from the Massachusetts Selectmen Handbook:

Finance Committee (or Advisory or Warrant Committee)
The finance committee—or, in some towns, the advisory or warrant committee—is a town’s official fiscal watchdog. Its primary, statutory responsibility is to advise and make recommendations to town meeting on the budget and other areas of finance. One of the finance committee’s most important functions involves making transfers from the town’s reserve fund (a contingency fund normally created as part of annual budget appropriations) to other line items in the budget for extraordinary or unforeseen occurrences.

While the finance committee plays a vital role, it is within the executive authority of the selectmen,and/or their appointees, to prepare the town’s budget. The selectmen have ultimate responsibility to the residents for this service. The finance committee’s responsibility is to review the budget submitted to them and to make recommendations regarding the budget to the town’s legislative body: the town meeting.

The proposed word changes to town by-law on the warrant for the upcoming special town meeting does not affect this: it cannot because the advisory committee's responsibility to examine and make recommendations on all warrant articles is mandated by state law and town by-law: make recommendations and a written report to town meeting.

The aim for the proposed by-law change is to clearly state who does what so we spend less time on arguing on that and spend more time on the very important subject of how is taxpayer money being spent. 

The proposed by-law change equates to clearly stating the Town Administrator with approval of the selectmen will create the town budget (which already happens as stated in current by-law) and if approved, would then clearly state the town administrator and selectmen would present and defend same to town meeting. (which already happens, it just does not state that in the by-law that was voted on at the 2014 annul town meeting.

2014 Templeton annual town meeting:

ARTICLE 20 CHANGE TO THE TOWN BUDGET PROCESS 

To see if the Town will vote to change Article IV “Advisory Committee,” Section 4 of the Town By-Laws to read: “It shall be duty of the Town Administrator in conjunction with the BOS to consider expenditures and develop a budget for the ensuing fiscal year of the several boards, officers and committees of the town, as prepared by them in such form and detail as prescribed by the Town Administrator.”; or take any other action relative thereto. 

Submitted by the Board of Selectmen 

Advisory Board Recommendation: No Vote: 5-0 AB 

Comments: The Advisory Board fully supports a change to the town budget process, however, the wording and placement of this suggested by-law change ( replacing an article that deals with the Advisory Board with text that relates strictly to the BOS and Town Administrator) does not seem to make sense and therefore the Advisory Board cannot support the article. 

So, will the advisory committee support further clarification of the process?

By Michael P. Norton, State House News Service

BOSTON The Massachusetts Legislature was the last in the nation to enact an annual budget this year and now their drawn-out deliberations over last year’s state budget are about to cost the taxpayers real money.

Comptroller Andrew Maylor faces a Thursday deadline to file the state’s annual Statutory Basis Financial Report closing the books on spending and revenues for the fiscal year that ended June 30, almost four months ago. But here’s the problem: the Legislature still isn’t done spending last year’s revenues.

Beacon Hill talks on a final fiscal 2019 supplemental budget only started to heat up this month, and House and Senate Democrats are currently looking at two different bills that spend most of last year’s budget surplus, while proposing rainy day savings account deposits of between $350 million and $400 million.

In a letter delivered to top lawmakers and Gov. Charlie Baker Tuesday, Maylor said that when the budget bill is eventually signed by Gov. Charlie Baker, it will take about 14 days to compile the final financial report and have it reviewed by the state’s independent audit firm, currently KPMG. That timeline puts Maylor’s office well beyond its statutory filing deadline.

“Please note that this is a target to help you understand when the SBFR might be issued but is not a guarantee,” Maylor wrote.

As part of his work, Maylor is required to certify and report the state’s consolidated net surplus at the same time as he issues the financial report, and the surplus certification determines if the budget is balanced and if there’s any amount to be transferred to the rainy day account.

Basing his calculations on the financial report being issued on Nov. 15, Maylor projected forgone interest on expected stabilization fund revenues of more than $500,000, an amount he estimated will increase by more than $30,000 each day beyond Nov. 15.

