reimbursements for services provided to students in the district's schools, reimbursements pursuant to M.G.L. c. 40S, and any other general fund revenues generated by the school district available to support current year operating expenses.

(4) The Department shall compare each school district's net school spending in the prior fiscal year with the net school appropriation required by M.G.L. c. 70, § 6 to determine the district's compliance with M.G.L. c. 70 net school spending requirements. For the purposes of this calculation, actual expenditures in the prior year by municipal departments other than the school department for school district purposes shall be used for the following expenditure categories: school district employee retirement and insurance programs, interest on short term borrowing in anticipation of revenue to fund current year operating expenses, tuition payments on behalf of resident students, and assessments for charter school and school choice students. Estimated expenditures by municipal departments other than the school department shall be deemed to be the actual expenditures in all of the other categories in which municipalities are permitted to report expenditures pursuant to 603 CMR 10.05.

(5) The Commissioner shall, after receipt of a district's End-of-Year Financial Report, notify the school district superintendent and municipal officials of any prior year spending deficiency and resulting expenditure obligation carried forward into the current fiscal year pursuant to M.G.L. c. 70, § 11. In such instances, any funds remaining in the school district's account at the close of the fiscal year shall be reserved by the municipal accountant or regional school treasurer and shall be made available to the school district without further appropriation. If the amount of the prior year's net school spending deficiency is greater than the amount of the school district's unspent funds available to be carried forward, an amount sufficient to meet the carried forward spending obligation must be appropriated by the municipality or municipalities responsible for the financial support of the school district.

(6) If, in any fiscal year, a district's actual expenditures for public education are less than the amount required under M.G.L. c. 70 taking into consideration any permitted carry-forward, the Department shall direct the Commissioner of Revenue to reduce the district's state school aid distribution by the amounts set forth in M.G. L. c. 70, § 11. When a deduction is so taken, there shall be no corresponding reduction in the district's net school spending requirement for the current year.

Some very "dry" reading but interesting to see how the DESE comes to its conclusion if a municipality is meeting its required obligation with regards to school spending. 

This comes from MGL and DESE website.

Jeff Bennett

Money articles;

There is usually an article at Town Meeting that generally says "to allow the Town Treasurer to borrow money, with approval from selectmen, from time to time in anticipation of the revenue from the next financial year beginning July 1 in accordance with MGL c. 44, section 4 and to issue note or notes as may be given for a period of less than one year in accordance with general laws chapter 44, section 17 or to take any action thereto.

You, Town meeting vote, give selectmen permission to borrow short term, (for a year or less) for any reason and no concern for those borrowing costs. If the Town had an adequate rainy day fun, would there be a need for short term borrowing.

The town does not have a real rainy day fund because there is currently no selectmen who will insist on this, just look at the record of spending for the past few years. Can you say over 300 thousand gone in 30 minutes or less? And now they want to get paid again. Probably watch for some back peddling on that and other things because there is one thing that I think scares them and that is a selectmen who has and will speak on those very things.

So there is not only a problem with the wording for the money, there also seems to be a problem with the way it was handled as it was not done as a debt exclusion long term so that has to be fixed. The thing that should really have people mad is not that there are or may be problems, but rather that no selectmen seems to be willing to speak on it, rather they seem to wish to portray a tight ship where everything is fine and working well and there is a million dollars in free cash out there waiting on you.

More transfers time and time again, just like before which in my opinion, shows there was and still is not enough money to pay for things the selectmen want or dept. heads want. Perhaps it is time to say so and address it in what ever way it takes such as sharing whatever services possible to save taxpayer dollars, as one former selectmen brought to the table on more than one occasion but the rest of the selectmen and many dept. heads did not like or support and you have to ask yourself why is that? Wait, they want to make government bigger and more expensive because they have no problem spending your money.

And the hell with the one pain in their butt there is, the Advisory Board.

