HANSON – The warrant article for the June 17 special Town Meeting was reviewed by Select Board on Tuesday, May 28, but no vote has been taken as of yet due to questions over the clarity of syntax and the need for Finance Committee’s recommendation.
Finance Committee was also meeting on May 28 and Chair Laura FitzGerald-Kemmett said by next meeting the Select Board will have that committee’s well-thought-out cuts.
The Select Board plans to meet again at 7 p.m., Friday, May 30 once the articles are revised and clarified, with a tentative fallback time set for 5:30 p.m. Friday, May 31, if needed. The Town Meeting Article must be posted by June 1.
“Basically, what we are doing is we are having a special Town Meeting to vote the budget with the school assessment minus an override question,” Town Administrator Lisa Green said. “The budget that’s going to be presented will show approximately $372,141 in budget cuts, with the numbers they will be getting. The Finance Committee is meeting this evening to discuss those.”
The initial language of Article 1, as drafted by Town Counsel Kate Feodoroff asks the town to vote in Town Meeting whether it should “rescind its approval of the town budget under Article 5 of the May 6, 2024 annual Town Meeting and to determine what sums of money town will raise and appropriate by taxation, transfer from free cash, transfer from town ambulance funds, Water Department revenue, water surplus, the Title V special revenue fund, MWAT loan repayment receipts reserved for appropriation, Conservation Notice of Intent fund, overlay surplus and unbalanced reserve for reduction of future excluded debt to defray charges and expenses of the town.”
Those expenses include payment of debt and interest while providing for a reserve fund for fiscal year 2025.
Feodoroff’s original text of the Article 1 explanation reads that on May 6, the town approved the “FY 2025 annual omnibus budget in Article 6, and disapproved the contingent appropriation for the W-H regional school district.
“The disapproval of Article 6 resulted in the rejection of the budget as assessed by the district,” Feodoroff wrote. “The original budget request was $14,974,735; but $14,602,595 was approved at Town Meeting and the contingent appropriation of $372,141 failed.”
The School Committee then met and revoted to resubmit the school assessment of $14,974,735 “for this town meeting’s consideration,” the explanation continued. “The purpose of this article is to present and deliberate upon the district’s reassessment and determine whether to approve:

• A reduced budget for the W-H regional school district as previously approved which would be sent to the School Committee, which would determine whether to accept the reduced amount or reject it, forcing a district-wide meeting;
• Approve the full school assessment with reduced services in the town’s budget; or
• Approve such other budget as may be deliberated upon by Town Meeting.
  “I don’t want people to need a decoder ring to make it through this explanation, FitzGerald-Kemmett said, suggesting that it be edited by making bullet points of the options “so it reads, ‘here’s a choice, here’s a choice, here’s a choice.’”
  She argued that would make things more apparent.
  Board Clerk Ed Heal said the “decoder ring” issue for him was in the main text of the article where it said the original budget was approved, “but then, they came back with the same number,” he said.
  “It’s not the same number,” Rein said.
  “It’s not crystal clear, the way it’s written,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “Why are we using the words ‘omnibus budget?’ Does anybody even know what the hell that means? I’m not saying I don’t know what the word omnibus means, I’m saying it just adds extraneous words that don’t need to be there.”
  After discussing the vocabulary used the Board composed a more direct way of explaining the article for submission to Town Counsel for approval.
  “This is where I think it jumps the track,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said about the original legal syntax of the article. “Can we just say ‘did not approve the contingent appropriation?”
  “It’s not wrong, it’s convoluted,” Vice Chair Ann Rein said. “It’s too wordy.”
  “You’re all in the know, you pay more attention to this than the 300-plus people that are going to show up [for Town Meeting], said Board member Joe Weeks. “The more information and the more [direct] you could make the language, the more you’re going to have informed voters.”
  Heal suggested that the language make clear the difference, making clear that the $372,141 is the difference between what was requested and what was voted upon.
  FitzGerald-Kemmett said the board has consistently outlined the difference between what was described and what was requested and what we appropriated.
  FitzGerald-Kemmett wanted to try a different approach providing more clarification of the articles.
  “We need it to be clear,” she said.
  The final language the board worked out for town counsel approval reads: that “on May 6, the town approved the annual budget and did not appropriate the contingent appropriation for the W-H Regional School District. The disapproval of Article 6 resulted in the rejection of the budget as assessed by the district. … The original budget request was $14,974,735; but $14,602,595 was approved at Town Meeting and the contingent appropriation of $372,141 failed. (The contingent appropriation ‘the delta’) between the School District and municipal budgets.”
  The Town Meeting options here are:
• A reduced budget for the W-H Regional School District as previously approved;
• To present and deliberate on the district’s reassessment and to determine whether to approve it;
  Appropriate a full schools assessment amount with reduced services in the town budget; or
  Approve such other business could be deliberated on Town Meeting floor.
  FitzGerald-Kemmett said even that language seems to be contradicting ourselves, because we say that we approved the [municipal] budget in Article 6 and disapproved a contingent appropriation, but in the next sentence talks about, the disapproval of Article 6.
  “It’s like, pick a lane,” she said. The two lanes should be Article 1, tied to an explanation in Article 2 is no change, the budget is the one passed May 6.
  Heal and Weeks suggested the contingent appropriation was Article 7 of the May Town Meeting.
  In the June 17 warrant.
  “I really want to go into this meeting without using ‘lawyer speak’ to pull something over on people,” Weeks said, noting the three possible outcomes if the budget passes. “Which of the possible outcomes are we going to get? Heal asked if each of the options would be voted on.
  “We are absolutely trying to avoid making cuts from the floor,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “We want to be thoughtful about what the cuts are. We don’t want to be flying by the seat of our pants and cut the Veterans Agent or some other crazy thing that we haven’t all thought about and [asked ourselves] what are the ramifications?”
  The Finance Committee’s meeting that night was for just that thought as they advise the Select Board on cuts and the Town Accountant is also going through that process with the aim of those recommendations reviewed by the Select Board Thursday or Friday, May 30 or 31.
  “Ideally, we’ll align, but we may not,” she said, adding the Town Meeting will have two choices in the end:
  A budget with no cuts – in essence, another “no” back to the school district; or
  Not saying no, but saying yes to the budget by making cuts in services and other budget line items.
  “Those will be presented side-by-side, just like we presented the line budget at Town Meeting, we’ll have a line budget for this, which will show where we’re cutting,” she said.
  A third option is because someone could stand up at Town Meeting and cut things the board had not anticipated or planned to cut.
  “If we vote yes on Article one, what happens,” Weeks asked. “The explanation is supposed to tell me what happens, but it’s not. It’s giving me every single option under the sun, which is obvious… If I was the casual or semi-casual [resident] coming to Town Meeting, knowing this is something I’m passionate about and wanting to know exactly what I’m voting for … Even me reading this right now I don’t know what I’m going to explain to people.”
  In unison, Heal and Weeks suggested that, instead of a list of options for cuts, it be presented as “a yes vote means this and a no vote means this.”
  FitzGerald-Kemmett instead suggested that it be presented as two articles, with Article 1 carrying the explanation “we’re not going to rescind anything” but rather the choice should be to approve the school assessment with reduced services in the town budget.
  Article one is the explanation, and if Article 2 is rejected, it would lead to article 3 to the information of where the cuts will be made, Weeks suggested.
  “… You have to arm people, in a very specific way,” he said.

HANSON – Now begins the work of meeting the W-H Regional School District’s operational assessment in the wake of the second failure to pass an override – at Town Meeting on May 6 and at the ballot box Saturday, May 18.
A funding gap of $372,141 remains.
The Select Board on Tuesday, May 21, met with Superintendent of Schools Jeff Szymaniak in an effort to better understand what drives rising school budget costs and what the defeat of the override will mean for Hanson’s finances.
Now that the ballot question failed on Saturday [see related story], the Select Board discussed what comes next since the “override question is dead,” she said.
“That’s one path that’s been eliminated from the map,” she said of the override. “Now what we have before us is a question of how do we fund that delta between what we had budgeted for and what the school [operational] assessment was. … We’re in the same position we were in without any method of paying that difference.”
Select Board member Joe Weeks asked for a bumper-sticker view of what the current budget situation would mean to the district’s schools.
“If I don’t have a budget in place by July 1, the commissioner of education takes over and I have no say in what he decides on giving us,” Szymaniak said. “It can be even to fiscal 2024, or he could decide it could be more.”
What the bumper-sticker would say is: pink slips for staff, according to Szymaniak
“The challenge is, once you get a pink slip, you don’t have a job and you qualify for unemployment,” he said. “On July 1, if those are 60 folks, they will qualify for unemployment until I can give them a contract, and I can’t give them a contract until I have a certified budget.”
Szymaniak said the district is OK until July in paying teachers according to their contract.
“It gets a little gray by August if I don’t have a budget,” Szymaniak. “The day that a teacher doesn’t have a contract, they’re eligible for 40 percent of their salary going forward. Some would call that double-dipping because they’ve already gotten paid.”
The district had challenged the practice during COVID, but lost.
“We learned a lot during that time-frame just because of that situation,” he said.
Where things stand
Town Meeting voters were told at the May 6 Town Meeting that balancing the municipal budget was dependent on the $372,141 increase for the W-H operating assessment being “expressly contingent upon passage” of a proposition 2 ½ question on the May 18 ballot.
This time at Town Meeting, the question will be structures such that there will be two options – voting no and voting to fund the difference with various budget cuts the Select Board will explain, according to Chair Laura FitzGerald-Kemmett. At that time, voters will be provided a line-by-line look at what the board has voted.
On Tuesday, May 14, she had advised the board that “there’s only so many things we can do to fund this budget,” while ticking off the options. They remain: drastic across-the-board cuts; funding some of the gap with free cash and make modest cuts at Town Hall and other departments; fund a bit more with free cash and make; use of free cash and more drastic cuts; free cash or even more drastic cuts or just cuts.
The Finance Committee has not yet voted on the new warrant article being drafted for the June 17 Town Meeting, FitzGerald-Kemmett said.
“Again, saying no is not an option,” she said. “We have to present some option to Town Meeting, or de facto that assessment is in place and we just don’t have a method anyone’s voted on to pay it.”
In fact, Hanson’s available free cash is $627,000. “To pay $350,000 for the assessment would perilous,” FitzGerald-Kemmett May 14.
Town Accountant Eric Kinsherf has cautioned that “It would be irresponsible” to balance the budget with free cash now.
Kinsherf, Town Administrator Lisa Green and the Finance Committee are all looking at whether there are open positions that the town should not fill right now or positions where hours can be trimmed back without drastically impacting services.
FitzGerald-Kemmett also put to rest – again – the rumor that the town has $1.4 million in free cash.
“We do not,” she said. “We have roughly $600,000 in cash.”
Kinsherf and Green are also meeting with department heads, considering options including whether it could be a lot of little cuts that could fill in that dollar amount.
“Some of it may be free cash, but we’re going to use as little free cash as we possibly can,” she said.
The board will be meeting again on Tuesday, May 28 to review and sign that warrant then.
It has been considered whether the meeting could be made to the high school…. but that option in recent years was permitted by the state because of COVID and may not be available again.
In the past, when a high turnout was anticipated at town meetings at Hanson Middle School, the gym or cafeteria had been configured to handle overflow crowd with a TV screen for people to follow the meeting and a teller to track questions and votes.
“We were caught flat-footed at the last Town Meeting,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “We didn’t anticipate that number of people and we need to do better.”
The town is planning on having the meeting at Hanson Middle School, but having the gymnasium in place with plenty of printed materials available for voters.
Budget craft
School budget is based on an estimate of funds the district expects to be refunded by the state.
“Every year, it’s a bit of a crap-shoot,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “It’s the best guess that the School Department can do.”
This year the important funds the budget was based on was $30 per-pupil reimbursement and a 74 percent reimbursement on busing. But right now, both the House and Senate on Beacon Hill have increased those numbers to $104 for per-pupil costs with an 84 percent transportation reimbursement. Those two budget bills translate to a $190,00 in state funds.
“However, that is not a sure thing,” she said, calling on Szymaniak. “It’s not on lockdown and it probably won’t be until mid-July.”
FitzGerald-Kemmett said the clock on the wall should make town and school officials look at the timing of everything.
“I don’t know if we’ll ever get to a point where we could have Town Meeting so late that we’d know [the state budget] numbers,” she said. “But there’s got to be a better way of doing this.”
“We don’t have those numbers, but they look encouraging,” Szymaniak said. “Last year, we expected a little bit more and when the budget came in on Aug. 5 with less, so we had to make cuts on the fly.” The state is asking the towns to pick up more funds and the towns say they can’t, he said.
“If they came back with $300,000 more in [reimbursements], we wouldn’t be here,” he said.
Those cuts amounted to $250,000 in personnel cuts.
There are two bills, with some teeth to them, on state Sen. Mike Brady’s desk to increase regional transportation and special education 100 percent, he said, urging people to call Brady and other state senators to support them.
“Regional transportation and special education reimbursement are the core of our funding,” he said. “If we can get more from the state, it will help us out.”
But there are four or five more conference committees to go through plus objections before it goes to the governor’s desk, Szymaniak added.
“There’s no way that we could time a super Town Meeting before July 1 at which point, you must go into the 1/12 budget,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said.
Ed Heal asked how the public could get salary information, to which Szymaniak said teachers are listed by unit salaries in Town Report. Complete budget information is available at whrsd.org.
“We’re looking at cutting staff also,” said Select Board Vice Chair Ann Rein. “It seems to me the School Committee needs to look at that themselves and not try to force us to go onto this fiscal cliff every year.”
Later in the meeting, Weeks also requested more meetings — joint sessions with the School Committee — be added to the Select Board’s schedule with the specific intention of making formal requests of the School Committee.
“We all know this isn’t going anywhere anytime soon and we had discussed last year being more diligent about being more transparent about having these financial meetings,” he said. “It’s really hard to put somebody on the spot when we didn’t provide them with an agenda, we didn’t provide them any materials to get ready. They weren’t here for this.”
Weeks said that kind of scenario can lead to people putting their foot in their mouth or promising something off-the-cuff that they cannot keep.
“Everybody here has had questions they’ve been asking to cameras and they haven’t had the ability — quite frankly, we haven’t done a forma request … and then we can have our questions answered.
FitzGerald-Kemmett said it makes sense for January or February.
“What’s stopping us from having a meeting in a couple of weeks that the superintendent was asked on the fly?” Weeks said.
Rein said it makes more sense to get throught the special Town Meeting first.
Member David George said he primarily wants to speak with the Hanson School Committee members about their support for the budget because he is still looking for an answer as to why 31 staff members were added with one-time money.
“I think you have to meet all of them,” Rein said.
“I don’t know the ask,” Heal said.
Weeks said he envisions a joint meeting with Whitman Select Board and the School Committee several times during the budget season.
George said he doesn’t see why it wouldn’t help just to get the Hanson members of the School Committee at Select Board meetings to ask the questions people have.
“We’re not asking them to make decisions or change anything, we just have some questions that we need answered,” he said.

HANSON – All eyes will be on the outcome of Saturday’s annual Town Election in Hanson – not only as an indication of where the town’s finances are now, and options for meeting the operating assessment for the Whitman-Hanson Regional School District in fiscal 2025, but also as a bellwether for the fiscal 2026 budget.
Polls are open from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. at Hanson Middle School. Polls for Whitman’s Town Election are open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. in the Town Hall auditorium.
After hearing a sobering opinion on the town’s assessment options, and expressing anger and frustration over Hanson’s representation on the School committee, the Select Board voted on Tuesday, May 14, to hold a special Town Meeting regarding the school district’s operating assessment at 6:30 p.m., Monday, June 17.
The budget issue must be settled before July 1, or a super town meeting and, failing that, a 1/12 budget based on the fiscal 2024 budget could be imposed by the state. [See accompanying story] A special Town Meeting not only must be held within a 45-day window (June 29 is day 45), but 14 of those days must be used for officially posting the meeting.
Town Accountant Eric Kinsherf and Finance Committee Chair Kevin Sullivan say passage of the $350,000 override rejected at the May 6 Town Meeting is crucial to helping the town meet its budget obligations this year – and in avoiding putting the town in a deeper financial hole next year.
“I’ve been thinking about this a lot,” Kinsherf said, noting that the town’s fiscal 2025 budget has, to this point used up $794,000 in free cash. “If we have to fund the schools, I can’t in good conscience, recommend anything other than budget cuts to fund it.”
“I think the vote this Saturday is going to give us a very good indicator of what our options are,” he said. “Or, if by some remarkable chance it is approved on the ballot, we can have Town Meeting take another bite of the apple and try to have another override [at Town Meeting], which, to be honest is the only way to fill this gap.”
He said he understands residents’ distaste for more taxes.
“But it’s $92,” he said, noting Hanson still has relatively low taxes, compared to other towns in the area. “If it doesn’t pass, we have to look at some sort of mixture, in my opinion of all free cash/no free cash.” Some Select Board members suggested it may have been principle over money that drove votes.
As it stands today, Kinsherf said Hanson already has to plan on making $800,000 from next year’s budget even if the override passes.
“It would be irresponsible,” he said of using the free cash now.
If the $372,000 override passes, it becomes part of the new base for next year and the town starts with that much more in the hole. For a healthy free cash account, it should total 10 percent of the entire budget.
“There’s no way you can do long-term fiscal planning if you don’t know what your fixed costs are from year to year,” Kinsherf said. “My advice would be to cut the current school budget by an equal amount.”
From a mathematical standpoint, Sullivan said, Kinsherf is “absolutely correct.”
He said he would prefer putting $100,000 in an unemployment trust fund in case there are layoffs next year and put another $500,000 in a stabilization fund for next year.
Select Board Vice Chair Joe Weeks said unemployment costs sometimes get forgotten when budget cuts are discussed.
“If you’re talking about peoples’ jobs, it’s not as easy as saying if you cut salaries – AKA people – that somehow the town saves,” he said. “That is not true.”
Discussions during last week’s School Committee meeting indicated that a Hanson official had put the town’s free cash at $1.4 million. Both Select Board Chair Laura FitzGerald-Kemmett and Kinsherf were emphatic in pointing out that it is nowhere near that amount.
“There’s only so many things we can do to fund this budget, FitzGerald-Kemmett said, ticking off the options. They are: asking for an override again; funding it via free cash; funding some of the gap with free cash and make modest cuts at Town Hall and other departments; fund a bit more with free cash and make; use of free cash and more drastic cuts; free cash or even more drastic cuts or just cuts.
In fact, Hanson’s available free cash is $627,000. To pay $350,000 for the assessment would perilous, FitzGerald-Kemmett said.
“Both towns have to coordinate, otherwise there’s a disconnect and there’s a path,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said of Whitman’s Town Meeting rejected an override, meeting it’s assessment with a transfer of $509,212 from free cash. Hanson Town Meeting also rejected an override.
“Now we’ve got this dissonance, I’ll call it,” she said.
The issue went back to the School Committee, which recertified the same budget figure to go back to town officials for funding.
It was a move that left most Hanson officials frustrated and Weeks livid.
“Of the last School Committee meeting, how many of the Hanson representatives voted for the assessment?” he asked.
“All of them,” FitzGerald-Kemmett and Board member Ann Rein said, practically in unison.
“Going into Town Meeting, I heard over and over again, ‘We’re going to let the people decide,’” Weeks went on. “Over 100 people said, “No, we don’t want that,’ and then when it got kicked back they said, all of them unanimously said, they wouldn’t move on it.”
He lauded the hard work of Kinsherf and the Finance Committee, but repeatedly called the School Committee representatives on their “hollow words” and challenged them to show their solutions.
“The schools have proven they don’t want to be a good partner to us, so we’re going to have to take this on the chin, again,” Sullivan said. “But if it comes right down to it, we’re talking about services.”
Board member David George said the school department should be making layoffs.
“I know one of the things that people have been saying is the Select Board should just say no to the School Committee,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “That’s not an option. We can’t just say no.”
If the Select Board did nothing, the assessment is de facto approved, she explained.
“It is in effect without us having any power to determine how to pay, or having any input from voters,” she said. “The Select Board doesn’t set the assessment. All that we are able to do is propose from whence the funds will come to pay for that.”
FitzGerald-Kemmett and Weeks were among those Select Board members who said voters with budget concerns should be speaking to and attending meetings of the School Committee.
“We have no ability to lower our own assessment,” she said. “If we had that ability, we would have done it before now – we wouldn’t be here.”
“We’re not talking about the elephant in the room,” said Board member Ann Rein. “People have to get involved with the School Committee and they have to make their wishes known to the School Committee, because we can’t fix it.”
Both boards are elected separately with their own mission in serving the public. FitzGerald-Kemmett said sometimes those paths are followed harmoniously and sometimes it is more difficult. She added that communication with the district has not been the same in recent years. School Committee Chair Bob Hayes and Superintendent Dr. