As a Matter of Fact: A Response to the Town Manager’s Budget Message from the School Department

The following is submitted by the Stoughton School Department:

The Town Manager’s budget message used considerable space to discuss and criticize the School Department and School Committee budget.  For the second year, the budget process is encumbered by the acrimonious and adversarial approach of Municipal government that serves no useful purpose.   The School Department does not wish to participate in this approach to the budget process.  Unfortunately, many of the statements made in the Town Manager’s budget message are not factual, and the statements cast aspersions on the School Committee, School Department and school district employees.  We feel compelled to respond to the largely unsubstantiated statements concerning the school district contained in the Town Manager’s budget message.  Our responses are inserted below appropriate places in the text that follows. 

The Honorable Board of Selectmen and Members of the Committee on Finance and Taxation:

FY 2013 Budget Message

I hereby submit the FY2013 Town Manager's Budget. In reviewing this document, you will note that there are references to several Tabs that are specifically incorporated herein by reference.

This budget as submitted is unbalanced given the revenue assumptions presented in Tab "Revenue" of this document. As additional information is processed, we will need to revisit some line items.

This is a budget that encompasses both the Town Manager's recommendations and the Superintendent of Schools proposed budget that was voted on by the School Committee on December 20, 2011. You will note that the budget I present is different from the recommendations made by various Department Heads including the School Department. I have highlighted their recommendations and those areas where I disagree with their recommendations. (See Tab -"Town Manager Adjustments").

Town Charter

I submit this budget in compliance with the duties incumbent upon me pursuant to the Town Charter at Article 4, Section C 4-2.F. At this section, the Town Charter provides that the Town Manager's duties include the following: "To prepare an estimate in writing of the probable amount required for the expenditures of the town for the next ensuing fiscal year, stating in detail the amounts of maturing bonds or notes, the amount required for interest or other outstanding indebtedness of the town, the amount necessary to be provided by each fund and for each department, and the accomplishments expected. He shall keep the Selectmen fully advised as to the needs of the Town within the scope of his duties, and furnish them on or before the 31st day of December each year a careful, detailed budget. "

Budget Strategy

The next fiscal year promises to be a very challenging time for the Town of Stoughton.  As the news media gears up for the upcoming presidential election, we hear daily accounts about the status of the Federal Government and the crushing debt saddling our  fellow countrymen. The Federal budget has a direct impact on the revenues available to the various states in the form of Block Grants for federal programs. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts will be impacted by the federal budget deficit. In turn, the cities and towns will be impacted by the already strained ability of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to continue to increase Local Aid and to deal with unfunded mandates. Local aid from the state government represents nearly 20% of our available revenue.

With this backdrop, we face some crucial decisions and difficult choices in the budget ahead. Fortunately, the Town has benefited from steady, prudent, and conservative decisions for the most part in crafting budgets to serve our residents. We will need this same resolve in the upcoming fiscal year as the challenges are even greater. The law known as Proposition 2 1/2 limits the increases to the tax levy to 2 1/2% over the prior year's tax levy. That means that next year, our available levy limit revenue will only be 2.5% more than this year's, with one main exception. The law also allows a town to account for a new growth figure in addition to the prior year's tax levy, plus 2.5%. That means if new construction produces property that is subject to taxation, we can add the taxes generated by the increase in the assessed value attributed to the new construction to the 2.5% increase over the prior year's levy limit. Unfortunately, a combination of a difficult fiscal climate combined with a banking crisis and policies on certain Boards and Commissions that do not make the perm it process user-friendly for new construction has frustrated any major new growth initiatives. The short of it is, next year we will have levy limit revenue that will only be 2.5% over what we had available this year.

With costs in several areas that increase by greater than 2.5%, you can see that we will have great difficulty in providing level services to our citizens . When the Town's fuel costs increase by greater than 3% and our revenues can only increase by 2.5% something needs to be cut. When other fixed costs increase by more than 2.5% and our revenues can only increase by 2.5%, other items must be reduced.

In another cooperative effort by the School Department, Joel Harding, our Supervisor of Support Services, developed bid packages for gas and electric utility service for both municipal and school facilities.  As a direct result of this cooperative effort, both municipal and school budgets for gas and electric services have been reduced.

These fiscal realities existed last year as well. Due to these realities, last year I attempted to propose a balanced budget for the fiscal year that we are presently in, FY2012, and I asked all departments through their respective Department Heads, to propose a budget that represented a 5% decrease over the prior fiscal year of FY2011 . Knowing that this would be controversial and painful, I attempted to reach a consensus with the major stakeholders in the process of forming a budget by forming a Budget Liaison Committee.

No attempt was made to reach a consensus with the School Committee. There was a meeting among the Chairs and Vice-chairs of the Board of Selectmen, the School Committee and the Finance Committee, but no revenue projections were made available at that meeting, rendering any conversation speculative.  Revenue projections were not made available until January 2, 2012, after the School Committee budget was due.