Jeff Bennett

The article that has the problem;

ARTICLE 6
To see if the Town will vote to appropriate, borrow or transfer from available funds, an amount of money to be expended under the direction of Templeton Elementary School Building Committee for the Schematic Design portion of the Feasibility Study for the Templeton Elementary School, located off Route 202, King Philips Trail in Templeton, MA, known as Crow's Hill, identified as Town Assessor identification no. 2-7-40 and described in the deed recorded at the Worcester County Registry of Deeds in Book 1600, Page 313, for which feasibility study the Town may be eligible for a grant from the Massachusetts School Building Authority. The MSBA’s grant program is a nonentitlement, discretionary program based on need, as determined by the MSBA, and any costs the Town incurs in connection with the feasibility study in excess of any grant approved by and received from the MSBA shall be the sole responsibility of the Town. Submitted by the Selectboard at the request of the School Committee A motion was duly made and seconded to move the question. Passed/March 29th @ 12:51

 On a motion duly made and seconded; the town voted that five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) be hereby appropriated for the purpose of paying costs of the Feasibility Study/Schematic Design work ahead for the Templeton Center Elementary School, located at 17 South Road, in Templeton MA, including the payment of all costs incidental or related thereto, and for which the Town may be eligible for a grant from the Massachusetts School Building Authority (“MSBA”), said amount to be expended under the direction of the Templeton Elementary School Building Committee. To meet this appropriation the Narragansett Regional School District, with the approval of the Templeton Board of Selectmen, is authorized to borrow said amount under and pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 44, or pursuant to any other enabling authority. The Town acknowledges that the MSBA’s grant program is a non-entitlement, discretionary program based on need, as determined by the MSBA, and any costs the Town incurs in excess of any grant approved by and received from the MSBA shall be the sole responsibility of the Town, and further provided that the appropriation hereunder shall be subject to and contingent upon an affirmative vote of the Town to exempt the amounts required for the payment of interest and principal on said borrowing from the limitations on taxes imposed by M.G.L. 59, Section 21C (Proposition 2 ½), and that the amount borrowing authorized pursuant to this vote shall be reduced by any grant amount set forth in the Feasibility Study Agreement that may be executed between the Town and the MSBA.

 Passed/March 29th @ 12:52

This involves Town money so only the Town can borrow funds. If you take the time to look over past minutes of selectmen meetings, you will see that, as a selectmen, I constantly pushed for selectmen to take charge of this project. Only one name belongs on all the papers, contracts and agreements for this, and that is the Town of Templeton.

Just like reported in annual Town report of 2003, page 28, light commissioners accepted low bid of 1.5 million for construction of 12,000 square foot building. The commissioners took $400,000.00 from MMWEC working capital fund to pay for the increase above the 1.5 million approved at Town Meeting.  So the commissioners at that time, Dana Blais, Gregg Edwards and Sean Hamilton said it would need 1.5 million for a new building but they then went to bid and were off by $400,000.00 and they had a place to raid for the extra money. Where will the money com from if these fellas are off again?  See who the current commissioners are today. If you look at the warrant article for that 1.5 million, you will that it was Templeton taxpayers on the hook if anything went wrong and it is still that way today, be it a water tank or a school.

Jeff Bennett

Spend Spend Spend;

The one comment on the 17 budget was that after looking at how much money is available to spend and with that amount divided up, there is $180,000.00 left, so rather than put it in a rainy day fund or a stabilization or capital projects fund, it was stated that we may be able to cover some of the things dept. heads want. Nothing has changed, get 5 bucks extra and just spend it. What was really interesting was the disclosure that at least a few selectmen wish to go back to getting paid.

My thought on one scenario is to keep the interim town administrator around for another year and create the assistant town administrator position along with formal training so next year the board can say it is time to move to a full time town administrator so how about we move the assistant to full time town administrator and there, we now have a full time town administrator. So we will then have to hire a new assistant town administrator?  It just seems like more of the same, but lets hope the select board actually begins looking for an experienced professional rather than some more of the give it to the next longest serving individual which does not always equal the best interest of the taxpayers.



Jeff Bennett

So at tonight's selectmen meeting, there was discussion on job descriptions and sure enough, assistant town administrator was brought up and Holly Young was named as one. When asked if there would be a posting for any other town employee to apply, ah, not so much. When asked if there would be an impact on the budget, no was the answer, which seems strange when there is presently an increase proposed in the current draft for that very topic, assistant town administrator. But yet for 5 hour increase in Town Clerk's hours, that is a financial concern. Also there would be an increase in hours for the other admin assistant in the BOS office which would make that position qualify for benefits. Some selectmen now think that centralized purchasing of office supplies is now a good idea. That is an idea I proposed back in 2012 but not many selectmen agreed nor did many dept. heads, I think they do not like any interference with their little empires. But it is good to see that now it may be fashionable and money saving as well. Perhaps it was an idea ahead of its time. The best one yet was that apparently some members of the select board think they should be compensated for volunteering to run for the board. Some things never change.  Towards the end of the meeting when dept. heads talked about their budgets, 2 selectmen recused themselves for possible conflict issues. So there were only 2 selectmen left at the table, good thing they did not have to vote on things. I thought Templeton had a five member board of selectmen. 

Jeff Bennett

2017 OPERATING BUDGET View in OneDrive This is a link to the draft budget as sent from the Town Administrator. Look at line 78, selectmen office salaries. see the small red triangle,  click on it and look for the explanation to the right. Jeff Bennett

Selectmen meeting agenda;

Why is there an item for the Templeton Water dept.?  Because the MA Department of Revenue told the Town, in a letter, that said in the first line of the third paragraph that with regards to Massachusetts General Laws, chapter 164, a municipal light dept. is NOT a legal separate entity and it needs Town meeting vote to borrow money. The simple fact is the Templeton Municipal light & Water is a part of the town and by that dept. taking on debt, enterprise fund or not, ultimately if anything happens, the Templeton taxpayers are on the hook for that debt. Pretty simple if you take the time to do a little reading / research. No big question or mystery there.

Action on Town Administrator; this could be the announcement that there will be an assistant Town Administrator and it will be Holly Young. Why state that as a possibility? Look at an electronic copy of the budget proposal for FY 2017 and you will see it by clicking on one of the little red triangles in upper corner of some columns of numbers. Of course we will have to wait to see what actually happens or is discussed tonight and I hope to have a report on that right after the meeting.

I will post the link to the last copy of the draft budget from the Town Administrator, look at line 78, selectmen office salaries and look for the small red triangle. Click it and read the explanation to the right.

Jeff Bennett

My tax bill went up by more than 2 1/2%, so much for the law. I think someone commented on that or wrote it and sent it to me via the old electronic mail system. One of the more popular myths out there of the under educated populace. No disrespect to anyone, but unless you spend most of your time reading on this subject along with many others or are a professional in some way with regards to these things, that is an easy position to be in, my self included. So i will try to shed some light on these items by putting some information forward on the subject as well as sources where you can go to read it all if you are so inclined. So here is some more information concerning prop 2 1/2 and it comes from "A primer on prop 2 1/2 from the MA DOR, division of local services"

Levy Increases
 Once a community’s levy limit is established for a particular year, the community can determine what its levy will be. The community may set its levy at any amount up to the levy limit. (Or, if it has voted a debt exclusion or capital outlay expenditure exclusion, it may levy up to the levy limit plus the additional temporary capacity resulting from the exclusion.) It is important to note that as long as a community levies no more than its levy limit, there is no restriction on the dollar increase or percentage increase in its levy from year to year. Proposition 21 ⁄2 restricts increases in the levy limit, not the levy. A community is permitted to tax up to its levy limit, even if it must raise its levy by a large percentage over the previous year’s levy. For example, a community could decide to increase its levy between FY2007 and FY2008 because the people of the community feel that the town should respond to some unmet local needs.

 Below we highlight the community’s FY2007 and FY2008 levy limits and levies:

 FY2007 Levy Limit = $1,000,000
 FY2007 Levy           = $   900,000

FY2008 Levy Limit = $1,025,000
FY2008 Levy           = $1,025,000

Percentage Change In Levy Limit = 2.5%
Percentage Change In Levy = 13.8% From FY2007 to FY2008,

 the community’s levy limit only increases by the allowed 2.5 percent. (In this example assume the community has no new growth and has not voted an override.) The community’s levy increases from the FY2007 amount of $900,000 up to its FY2008 levy limit of $1,025,000. This is a total dollar increase in the actual levy of $125,000 — and a percentage increase in the actual levy of 13.8 percent. From FY2007 to FY2008, the actual levy increases by 13.8 percent while the levy limit only increases by the allowed 2.5 percent. It is important to note that the 13.8 percent increase described here is allowable under the provisions of Proposition 21 ⁄2. As long as the levy limit only increases each year by the amount allowed under Proposition 21 ⁄2, the actual levy can increase or decrease within the levy limit established each year, as decided by the community. The community may increase its levy up to its new levy limit regardless of the percentage increase in the levy.

I hope this helps,
Jeff Bennett

Attempting to understand proposition 2 1/2.

The following is from a guide about prop 2 1/2 published by Department of Revenue, division of local services of MA.

What is a Levy?
 The property tax levy is the revenue a community can raise through real and personal property taxes. We will refer to the property tax levy simply as the levy. In Massachusetts, municipal revenues to support local spending for schools, public safety and other public services are raised through the property tax levy, state aid, local receipts and other sources. The property tax levy is the largest source of revenue for most cities and towns.

 What is a Levy Ceiling?  What is a Levy Limit? 
    Proposition 21 ⁄2 places constraints on the amount of the levy raised by a city or town and on how much the levy can be increased from year to year. A levy limit is a restriction on the amount of property taxes a community can levy. Proposition 21 ⁄2 established two types of levy limits: First, a community cannot levy more than 2.5 percent of the total full and fair cash value of all taxable real and personal property in the community. In this primer we will refer to the full and fair cash value limit as the levy ceiling. Second, a community’s levy is also constrained in that it can only increase by a certain amount from year to year. We will refer to the maximum amount a community can levy in a given year as the levy limit. The levy limit will always be below, or at most, equal to the levy ceiling. The levy limit may not exceed the levy ceiling. Proposition 21 ⁄2 does provide communities with some flexibility. It is possible for a community to levy above its levy limit or its levy ceiling on a temporary basis, as well as to increase its levy limit on a permanent basis. These options are discussed in more detail in other sections of this primer. The concepts of levy ceiling and levy limit are illustrated in Figure 1.

 How is a Levy Ceiling Calculated? 
   The levy ceiling is determined by calculating 2.5 percent of the total full and fair cash value of taxable real and personal property in the community: Full and Fair Cash Value x 2.5% = LEVY CEILING Full and Fair Cash Value = $100,000,000 $100,000,000 x 2.5% = $2,500,000

I believe it is important when anyone puts out any graphs, charts or figures projecting taxes and tax rates that all understand or at least try to so we all then realize how it actually works or at least how it has worked out in many cities and towns, most importantly, in our own Town.

Jeff Bennett

The hits keep on coming - more financial funnies in Templeton

First off, relax, the Templeton financial team has it under control and everything is fine, we have hundreds of thousands of dollars in free cash coming. That is what the Town Administrator tell us and the selectmen seem to agree

So now lets take a look at the results of the special town meeting held back in November, 2015 and some financial transfers; Article 4

Transfer from General insurance to town accountant expenses

account number for general insurance given as   1000-945-900-57-5743-0000
account number for town accountant expense as 1000-945-900-57-5743-0000

so if you look at the town clerks record for that special town meeting, it shows money from one account was put  back into that same account.

the next item was transfer from town administrator salary to town accountant expenses

account number for town administrator given as            1000-123-100-51-5110-0000
account number for town accountant expenses given as 1000-135-100-54-5420-0000

Looking at the current budget versus actual report from the Town Accountant shows the following;

account number 1000-135-100-54-5420-0000 is listed as town account office supplies supplies.

So the financial team has it under control and all is fine, official town meeting vote has money going from here back into here and on and on. It is one thing to try and reassure people and to try to calm things down but when it all starts to add up to the same old same ole and the selectmen try to manage the Advisory Board and interfere with their duties, something is amiss. In my opinion anyways and I believe there are more surprises to come.

Jeff Bennett

Lets ruffle the selectmen feathers;

The Department of Revenue (DOR) division of local services puts out many publications to aid local officials with regards to municipal finance. One of them is a municipal calendar and within said calendar, it has listed that  December 31 is the timeline when the board of selectmen should begin to finalize budget recommendation for review by Finance Committee (Advisory Board)

February 28; Finance Committee continue budget review and develop recommendations.

That is pretty hard to do with the selectmen telling people they appoint not to meet with the Advisory Board. Pretty safe to say this BOS do not want any checks n balances in place.

Templeton Town by-laws, article IV (4)  Advisory Committee, section 5 states:

In the discharge of its duty, said committee shall have free access to all books of record and accounts, bills and vouchers on which money has been or may be paid from the Town treasury. Officers, boards and committees of the Town shall, upon request, furnish said committee with facts, figures and any other information pertaining to their several activities.

Included within the draft 2017 Templeton budget is an item of interest, a $47,000.00 salary figure for an assistant town administrator, Holly. Could that be Holly Young, current secretary in the BOS office and perhaps this is why she was sent to training for MSBA paper work.

Perhaps what is needed is one selectman with some moxie to speak up on some of these issues and to ask why at a selectmen meeting.

Some sunlight is clearly needed down at that office.

Speaking of sunshine, it was stated at last nights Advisory Board meeting that the secretary from the highway department went to MSBA training as well so i hope the Treasurer has been as well. 

Jeff Bennett

Templeton Finances may not be rosey

Templeton Town by-laws, article IV (4)  Advisory Committee, section 5 states:

In the discharge of its duty, said committee shall have free access to all books of record and accounts, bills and vouchers on which money has been or may be paid from the Town treasury. Officers, boards and committees of the Town shall, upon request, furnish said committee with facts, figures and any other information pertaining to their several activities.

Apparently the Town Administrator and selectmen do not feel like following this by-law.

An email sent to the chairman of the Advisory Board from the Town Administrator seems to reinforce my thought. As well as my other thought that the Town Administrator is trying to manage the Advisory Board and even circumvent it.

Within the email is the following;

All;  I received a copy of the Advisory Boards schedule for reviewing budgets from department heads. Some members of the select board and I feel that this effort is premature.
One comment from a member of the BOS stated "I believe it is inappropriate for them to put out a schedule when we as the selectmen may not have even met with any of them yet or asked to meet with them. This makes it really confusing and some of the department heads are very upset that they're even being asked to attend or just given a date for a meeting."

The email further states we are not holding up the budget process. Rather, we cannot make sensible decisions about spending for fiscal 2017 until we get important information about insurance costs and assessments for the schools. I did get a quote for general insurance on Monday and am hoping to have the health insurance number by mid month. We await the assessments from NRSD and Monty Tech.

Accordingly, I am recommending to the department heads that they postpone any meetings with the Advisory Board until the selectmen have finalized their budget request to the Town meeting for fiscal 2017.

So the Advisory Board is tying to follow Town bylaws as well as do their duty and the selectmen and Town Administrator apparently wish to have no part of it.

written and posted by Jeff Bennett

well well, someone is reading my stuff here, at least it looks  like Dave Smart is. He posted a comment on his blog, Pauly's Templeton Watch under a blog post "Rumor has it" and I am not sure who authored the original post as I sign all of mine. Anyways, ole Dave posted a comment that was word for word on my last blog concerning the request from Templeton Water dept. for a special Town meeting for a given reason of looking for approval of a loan for the replacement of a water storage tank located on Ladder Hill. Perhaps the old "whole story, rest of the story" line has lost its luster so he needed something original so he just stole my post? Least someone reads the stuff.

Jeff Bennett

Other Common Issues – Multiple-member bodies remain challenged by the highly technical requirements of the OML, and the Division therefore continues to issue determinations emphasizing its interpretation of the basic requirements of the OML. The following matters may therefore be of assistance to public bodies: - Meeting notices and documents to be discussed at the meeting prepared by non-board members may be distributed in advance, provided that there is no sharing of opinions between a quorum of the members. OML 2015-54 - Meeting minutes, including executive session minutes, must contain sufficient detail regarding the discussion so that a member of the public not in attendance can understand what was discussed. OML 2015-49 - A meeting notice must contain the date and time of the meeting and also a record of the date and time that it was posted. OML 2015-90 - If a meeting notice is updated, the notice must include the time and date the updated notice was posted and indicate the portion of the notice that is “new.” OML 2015-43 - The attorney-client privilege does not provide an independent basis for an executive session; a board may meet privately with legal counsel, but only in accordance with one of the ten executive session purposes in G.L. c.30A, §21. OML 2015-120 - The board chair is required to notify the public that a meeting is being recorded, whether by a verbal announcement or a sign on the door to the meeting room. OML 2015-147 .

I seem to remember a member of the Templeton Board of Selectmen (current) reply when asked about this, that it does not matter how things were done in the past. Well, I guess it matters after all and perhaps the BOS needs a reminder, especially if they attended the Massachusetts Municipal Association meeting this past January.

The above is from the website MMA and K&P law and were topics covered at the last MMA conference.

Jeff Bennett

Approval of Contracts Negotiated in Executive Session: Union v. Non-union – The OML authorizes boards to meet in executive session to discuss strategy and/or conduct contract negotiations for both collective bargaining and nonunion personnel contracts. The Division interprets the OML requirements for approval of such contracts differently, however. The Division has held that a collective bargaining contract may be approved by vote in executive session, provided that the board announces its approval at its first opportunity and “promptly” makes the final contract available as a public record. For contracts with nonunion personnel, however, the Division takes the position that the OML does not allow a board to vote in executive session to approve the contract. OML 2015-50 In effect, therefore, it is the Division’s position that a vote in executive session to approve a contract with non-union personnel violates the OML. As with any unintentional violation of the OML, the Division recognizes that a board may independently cure such a violation by taking “independent, deliberative action” in open session. This requirement may not be met merely by ratifying the prior vote, but only by engaging in a full and fair discussion at a properly posted meeting for which the matter appears on the meeting notice of the provisions and/or issues that resulted in the final contract.

very interesting, to me anyways.

Jeff Bennett

from the website of MMA and K&P law on topics covered at the past MMA conference.

following is from MMA website and K&P law and said material was covered at the last meeting of MMA in January 2016.


Nearly five years after the enactment of the “new” Open Meeting Law (“OML”), the Attorney General’s Division of Open Government (“Division”), through the issuance of opinions on particular complaints, continues to refine our understanding of the law and implementation thereof. Review of these opinions highlights nuances in how the Division interprets the OML and can assist boards in avoiding violations. While the Division’s resolution of a complaint applies only to the particular governmental body against which the complaint was lodged, it sets a precedent for resolution of similar complaints that may not appear in the OML or Division regulations adopted thereunder. The database of Division determinations is available on the Attorney General’s website at http://www.oml.ago.state.ma.us/Search.aspx?section=1 and may be searched by municipality, date or keywords. Below are some notable decisions from 2015 of which governmental bodies and their staff should be aware. Executive Session: Single Item Meeting Notice – On occasion, a board may schedule a special meeting for the purpose of addressing a single issue in executive session. As always, the OML, specifically G.L. c.30A, §21, requires the governmental body to begin the meeting in open session and then vote by roll call to enter executive session. The Division has determined, however, that in such a case, a board must include an item for the open session portion of the meeting, even if the only action to be taken is voting to enter executive session. The Division reasoned, “Listing ‘open session’ on the meeting notice is the only means by which members of the public are informed that a public body will, in fact, hold an open meeting that they are permitted to attend.” OML 2015-177, OML 2015-87. Therefore, to avoid a potential violation of the OML, if a board intends to hold a meeting only for the purpose of addressing an executive session matter, the meeting notice must first list the open session in a form similar to the following, “1. Open Session for Purpose of Voting to Enter Executive Session.” Executive Session Minutes: Collective Bargaining Strategy – A board may, pursuant to G.L. c.30A, §21(a)(3), enter executive session for the purpose of discussing strategy with regard to collective bargaining contract negotiations, but only so long as an open session “may have a detrimental effect on the bargaining position of the public body.” The records of an executive session, including minutes, must typically be released when the purpose of the session is completed. Some public bodies have argued that the minutes, which may contain negotiating strategies, have a continuing need to be withheld as potentially affecting future negotiations. The Division has agreed that such minutes may be withheld for a period, but that ”such minutes may not be withheld indefinitely.” OML 2015-62. The Division held that at some point the basis for withholding these minutes, i.e., that release would be “detrimental” for future negotiations, must expire. At this time, no appellate court has ruled on the application of the exemption and the ability to withhold permanently executive session minutes concerning collective bargaining strategy. Importantly, however, other exemptions from disclosure under the Public Records Law may still apply and be asserted in response to a request for such minutes.

Jeff Bennett

Back in September, 2015, the supreme judicial court of MA issued a decision regarding the use of the CMAR (construction manager at risk) method for public projects. In short, the decision states that rather than a project manager being liable, a municipality could be liable / responsible for defects in plans and specifications for a public project even if a CMAR was used.

In short, a Ma state agency, DCAMM employed a CMAR for a project, then when a subcontractor tried to get paid extra dollars for changes, scheduling, coordination and design errors, the subcontractor went after the CMAR for the extra dollars then DCAMM. The court ruled the public agency does give an implied warranty with regards to a designers plans and specifications. Somewhere in there, I foresee a possibility of this having effect on the new school, even with a contingency fund built in. Right now, I would just say it is a possibility and that is what happens when lawyers and the courts get involved. Even with a guaranteed maximum price, there seems to be an opening, so we will just have to watch this project unfold and see what happens and hope for the best.

Jeff Bennett

you can find this online and read the entire text of the ruling

A special town meeting;

Templeton water dept. has been before the selectmen, on Wednesday, February 10, 2016 to ask for a special town meeting. Reason for this meeting is so the Templeton water dept. can apply for a loan from USDA to replace one of Templeton's water tanks. The water dept. stated they woulld pay the costs associated with this meeting. Seems like the water dept. needs town meeting after all. According the a letter from the MA DOR, with regards to MA general law, chapter 164, the Templeton light & water dept. is not a separate legal entity and needs town meeting approval to take on more debt.

This is no rumor as I was present at the meeting. This is just what the dept. needs, more debt.

Jeff Bennett

ps: feel free to comment on this.

Typical Chronology:

 After authority to raise money through debt is granted by city council or town meeting, actual issuance of notes or bonds may occur months, or even years, later. For this reason, it is good practice for local finance officials to meet periodically to review borrowings that have been authorized, but not issued, to make sure that the debt position of the community is understood by all. Once the structure of a borrowing has been determined, a preliminary official statement (POS) is developed under direction of the treasurer and disseminated to the bond market community. The POS will also be used by rating agencies in their analysis of credit worthiness. Both the POS and the final Official Statement (OS) are documents prepared for potential investors that contain information about a prospective bond or note issue and financial data about the city or town. The OS is sometimes referred to as an offering circular or prospectus. After all of the preliminary work has been done and the various experts (e.g. bond counsel, rating agencies) have weighed-in on the sale, the bonds or notes are sold to underwriters or broker syndicates and, ultimately, to investors. Once payment on the purchase has been made, the community has the funds for the specified capital improvement or operating expenditures. To minimize interest costs, or more efficiently assemble borrowing packages, treasurers should always communicate with the department head, who will oversee a project or purchase, to better understand when funds will be needed. By taking a deliberate and thoughtful approach toward debt, cities and towns can optimize their borrowing practices to better maintain capital assets and minimize costs. Having a basic understanding of the process and making use of the knowledge of investment professionals improves a community’s odds of success.

Jeff Bennett

From the Massachusetts Department of Revenue;

Understanding Municipal Debt The decision to borrow money can be intimidating. To make matters more uncertain, the mechanics of issuing debt may be the least understood financial process among citizens, local officials and even some professional staff. Generally known is the statutory requirement that a town meeting, or a city council, can authorize borrowing only by twothirds vote. State law also specifies what expenditure purposes may be funded through debt and the allowed duration of the borrowing term (M.G.L. Ch. 44). The terms of a borrowing are made final when a majority of the board of selectmen, or the mayor, affixes their signature to required documentation. However, between authorization and issuance much more occurs with little notice outside the treasurer’s office. In the narrative that follows, we hope to provide some clarity. Discussed will be typical reasons why municipalities borrow and the borrowing vehicles that are available. The players who are a part of the process are described, as well as the process itself. Communities in Massachusetts have an ongoing responsibility to create and maintain capital assets. Hopefully, decisions of this nature are based on a capital improvement plan developed through analysis and prioritization of the community’s needs. Beyond a role in funding capital improvements related to buildings, infrastructure and equipment, it is the treasurer’s responsibility to maintain sufficient cash balances to meet the spending demands of departments, within the limits of appropriations. Occasionally, some communities also find themselves in need of a short-term infusion of cash for either capital or operating purposes. For these and other reasons, Massachusetts General Law authorizes cities and towns to issue debt under certain circumstances and for various durations. Often, the reasons for borrowing will dictate the type of debt a community chooses to take on. This is because some vehicles are better suited than others, depending on the nature of the need for funds. To make the discussion simpler, we can conceive of municipal debt as essentially falling into two categories: short-term and long-term.

Short-term Debt:
 Short-term debt can be classified best as borrowing through the issue of notes in anticipation of either paying them off or permanently financing the debt. Short-term borrowing also allows communities to make interest-only payments. However, such debt usually has a maturity date of no more than two years and, in some cases, statute dictates a shorter time frame. Additionally, a community might choose to re-issue short-term debt and/or make principal payments under certain circumstances. The various types of short-term debt vehicles used in Massachusetts include the following:

Bond Anticipation Notes (BANs) – These notes are issued to provide funding for capital improvements. BANs are usually paid-off with the proceeds of long-term financing instruments such as general obligation bonds. However, state law allows for BANs to be re-issued for up to five years if principle payments are made in accordance with an amortization schedule that would be required if the outstanding balance had been financed as long-term debt (M.G.L. Ch. 44, §17). Since short-term debt normally carries a lower interest rate than permanent, this strategy may make sense under certain circumstances.

Question: is there a line item in the fiscal year budget, 2017, which begins July 1, 2016 and will be voted on this May at Annual Town Meeting.

Jeff Bennett

School Building Committee meeting.

Seems like some members may be fizzling out, as it was at the very last minute to the start of the meeting that a quorum was arrived at. Can't wait to see what happens after Steve Hemmen leaves.

At last night's meeting of the school building committee, it was stated by school superintendent that he had taken the town Accountant and selectmen secretary Holly Young to Boston (presumably MSBA) to be trained with regards to MSBA payments, specifically pro-pay. This seemed a bit odd considering there was no mention of the Town Treasurer, who according to MA general laws, has authority and duties to pay bills and keep track of town debt, The treasurer shall, in addition to his estimate of the amount required for the maintenance of his own office, prepare a separate statement indicating the amounts required for the payment of interest on the town debt and for the payment of such portions of the town debt as may become due during the ensuing fiscal year. (from MA general law, chapter 41, section 59)

It was also stated that the school district intends to turn over control of the Templeton Center School building back to the Town on July 1. It would appear that as of that date, that building and land will be solely under Town Control.

If anyone should check, and I urge you to do so by looking at MA general laws, specifically chapter 41 and by googling Massachusetts municipal treasurers, Collectors and Accountants. This will allow you to read on the powers and duties of each position. Very simply, each department, board or committee authorized to expend Town funds shall at least once a month send to the Town Accountant said bills at which time the accountant verifies that they are proper and legal charges or bills and that they are charged to the proper account, that is then presented to selectmen for their approval and finally the Town Treasurer, after having a warrant signed by a majority of selectmen, can pay the bills and keep a record of all debt and interest costs for said debt. 

Jeff Bennett

Oh that budget and the pesky details. . . .

Retirement costs and conflicting numbers aside, there appears to be some more figures presented in the next budget draft for fiscal year 2017, July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017. These numbers come from information provided by the Town Administrator. There is still a wait for debt schedule of the Town to be provided as well as explanations of numbers not coinciding with previous year budget. The budget versus actual which is suppose to be an up to date accounting of town spending does not even equal what it should be. Quite a few dollar figures do not agree. Something is clearly amiss here which is probably why the Town's schedule A has not been completed on time. There are also new contracts for some departments such as fire and highway, which I hope the selectmen do not give away the house this time. It is time to stop giving away free stuff, offer a wage and benefit package that helps employees but also benefits the town as a whole. One thing would be to strongly push for new health insurance entity to lower the cost of the taxpayers, quite simply, the pie is only so big and if you spend it all on employees, what is left for services such as road repair and maintenance of town buildings. The money has to come from somewhere and that is your wallet, whether it is local taxes, state taxes or federal taxes, it all begins at your wallet. There is no such thing as free money and if the state did not take it from you in the first place, there would be no need for state aid. But back to the local issue at hand. The Advisory Board received an email from the Town Administrator that the Town Accountant was working on the debt schedule, which is really the job of the Town Treasurer. With all the work that needs to be done for audits to happen, as we have been told, it would seem prudent and important for the Town Accountant to be fully focused on things under that office and the treasurer to work on things under that office. Seems like one person doing all the work, which makes one wonder, what the hell is the rest of the "team" doing?

Jeff Bennett