Calling it a “measurable downstream impact” of not filing the financial report on time, Maylor wrote, “I realize that this amount may not seem important, but as a taxpayer and someone who spent more than 25 years in local government, that sum is meaningful.”

The spending bills are on the minds of legislators, and the many stakeholders throughout Massachusetts who stand to benefit from newly authorized spending. The House closeout budget totaled about $723 millin in spending; the Senate bill authorized $780 million in spending.

“On Beacon Hill, a supplemental budget should be coming out, we think this week,” Education Commissioner Jeff Riley told the Board of Education Tuesday.

Riley added, “We think legally they have to figure this out by Oct. 31, but that may be pushed. Legally is perhaps too strong a word. Maybe they’re shooting for Oct. 31, traditionally.”

Last year, Treasurer Deb Goldberg and former Comptroller Thomas Shack knocked the practice of passing final supplemental budgets so long after fiscal years had ended, with Goldberg comparing the practice to “kids getting away with stuff for too long.”

To follow industry best practices, Shack said, a final supplemental budget should be approved by Aug. 31 each year.

“This is the fourth fiscal year that I’ve operated as the commonwealth’s comptroller and this is the fourth year under my comptrollership that we will not meet the statutory deadline,” Shack said last October.”I would reiterate that such late activity is really perilous. It’s a well-known risk within the audit world that if you do not meet your own statutory obligations you may well subject yourself to really, really significant scrutiny.”

Senate President Pro Tempore William Browsberger said lawmakers are aware of Thursday’s deadline and said there’s a possibility that the budget bills could be reconciled without the need for a six-member conference committee.

Katie Lannan contributed reporting

Please pass this message on to the Board:

Recently I contacted Mr. Szocik on the deteriorating road condition on the lower end of Brooks Village Road. First of all I want to say that Mr. Szocik was a pleasure to speak with and not only did I find him very professional but also very friendly and kind.

Secondly, Mr. Szocik addressed the situation and initially did some repairs...and returned once again to do some more repairs on the berm.

I just want to say that I appreciate Mr. Szocik's efforts and kindness in getting the job done well.

Sincerely,

Joseph Kondrchek
Ridgewood Lane

---

From: dlssupport@dor.state.ma.us <dlssupport@dor.state.ma.us>
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2019 11:03 AM
To: accountant@phillipston-ma.gov <accountant@phillipston-ma.gov>; Pontbriand, Kelli <kpontbriand@TempletonMA.gov>; Currie, Michael <mcurrie@TempletonMA.gov>; Griffis, Terry <tgriffis@TempletonMA.gov>; Bennett, Jeff <jbennett@TempletonMA.gov>; Richard, Julie <jrichard@TempletonMA.gov>; selectman@phillipston-ma.gov <selectman@phillipston-ma.gov>; Diane Haleybrooks <DHaleybrooks@TempletonMA.gov>; ageyster@nrsd.org <ageyster@nrsd.org>; shemman@narragansett.k12.ma.us <shemman@narragansett.k12.ma.us>; svarney@nrsd.org <svarney@nrsd.org>; ccasavant@nrsd.org <ccasavant@nrsd.org>; tcoller@nrsd.org <tcoller@nrsd.org>; dlsgateway@dor.state.ma.us <dlsgateway@dor.state.ma.us>
Cc: andrem@dor.state.ma.us <andrem@dor.state.ma.us>
Subject: EXCESS AND DEFICIENCY - Narragansett

 

Massachusetts Department of Revenue Division of Local Services

Christopher C. Harding, Commissioner

Sean R. Cronin, Senior Deputy Commissioner of Local Services

Narragansett
10/27/2019

Re: EXCESS AND DEFICIENCY - Narragansett

Based upon the unaudited balance sheet submitted, I hereby certify that the amount of excess and deficiency or "E & D" as of July 1, 2019 for Narragansett is:

General Fund $611,799.00

This certification is in accordance with the provisions of G. L. Chapter 71, §16B½, as amended. The unencumbered funds certified above in excess of five percent of the operating budget and budgeted capital costs for the succeeding fiscal year must be applied to reduce the current fiscal year's assessment. For your district, this excess amount equals $0.00.