I proposed having preliminary meetings with representatives of the Committee on Finance and Taxation, the Board of Selectmen, the School Committee, and our financial staff to review available revenue and to suggest an appropriate split of estimated revenue for the present year. Despite several attempts to convene this meeting, representatives of the School Department could never seem to find the time to make this meeting happen. It is unfortunate that this Budget Liaison Committee never had the chance to address some of these issues . Nonetheless, the process continued without a consensus.

The meetings proposed last year were unilaterally scheduled for times during the work day when the Chair of the School Committee was unable to attend.  Last year, for the first time in recent memory, the Town Manager proposed to arbitrarily slash approximately 2 million dollars from the School Committee’s budget.  The proposed cut was taken entirely from the Instruction budget line item.  This was done with no knowledge of the real nature of that budget line item or of the needs of the school district.  It was clear from the beginning of the budget process that there was going to be no real attempt to reach consensus, unless that consensus reflected the Town Manager’s priorities.  Under previous Town administrations, there was no difficulty reaching consensus on the overall Town budget.

Last year, I asked the Department Heads to explain the impacts on their budgets and I adjusted their budgets after a close look at their critical needs and their functions. My recommendation to the Board of Selectmen reflected these adjustments and it was a budget that made sense. I had the cooperation of every Department Head, except the School Department. The School Department proposed a budget increase last year that represented 4.56% over the prior fiscal year and then they proposed budget articles that bypassed the Board of Selectmen for another 4% representing an increase of 8.56% over the prior year. That proposal was fiscally irresponsible.

The Town Manager apparently does not recognize the legal right and responsibility of the School Committee, established in statute by the Education Reform Act, (M.G.L  c.71, sect. 34 and sect. 68) to develop and propose a budget for the School Department and expend those funds. The School Department is not under the Town Manager’s jurisdiction, the School Committee does not agree with the budget process that the Town Manager chose for the municipal departments and the School Committee is not required to use this process. 

The School Department did not receive a budget increase of 8.56% in FY2012.  Borrowing articles are not part of the annual operating budget.  The School Department asked for $1.4 million in borrowing articles last year.  The Municipal request for capital spending was for a substantially larger $12.5 million.  Using the Town Manager's misleading approach of adding borrowing articles to the annual operating budget to calculate “annual budget increases”, the percentage of the municipal budget increase was approximately 79%, significantly larger than the school increase calculated by the Town Manager.  Adding together the annual operating budget and the total of the borrowing articles to calculate the annual budget increase is not valid.

The School Committee has “bypassed the Board of Selectmen” and petitioned their articles in the last couple of years because during the Town Meeting in 2010, the Town Manager stood up and dismissed one of the School Committee’s articles without any consultation with the Superintendent or the School Committee.  This article, repairs at the Jones Early Childhood Center, was a priority of the School Committee.  When asked why he did it, the Town Manager said that since the articles were put on the warrant by the Board of Selectmen, the Board of Selectmen could choose to dismiss them.  This was contrary to previous practice, and as a result the School Committee decided to petition their own articles in order to insure that they get a hearing on the Town Meeting floor.

It was irresponsible because they were taking more of the share of the total revenue than was equitable for the needs of all the departments in the Town of Stoughton. We are one Town with one Government. That town government is established by the Town Charter. We need to provide for all of our citizens and serve all of our citizens and to do that, we have to maintain adequate funding levels for all of our Town Departments. For one department to get more than 70% of the available revenue, while other departments have been reduced and have struggled with funding over the past several years is unconscionable.

The municipal/school district revenue split, after the subtraction of the joint accounts, has been consistent for at least the past 7 years.  The Municipal portion of the Town has not experienced a cut in percentage in recent memory.  Both sides of the town government have experienced belt tightening and budget cuts. The School Department lost 35 teaching positions as well as numerous support staff over the last 10 years.  The School Committee considered it unconscionable to ask for more than the usual and appropriate percentage in the current economic situation precisely because the Committee does not wish to negatively impact the municipal departments.  This is the most significant and profound way in which the School Department has differed with the Town Manager and the Board of Selectmen in the last two years of the budget process. 

The School Committee made a clear decision not to attempt to initiate any new programs at this time in order not to reduce the amount available to all of the other important departments in the Town.  This decision was made in spite of the fact that the percentage the schools receive does not reflect the proportion of staff or square footage of buildings used and maintained by the school district.  The School Committee budget also does not provide a per-pupil expenditure that meets the state average, despite the considerable evidence that increased spending will improve student performance.  The School Committee decided that requesting funding beyond the amount required to provide level service would be fiscally irresponsible in the current economic conditions.

Last year I proposed that the School Budget request be reduced. Notwithstanding the fact that I proposed reducing their budget, my recommendation for the School Department reflected an increase over the prior Fiscal Year's line item. The School officials protested loudly and they told the citizens of Stoughton that if my proposal were to be adopted by the Board of Selectmen, and adopted by the Town Meeting representatives that ultimately vote on the budget, that two schools would need to be closed and 50 teachers would lose their positions. This could not have been any farther from the truth.

In his FY12 budget submission, the Town Manager proposed a $2 million cut from the Instruction line of the School Budget, without understanding what those funds support.  The Instruction budget line funds the salaries for our teachers.  At an average salary of $50 thousand per teacher, this cut would have eliminated 40 teachers, and another 20 teachers would have been laid off to pay the resulting unemployment costs.  To take two examples, the Gibbons Elementary and the West Elementary each have 20 teachers.   The loss of 40 to 60 jobs would mean loss of the faculties of 2 or more elementary schools.

In fact the budget that I proposed for the School Department last year represented a figure that allotted the School Department 68% of the available revenue estimated for the Fiscal Year that we in at present. That budget figure represented more than two thirds of available revenue, despite raucous protests that a phantom agreement regarding a two-thirds/one-third revenue split after joint accounts, had been violated.

The School Department benefited from a very agreeable Committee on Finance and Taxation, and not only did they get a recommendation to the Town Meeting for the amount of money that they requested, but they received additional monies. As you may recall at the Annual Town Meeting of 20 11, the Superintendent indicated to the Town Meeting, that the proposed School budget is "level service, minimal needs budget."

The School Department is very grateful to both the Finance Committee and Stoughton Town Meeting for working with us to meet our budget needs.  The implication in the above statement is that the Municipal departments did not benefit from a favorable recommendation from the Finance Committee.  In fact, all 7.5 of the new positions requested by the Town Manager were approved, even though adding new positions is not consistent with level service, or with the current economic situation.

In fact the School Department presented a "School Department Fact Sheet" at the Annual Town Meeting (see Exhibit A). The "Fact Sheet" indicated that the proposed School Budget was a minimal needs budget. The "Fact Sheet" went on to indicate that there were no wage increases in the proposed budget there were no new programs and there were no new positions except one English-language teacher mandated by the state . The "Fact Sheet" indicated that there are no funds allocated in the proposed budget to support the raises of the then recently settled contracts with three unions. The "Fact Sheet" also indicated that in FY2011, the total number of school employees was 585.

In fact, there was no money for raises in the School Committee budget proposal.  The Committee had not yet settled a contract with the largest union, the Stoughton Teacher’s Association.  The School Department budget is a bottom line budget and, if necessary, the School Committee can transfer money between lines.  While the Committee and the district administration have a long history of spending money in the same lines that the Finance Committee approves, occasionally a transfer is necessary.  This is always done in a public meeting with complete transparency and a full explanation.  In order to fund the raises that were negotiated, the Committee had to give up other budgeted items, including restoration of the 10% maintenance plan, and the contingency for unplanned out-of-district tuitions.  Savings through reduced fuel costs were also a source of the funds used for the negotiated raises.  In other words, items were cut from the school budget in order to fund the raises without requesting additional funds from the taxpayers.

In addition to their budget request, the School Department indicated to the Town Meeting that their priority school for needed repairs was the Jones School. They petitioned the Town Meeting for capital outlay request for this building.

With the recommendation of the Committee on Finance and Taxation, and the presentation by the School Department, the Town Meeting Representatives supported the School Department's Budget request. This School Department Budget, however, results in real service cuts for all of the other Town Departments that are equally important as the School Department.

The Municipal Departments did not experience any staffing cuts in this year.  The Town Meeting approved most of the municipal borrowing requests, and 7.5 new positions were added to the municipal departments.  If there were “real service cuts in all the other Town Departments,” it is not clear which municipal departments suffered cuts.

Before the dissolution of the Annual Town Meeting of 2011, the School Department settled a contract with the Stoughton Teachers Association, Unit A. They had enough money in their budget to fund part of that contract with FY2011 funds. There was enough money in their budget for FY20I2 to fund the salary increases, even though the "Fact Sheet" seemed to indicate that there were no wage increases in the proposed budget. The level funded budget that was not a level service budget seemed to have enough in reserve to meet these obligations.

The level funded budget, that was not a level service budget, did not show any reduction in personnel either.

The School Committee did not propose a “level funded budget” in FY12.  This is obvious, as the proposed increase in the school budget was 4.56%.  It is clear that the School Committee's proposed FY12 was a level service budget, not a level funded budget.

In fact, the number of school employees that were issued W-2's for income tax purposes by the Town of Stoughton in 2010 was 847. In our most recent payroll that was paid on December 15, 2011, the number of School Department employees that received checks from the Town of Stoughton was 740. (See Exhibit B, attached). That information can be verified by the Town Treasurer who is responsible for, among other duties, supervising the Town payroll.

The Town Manager indicates in the paragraph above that he does not understand the makeup of school district staffing.  The schools have numerous part-time jobs and experience significant turnover in these jobs, generating numerous W-2’s that do not represent full, or even typical part-time workers.  There is considerable turnover in part-time food service and para-professional positions.  It is not unusual to hire and lose 3 people in the course of a year in one part-time aide position, generating three W-2 forms for a single part-time job.  Substitute teachers also receive W-2’s, even though they may only work one day in the district.  Counting W-2's does not provide an accurate count of funded positions within either the school district or the municipal departments.

A last comment on the School Department request last year is reserved for the Jones school. The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) considers schools that are eligible for reimbursement to be those schools that provide instruction in the K through 12 levels. The Jones School does not offer instruction in these levels. One could make the argument that what we call the Jones School is no longer a school. How can this be the priority building for the School Department? Monies put into that building represent precious dollars that are needed in other Town Departments with greater needs. Those other Departments do not have access to the amount of grants that the School Department does. With that historical note, let me proceed with an explanation of how I approached the FY2013 Budget.

This statement above displays a profound lack of knowledge concerning the significant state and federal laws that govern Special Education.  The statement that the Jones School “is no longer a school” is non-factual and is entirely without merit.  The Jones Early Education Center delivers vital and legally mandated services for more than 100 children of pre-school age.  The district is obligated, by federal law, to actively identify, test and then provide services to any children in the district with Special Needs, and to teach them in a setting with typically developing peers. While the Massachusetts School Building Authority does not reimburse for pre-Kindergarten facilities, that doesn’t mean that this program should not be a priority for the district and the town.  Indeed, it is a priority since these programs are legally mandated.  The pre-school program serves children from all five of the elementary districts, making the central location of the Jones Early Education Center very important.  There are not enough students in each of the five elementary school districts to form full pre-school classes in each of our five elementary schools, and pre-schools in all five schools would require at least one additional teacher.   In addition, there are speech, occupational and physical therapists who serve these children.  Pooling their resources in one school is both fiscally and programmatically responsible.

With the experience gained from last year's budget battle, I asked the Board of Selectmen for guidance as to how they wish to proceed with the Budget this year.

The use of the term “budget battle” is symptomatic of the approach to the annual budget process used by the current Municipal administration.  The School Committee has favored a cooperative, respectful process, and has struggled to avoid a “budget battle.”  For many years previous to the current Municipal administration, the Town has been able to wisely and cooperatively manage the available resources to the benefit of all Town departments.  The “budget battle” approach to the budget process began last year when the Town Manager proposed an arbitrary $2 million dollar reduction of the school budget developed by the School Committee.

I suggested that we meet with the School Department and talk about the revenue split. The Chairman of the Board arranged for a meeting of all of the interested parties that comprised what represented the functional equivalent of my proposed Budget Liaison Committee of 2010. A meeting was held, but there was no consensus about a split of revenue. At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Selectmen, (BOS), I suggested that we have a Joint Meeting with the School Committee. The Chairman of the Board attempted to make this happen. The School Committee did not seem very interested, however. The BOS suggested that I propose a budget that reflects the critical needs of all of the Town Departments without dealing with the revenue split. Accordingly, I submit this Budget proposal.

There was a meeting among the Board of Selectmen, School Committee and Finance Committee chairs and vice-chairs.  Substantive discussion about the division of revenue was not possible until FY13 revenue projections were available.  The FY13 revenue projections were first made available on January 2, 2012, which is after the date of the School Committee’s budget submission.

This FY2013 budget is based on the goal of maintaining essential services in a challenging fiscal climate, but it is not balanced. While the Town is not in the position to expand our services to the residents, we strive to provide the essential services that our residents have come to expect. In fact, each year, more and more residents request that the Town expend more money in their neighborhoods. This will manifest itself in a request by homeowners to asked the Town to accept their streets as public ways, provide more street lighting, and more demands for services by the Public Safety Departments.

Although the Town Manager states that “the Town is not in the position to expand their services to the residents,” he is, in fact, asking for 18 new positions and 2 substantially expanded positions in the FY13 budget proposal.  If 18 new positions do not result in an expansion of services, it is not clear why they would be added.  Although the School Department recognizes the need to expand services to students and the community, we also recognize that proposing such an expansion at this time would be fiscally irresponsible.

In addition to dealing with our ability to respond to increasing levels of constituent demands, the Town government needs to have a Disaster Recovery Plan for financial operations. This has been highlighted in the past by management letters from our audit company of R.E. Brown and Company. We are attempting to put this Disaster Recovery Plan in place. One of the first steps that we are taking is to make sure that we have document manual procedures in the event of a loss of data processing system. This past summer, in the aftermath of Tropical Storm Irene, we were reminded once again that we need backup systems to allow our government to keep running in the event of a natural disaster or a major power outage. In fact the major National Grid power outage that followed the aftermath of this storm event underscored the critical need for Police, Fire and DPW. We will be more prepared for the next storm event but we need to have a backup system in place and this budget addresses this critical need.

The School and Municipal sides of government have long cooperated in the creation and constant updating of crisis management plans for a wide variety of scenarios.  The School Technology Department provides multiple methods for data backup for both School District and Municipal data systems.  The School Department provides four emergency shelter locations and four emergency dispensing sites for medication in cooperation with the Fire Department and the Visiting Nurses. 

In addition, I have reviewed the departments that have suffered cutbacks in recent years and have attempted to provide relief to some of the Departments. I have asked the Department Heads to review their priorities and to justify each line item in their budgets. The Department Heads have all indicated to me that the departments could use additional training for their staff. This budget reflects those critical needs.

The Department Heads have done an outstanding job in preparing goals with a plan to meet those goals. One of the areas that they all agreed that they need assistance with is with Information Technology. To that end I thought I formed an Advisory Committee known as the Stoughton Technology Collaborative to come up with suggestions to improve our use of Information Systems. That committee has recommended that the general government side have its own Information Technology Officer. This budget reflects that recommendation.

The cooperative relationship for technology support between the School and Municipal sides of government, initiated at the request of the Town in 2003, has been beneficial to all Town departments.  It has resulted in documented savings to the Town of hundreds of thousands of dollars.  School department personnel have offered training to Municipal employees and continue to offer to do so.  In FY12, the Town Meeting approved funds for a new IT technician.  This position could have been added to the joint technician pool to the benefit of both the School and Municipal departments.  Despite repeated attempts to make this happen, no response was received from the Municipal administration.  Since the current Town Manager has determined that this previously successful cooperative relationship is unworkable, it is now necessary for the Municipal government to ask for new funds to duplicate the support structure currently in place.   The Municipal request is for three people to provide technology support to the Municipal departments.  The School Department currently has four people providing technical support for both School and Municipal departments.  It is up the Town Meeting to decide if hiring three additional people to support approximately 20% of the total town-wide technology systems is an appropriate use of the taxpayer's money.

It is important to note that creating separate a Town IT Department is in direct contradiction with the recommendations contained in the  November 2010 Operational Audit Report prepared by Malloy, Lynch, Bienvenue, LLP.  On page 24 of this report, Item 10 recommends that “the Town work on developing areas where improved services can be realized through consolidation and/or regionalization.”  Many other communities are just beginning to explore a combined system such as Stoughton has enjoyed for years, while Stoughton is dismantling this relationship.

The priority for this budget is to make sure that the Town can continue to provide level services to our residents in the next Fiscal Year. This will not happen if the Town Meeting adopts the recommendation for the School Department that has been proposed in the School Committee Budget. Once again, the School Committee has requested a share of the available Town resources that cannot be sustained.

The School Committee has asked for a budget to sustain current services.  The budget request adds one position that is required to meet NEASC requirements to maintain Stoughton High School’s accreditation.  The Town Manager is asking for 18 new positions and two substantially expanded positions.  The school department unions have agreed to very modest increases of 1% a year and to Health Care changes that would have saved the Town over $300,000 dollars if the Municipal administration had negotiated and implemented the changes with their unions.  The School Committee's proposed budget meets all standards of fiscal responsibility.

In addition to a budget request that is fiscally irresponsible in these difficult times, the School Committee has proposed borrowing articles that total $1.91 million dollars. This would not affect the budget for the next fiscal year, but it would certainly add to the cost of borrowing and increase the joint costs in the future.

The Municipal Departments, through the Town Manager have submitted borrowing articles totaling a minimum of $11.8 million.  There are many articles in the warrant that will require borrowing that do not yet indicate the associated funding amount.  He is requesting capital funding that is at least 10 times the amount the schools are requesting, and the actual total is currently unknown.  If the Town Meeting approves a Feasibility Study for school building, it will be at least 56% reimbursable from the State, so the full $1.91 million dollars will not be required to fund the School Department requests.  Implying that the school capital request of $1.91 million dollars is irresponsible, while simultaneously requesting in excess of $11.8 million in municipal capital spending is illogical and disingenuous.

When I address criticisms with the Education Budget, I do so in the context of making sure that there are adequate funds for every Department in our Town Government. The School Committee definitely needs to come up with a plan that makes sense with respect to the maintenance of their school buildings. Last spring the priority school was the Jones School. A few months after that, representatives of the School Department appeared before the Board of Selectmen to request support for a Statement of Interest for plans to construct a new South Elementary School. That meeting occurred on October 18, 2011. Two weeks later, representatives of the school came before the Board of Selectmen and indicated that they priority was for a new Stoughton High School.

During 2010, the Town Meeting approved an article to fund the development of a comprehensive Facilities Master Plan for all Town owned buildings.  The Facilities Master Plan committee met for an entire year to develop the facilities plan.  The result of their extensive work was a Facilities Master Plan which was presented at the 2011 Annual Town Meeting.  Before the committee dissolved, they recommended that both the School Committee and the Board of Selectmen appoint new committees to implement the recommendations contained in the Facilities Master Plan.   They also recommended that these new committees begin to build a comprehensive Master Plan for the maintenance and replacement of all facilities.  The School Committee followed these recommendations immediately.  It is not clear why the Board of Selectmen failed to follow the recommendations of the Facilities Master Plan committee. 

The School Committee also set up a Feasibility Committee to develop plans for buildings which the Facilities Master Plan Committee deemed inappropriate for repair.  Both of these committees have met at least monthly in posted, public meetings to do this work.   Representatives of both committees have appeared before the School Committee to report on the progress of their work.  The School Committee keeps both Feasibility and Facilities on their regular agendas, and there are numerous public conversations and deliberations regarding these issues.  The Statements of Interest were generated after long, thoughtful, and publicly documented work by all three of these committees.

I have not been made aware of any meetings of the School Committee where they have had an extended discussion about the alternatives to repair, renovate or replace any of the Stoughton Schools, based upon any information other than that provided in the Facilities Master Plan prepared by Drummey, Rosane & Anderson, Inc.(DRA), dated May 17, 2010. This was the same report that was summarized by one of the consultants of the DRA on the last night of the Annual Town Meeting of 2010. The report was not in the hands of the Town Meeting members prior to that date so there was limited discussion. The meeting ended that same evening and there has not been a lot of discussion sense. It is important to note that that report has never been the subject of a joint meeting between the Stoughton Board of Selectmen and the Stoughton School Committee.

There are several departments that need to work efficiently and in cooperation with each other for our Town Government to work. This cannot happen if the School Committee's recommended budget is supported by the Town Meeting, because other Town Departments will suffer irreparable harm. I am not willing to stay silent and let other Town Departments fall below critical staffing levels because of the unwillingness of the School Committee to propose a reasonable budget.

In reality, the School Committee is not asking for anything more than has been provided to the School Department in previous years, precisely because the Committee does not believe it is fiscally responsible to reduce resources available to the Town’s other important departments.  While every municipality in the state has suffered from the Recession, Stoughton’s municipal departments have suffered no more harm than the school district.  In fact, the municipal departments gained 7.5 new positions in FY2012, as well as approximately $12 million in capital funding. This level of funding is difficult to construe as suffering “irreparable harm”.

We are one Town with one Government. Our Government is broken up into several departments and we have the duty to make sure that each of these departments has sufficient funding to perform their critical mission.

People First

We value our Town employees. In the aggregate, our Town employees make up our Town Government. They are the ones that make sure our residents receive the level of services that they expect from our Town Government. It is our goal that we continue our dialogue with our employees to make sure that they understand where they fit within a department and where the department fits within the Town Government structure.

To make sure that each employee knows what is expected of them, we have gone through the process of updating job descriptions. I have directed our Human Resources Director to make sure that all of our job descriptions reflect the actual duties of our employees. Mr. Martin McNamara is well on the way to finishing this task. We have been asking our Department Heads to sit down with all of our employees to make sure that they understand the job descriptions and to see if there are any questions. If those job descriptions require certain types of licenses as qualifications, we are asking our employees to furnish us with proof that they meet the minimum job qualifications. If they need additional training in an area, we will make every reasonable effort for them to obtain that training I have encouraged Department Heads to provide training opportunities for all of our valued employees. I am also requesting that the Department Heads show a career path to each employee and what are the qualifications that one must achieve to be considered eligible for positions in the structure of a particular Department.

If we find that employees are performing duties in addition to those duties in their job description, we will consider a reclassification of that particular job. There are certainly constraints that are put on by the Collective Bargaining Agreements but we will endeavor to have the job description reflect the actual duties that are needed. This process will inevitably lead to a review of our salary structure. To that end I have requested that Mr. McNamara review the salaries of like positions in other towns in the area so we may maintain competitive salaries for our employees. Our employees continue to be our greatest asset. Each valued employee is a member of a particular Town Department. And the person most responsible for making sure that a particular department achieves its mission and goals is the Department Head. The next fiscal year will present many challenges to our Department Heads .

Department Heads

Before we discuss some of the pressing needs of our Department Heads let us not forget that many of our Department Heads have changed in the past two years. Some of the Department Heads came into situations where certain critical needs had been overlooked due to priorities in other areas. It is important that they have an opportunity to assess the critical needs of their departments.

We have had the following major personnel changes in the past year. Fire Chief Mark Dolloff assumed his position in August 2011. Thomas McGrath became the Building and Zoning Commissioner in July of 2011. With that appointment, Robert Grover the Interim Building and Zoning Commissioner became the Interim Building Maintenance Supervisor, a new department. Joseph Gibbons became the Director of Assessing following the retirement of Paula Keefe. After Thorn Rome's retirement as Treasurer/ Collector, Donna Erickson became our new Treasurer/Collector. Noreen O'Toole became our Town Planner.  In the department of Public Works following reorganization, Jack Mitchell became the Chief Pumping Operator. We recently hired a Procurement Officer, Lindsay Pope. All of the foregoing are filling vital positions in our organization. All of these positions were filled with the assistance of our Human Resources Director Martin McNamara.

There has never been a time in our Town Government that they have been so many changes in Department Heads . Despite all the challenges associated with filling these vacancies, successors were hired and the Departments are all running very well. This is a great reflection on the individuals who came on board as well as a well-deserved endorsement of the staffs that they inherited from their predecessors.

Public Safety

While reviewing the goals and priorities of the Department Heads, it was apparent that we had to review some of the needs of the Public Safety Departments.

Police

While the Police Department has dealt with certain issues over the past few years that have distracted us from reviewing certain departmental needs, it is time that we address certain critical staffing levels.

Chief Paul Shastany has engaged in a planning analysis to assess the needs of his department. The Chief has my full support and I am supporting his request to revitalize the department

It may surprise some residents to know that during the daytime on Tuesdays Wednesdays Thursdays and Sundays we average only three police officers on the road, patrolling 16.3 miles and servicing a population of 28,000 residents. The Department frequently runs into minimum manning issues of four officers per shift due to the lack of manpower. Needless to say four officers on the street per shift compromises the public safety of everyone in the Town of Stoughton

The manpower shortage causes a chronic use of overtime money to compensate the lack of officers that are called to follow-up and respond to major crimes. Obviously, the Department is on call 24/7 for major crimes. In the past, the Police Department had 46 officers in Fiscal Year 2002. Many positions were lost due to events over the recent years and it is time to address those staffing shortages.

This budget reflects a support for the restructuring and streamlining of the Police Department. Among other highlights, it includes creating the new position of a Deputy Chief of Police; two (2) School Resource Officers; one (1) Housing/Senior Citizen Liaison Officer; three (3) Patrol Officers; one (1) Information Technology Crime Analyst, and; two (2) Dispatchers.

The Chief is making every step to turn this Department around and to have a Department that we are all proud of. I ask the Board of Selectmen and the Committee on Finance and Taxation to support his efforts to make the Stoughton Police Department the best in Massachusetts

Fire

In addition, we need to review the needs of the Fire Department. With Station 2 now back in service, we need to address the staffing levels needed to provide Fire Service to our residents to insure proper response times. I was pleased this past summer, when then Deputy Chief Mark Dolloff agreed to assume the duties of Fire Chief. I support Chief Dolloff's efforts to bring staffing levels back to where we need them to be. He is requesting funding for three (3) additional Firefighters. This budget supports that request.

Department of Public Works

In addition to the Public Safety Departments, we need to review the needs of the Public Works Department.

The Water Division of the Department of Public Works is under the jurisdiction of the State Department of Environmental Protection. The DEP regulations have changed a great deal over the past several years . These regulations require communities to be more vigilant regarding their respective water supplies and water treatment and pumping operations. These activities also require individuals to have certain licenses and training. This budget recognizes these new requirements.

Assistant Town Manager/Human Resource Director

I have attempted to create an organizational chart that reflects a Town government that can withstand vacancies and changes in every position in our organization. That goal applies to the Office of Town Manager as well. I am proposing that our Human Resources Director, Mr. Martin McNamara, have a change in his role to assume the duties of Assistant Town Manager in addition to his Human Resources duties.

As the members of the Board are aware, for decades the Town of Stoughton was assisted by either an Assistant Town Manager or later, the position of Town Clerk/Assistant Town Manager. In recent years the position of Town Clerk was also an Assistant Town Manager.

Prior to the hiring of the present Town Clerk, my predecessor had that position reclassified to eliminate the duties of Assistant Town Manager. As a result, the present Town Clerk does not have these duties. I am proposing that the job of HR director be changed to an Assistant Town Manager/ HR Director. I cannot adequately describe how important Mr. Martin McNamara is to the operation of our Town government. He has taken over the position of Human Resource Director and has done an outstanding job. I have relied upon him to be my backup when I am away on town business or on vacation. He has done an outstanding job and will provide a smooth transition in the event of a vacancy in the Office of Town Manager. The position of Town Manager is too vital to the Town government to not have a candidate ready to step in to fulfill those duties. This budget supports this need for the Town.

IT Director

The Department Heads have all expressed the need for additional assistance with respect to Information Systems. They need assistance in keeping up-to-date with software applications, maintenance of their hardware, and training for staff. In addition, there is a desire to improve the use of the Town website to provide more information about the department 's activities as well as the desire to use technology for more of its interactive potential.

To that end I am proposing that the town have its own IT director to be able to respond to those needs. I am grateful for the services provided to date by Dr. Lawrence Gray of the school department and his assistance to the town to date. However the needs of the departments’ require our own IT Director. This budget supports this goal.

The cooperative relationship for technology support between the School and Municipal sides of government, initiated at the request of the Town in 2003, has been beneficial to all Town departments.  It has resulted in documented savings to the Town of hundreds of thousands of dollars.  School department personnel have offered training to Municipal employees and continue to offer to do so.  In FY2012, the Town Meeting approved funds for a new IT technician.  This position could have been added to the joint technician pool to the benefit of both the school and municipal departments.  Despite repeated attempts to make this happen, no response was received from the Municipal administration and the technician position remains unfilled.  The School Department currently has four people providing technical support for both school and municipal departments.  It is up the Town Meeting to decide if hiring three additional people to support approximately 20% of the total town-wide technology systems is an appropriate use of the taxpayer's money.

It is important to note that creating separate a Town IT department is in direct contradiction with the recommendations contained in the  November, 2010 Operational Audit Report prepared by Malloy, Lynch, Bienvenue, LLP.  On page 24 of this report, Item 10 recommends that, “the Town work on developing areas where improves services can be realized through consolidation and/or regionalization.”  Creating a separate Town IT department is in direct contradiction with this recommendation.  Many other communities are just beginning to explore a combined system such as Stoughton has enjoyed for years, while Stoughton is dismantling this system.

Budget Highlights

Revenue Projections

General fund revenues are projected to increase by $2,278,599 or 3.26%. By way of comparison, in FY2012 budgeted revenues grew at 3.9%. The FY20 13 revenue growth is augmented by two new local option taxes that were approved at the 2010 Annual Town Meeting.

Tax Levy

A projected tax levy of $51,842,658 is presented in the calculation which includes $200,000 in new growth.

State Aid

We are projecting a small increase in funding for net state aid by the amount of $114,887 dollars . The total amount of state aid is projected to be approximately $13.6 million. We do not have the House Two proposal by the Governor as of this writing, but this is estimated on a survey of members of the Massachusetts Municipal Association.

Local Receipts

Due to the state of the economy, we project that local receipts will continue to decline . The estimated local receipts projected for Fiscal Year 2013 is $6,277,888.1n the spirit of fiscal conservatism, this is a 90% of the FY 2011 actual receipts.

Free Cash

Free Cash is estimated at $2.5 million. Actual certified Free Cash is expected by the end of January, 2012.

General Budget Consideration

Wage Adjustments

I am including the figure of $412,000 for collective bargaining agreements. As of this writing we do not know how the collective bargaining process will fall out. This dollar amount may have to be adjusted as the year unfolds.

Analysis and Evaluation of Existing Programs

This FY2013 budget projects to be another difficult year for the Town of Stoughton. We will need to evaluate all of the Town departments and the programs that we should serve our residents with to see how we can improve on efficiencies with a view to the bottom line. I will be working with the Board of Selectmen to see where we can make these improvements.

Highlighted Expenditures

Here are some highlights on the expenditure side of the budget:

General Municipal Budget: this budget as proposed is recommended to increase by $1,918,940 or 11.2%. This reflects an effort to address cuts from prior budgets. The General Municipal Budget is approximately 1/3 of the Total Budget after deducting Joint Costs.

Education Budget: The recommended budget for education for both the Stoughton Public Schools and the Southeastern Regional Vocational Technical High School will increase by $930,823 or 2.51%. The Education Budget is approximately 2/3 of the Total Budget after deducting Joint Costs .

Joint Education and General Municipal Budget: This joint account budget will increase by $1,191,885 or 7.53%.

Debt Service: This expenditure is expected to increase by $94,235 or 2.8% .

Acknowledgments

Preparing the budget with this level of detail in any year is a significant undertaking. I would like to express my appreciation to our Finance Team, the Department Heads, Boards and Committee members and the Superintendent of Schools, for contributing to the development of this budget. I would particularly like to acknowledge the efforts of our Town Accountant William Rowe, Town Treasurer/Collector Donna Erickson, Director of Assessing Joseph Gibbons, who comprise the Finance Team, as well as Executive Secretary, Reggie Kowalczykowski and Administrative Secretary, Denise Lochiatto for their work in preparing this document package. This document could not be made without the great efforts and analysis provided to me by William Rowe

Conclusion

As you take the opportunity to review the many sections of this Budget Message, I remain available to answer any questions that may arise. It is my pleasure to provide you with this document as you review the proposed budget for FY2013. In the coming weeks we will have to monitor the actions taking by His Excellency the Governor and the members of the Legislature as they present their budget recommendations for State Aid. It is anticipated that adjustments will need to be made to this document depending on the information that we receive next month from the Governor and the State House and the further revenue projections that we receive up to the time of the Annual Town Meeting.

I welcome the opportunity for Members of the Honorable Board of Selectmen, The Committee on Finance and Taxation and members in the community to share their thoughts about this document so we may make improvements to the community that we care so much about.

Honorable Members of the Board of Selectmen and the Committee on Finance and Taxation, I am pleased to present to you my recommendations for FY2013 budget for the Town of Stoughton.

Sincerely yours,

Francis T. Crimmins, Jr.

Town Manager

FTC/reg

Enc: (2) Exhibits A;B

cc: Town Accountant

Town Treasurer

Director of Assessing