This certification letter will also be e-mailed to the school superintendent, the board of selectmen in each member town and the city council in each member city immediately upon approval, provided an e-mail address is reported in DLS' Local Officials Directory. Please forward to other officials that you deem appropriate.

Sincerely

Mary Jane Handy

Director of Accounts
Massachusetts Department of Revenue

By MICHAEL CONNORS

Staff Writer

Published: 10/25/2019 12:13:22 AM

NORTHAMPTON — The Massachusetts House unanimously approved a historic $1.5 billion education reform bill Wednesday night, and local lawmakers in the chamber are touting the improvements they say the legislation makes to public education.

“It’s very exciting,” said Rep. Dan Carey, D-Easthampton. “The foundation of the public funding formula has not had a substantial update like this since 1993 and it’s long overdue.”

The legislation aims to rectify four substantially underfunded areas in state public education brought to light by the state Foundation Budget Review Commission four years ago. The state funding model was found to have been underestimating the cost of education by $1 billion annually by inadequately accounting for expenses related to low-income students, English learners, special education and employee health benefits.

The bill’s “revision of the formula makes sure educational opportunity is not based on your ZIP code, but that you live in Massachusetts,” said Rep. Mindy Domb, D-Amherst.

Over the last two legislative sessions, the House and Senate have failed to reach agreement on education funding reform. The collapse of negotiations on school finance bills at the end of last session prompted a renewed push from advocates this year, including the filing of a lawsuit alleging that chronic underfunding has created unconstitutional disparities in public education.

Under the House bill, Carey said, some communities in the region are less likely to see extra money due to fewer low-income and non-English-speaking students compared to larger cities in eastern Massachusetts. But there are still problems in the Pioneer Valley associated with funding for employee health care and special education.

“It will help every district use more accurate numbers for health care costs for school employees,” Carey said.

Rep. Lindsay Sabadosa, D-Northampton, said she believes more funding to support low-income students in larger cities will reverberate across the commonwealth.

“Cities don’t have big walls around them,” Sabadosa said. “If students aren’t doing well, that affects us here in Northampton and in the Pioneer Valley.”

The bill also allows for more funds to be allocated to the Massachusetts School Building Authority, Carey said, along with more money for transporting special education students placed out-of-district.

“Sometimes those out-of-district transportation costs are a lot farther and the costs are higher in our region,” he said.

Rural school districts in the state are experiencing declining enrollment, Carey said, and the bill passed by the House would create a commission to study how a per-student model of funding affects those districts through an amendment submitted by Rep. Natalie Blais, D-Sunderland.

“We absolutely need a commission that is going to study the long-term fiscal health of rural schools,” Blais said, noting declining enrollment is happening across the state.

“That will really affect the state aid they receive,” Carey said of the commission.

Sabadosa said she would have liked to see her amendment for full regional school transportation reimbursements in the final draft, but it was withdrawn. Some districts in Westhampton, Southampton and Montgomery are only being partially reimbursed for these programs, she said.

“They are really hurting because they aren’t being reimbursed to 100 percent,” Sabadosa said.

Domb said she was happy to see an amendment of hers in the House’s final draft, a stipulation which she said would require charter schools receiving public funds to submit data to the state on progress accountability plans, just as public schools do.

“The accountability that’s going to be given to district schools, that will be given to charter schools,” Domb said. “In my mind, it’s really a fairness issue.”

Carey is hopeful Gov. Charlie Baker will sign the bill, noting that there were some differences between the legislation the House passed and the Senate version that also unanimously passed earlier this month.

Most notably, the Senate bill featured a provision that removed the education commissioner’s authority to require that districts revise plans for closing achievement gaps that are found to be inadequate, instead saying the commissioner could “recommend plan amendments.”

A similar amendment was offered on the floor Wednesday night but was withdrawn, and Carey said he was surprised it was withdrawn since he thought it had some support. He said it wasn’t unusual for the House and Senate to pass non-identical bills.

“I think we’ll be able to iron out those differences,” he said.​

Domb said the fact that every elected official in both houses of the Legislature voted for substantially similar bills says a lot. The bill still needs to be reconciled in conference committee due to differences between chambers, but Domb said she was “pretty confident that something is going to come out of conference committee that we are all going to sign.”

“It’s a beautiful moment in Massachusetts history,” Domb said.

This story contains information from the State House News Service. Michael Connors can be reached at mconnors@gazettenet.com.

By GREG VINE

For the Athol Daily News

Published: 10/23/2019 9:55:09 PM

TEMPLETON – In the wake of the third joint town meeting of Templeton and Phillipston voters and a quickly-convened school committee meeting, the issue of a fiscal year 2020 budget for the Narragansett Regional School District remains unresolved.

Following often passionate debate Tuesday night voters, by the slimmest of margins, voted to approve a $19.5 million budget for the district, over $250,000 less than the more-than $19.7 million budget recommended by the school committee.

Narragansett District Education Association President Erick Eiben was among those arguing for the higher of the two figures.

“We, the teachers of the Narragansett School District are going to fight for our children and our classrooms,” he said. “The tissues we give them when their noses bleed, the pencils we give them when they don’t have them, the lunches that we give them when they don’t come with food; all of that has to come from somewhere, and your dedicated teachers provide that.”

“We need to do something,” Eiben continued, “because we’re going to be back here again. Let’s vote the higher number and fix the problem.”

“I just want to say,” said Templeton resident Sue Ocoin, arguing for the lower figure, “that the $19.5 number, from what I have been told, and in my opinion, is all the town can afford. Yes, we need teachers, but we need (the) fire (department), we need the senior center, we need the food pantry, we need meals on wheels. There are more people in this town than just the kids, and from what I’ve seen and from the children that I know, the people who are graduating from the school district are doing okay.”

Templeton Selectboard Chair said, “(The school department) can’t survive living off the same money every year, so we understand that their needs are going to increase. We understand also that they’re under tremendous pressure for not getting fully funded for transportation. They also have an antiquated foundation budget that’s working against them.”

When it comes to Templeton’s assessment for its portion of the budget, Currie said, “We can weather a 2.5 percent increase, so we added around four- or $500,000 on top of what we spent last year. But, $19.5 is the amendment we have out there so, hopefully, we figure this out here tonight.”

Templeton Advisory Committee Chair Tony DeJoy offered an amendment to split the difference between the competing budgets, putting forward a proposal for a $19.6 million spending package. That amendment, however, was shot down by a vote of 226-155.

Two very close votes followed.

One to approve the school committee’s recommendation was defeated on a recount by a margin of 214-209, after an original count showed the plan being rejected 207-205.

The vote to approve the $19.5 million budget passed by a mere six votes, 210-204.

After the town meeting adjourned, the school committee gathered to discuss its next step. Members weighed the pros and cons of either sticking with their original figure, opting to go with DeJoy’s proposed compromise, or endorsing the town meeting’s decision.

There was a great deal of discussion on exactly where cuts would be made if the committee went with either of the two lower numbers. The main concern was whether a reduction in the $19.7 million proposal would lead to kindergarten and first-grade students at Phillipston Memorial Elementary School having to be yanked from their classrooms in the middle of the academic year to be bused to Templeton Elementary. A number of staff cuts were also discussed.

A motion to go with the $19.5 million figure was defeated by a vote of 5-3 in favor. A 6-2 majority was required for approval.

The committee decided to convene again next Tuesday to discuss its next move. If it fails to certify a FY20 budget by Dec. 1, the state Dept. of Elementary and Secondary Education will impose a budget on the district.

Subject: TEMPLETON’S CONTRIBUTIONS TO ITS SCHOOLS

(from a letter written April 5, 2015)

On April 2nd The Gardner News published an article titled “Assessment Challenge Withdrawn” which contained a number of statements by Superintendent Miller regarding Templeton’s Local Contributions to school expenses.

She was quoted as saying that Templeton was “under effort” for education funding last year by nearly $ 800,000, when in fact we were nearly $ 800,000 over the “effort” level. She was also quoted as saying, “The reason that Templeton’s increase is higher … is that they’ve been under effort for a few years,” when, in fact, the last five years the town of Templeton has funded education not only above the Minimum Required Local Contribution level but, above the Target (effort) level by an average of 10 percent.

Each year the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) calculates a number of values for towns to follow while supporting their school systems. These calculations can be very complicated and confusing to the general public. When discussing these numbers it is important that you understand which value you are talking about. Each year DESE calculates a town’s - Maximum Local Contribution (MLC), Target LC, Preliminary LC, and Required LC. Two of these values are important; these are the Target LC and Required LC. To simplify this issue you need to know that the Target LC is sometimes referred to as the Effort Level and the Required LC is often called the Minimum Required Contribution. A more complete and technical definition of these terms may be found under:
 https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXII/Chapter70/Section2


The Minimum Required LC is that number that a town should never fund below. It is the absolute minimum local contribution that can be budgeted by a town for its school system. In this case, the Required LC includes two numbers, Templeton’s share of Narragansett Regional School District (NRSD) costs and our share of Montachusett Regional Vocational Technical School (MRVTS) costs.


The much higher, Target LC is that number that DESE encourages towns to contribute.


The first comment made in the April 2nd article was that Templeton’s required contributions increased recently because “… the town has been chronically ‘under effort” according to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education…” This statement is not true. The TGN article went on to quote Ms. Miller as saying, “the town was under effort by about $800,000 in the last fiscal year.” The last fiscal year was FY14.




I believe Ms. Miller may have been misquoted, because this is not true. Actually, the 800,000 difference had nothing to do with the town actually being “under effort” or below Target.
It was simply the difference between DESE’s Target figure and Required Contribution figure on a calculation sheet for FY14 that was “about $800,000”.
( FY14’s Target [effort] 4,963,418 minus FY14’s Required 4,170,850 = 792,568 )


Again, the above “$800,000” difference had nothing to do with Templeton’s actual contribution for FY14. 
In fact, the town was not only well above the Minimum Required LC but, was significantly higher than the Target LC. Templeton’s actual contribution (as related to the DESE requirements) was $5,582,130.
(ATM Art 27, voted $4,430,615 plus an override Oct STM Art 1 of $550,459 plus ATM Art 20 for Monty Tech of $601,056 = $5,582,130).


With a Target LC of 4,963,418 and actual payments of 5,582,130 Templeton was actually over the Target (effort) Local Contribution amount by 618,712. (12.5%)

Also, for this year (FY15) we will be $ 720,880 over Target Local Contribution. (14.4%)

All of the data supporting these conclusions are a matter of public record and may be found on the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s website and on the Town of Templeton’s website.

I have spoken with DESE’s and Narragansett school officials and been assured that my “numbers are all good.” However, because the preceding figures can be confusing to some, I have been asked to emphasis, in this letter, the following: Although Templeton has contributed a five year average of 10.0 percent over Target and 34 percent over Minimum Required LC, a good part of this support is due to three overrides during FY 12, 13 & 14. If you take override support out of the picture, then these percentages drop to an average of 3.8 percent over Target and 26.7 percent over Minimum Required Contributions.


The above was/is part of a project undertaken by  Templeton resident Bernard Heaney.
Unfortunately, it was largely overlooked and ignored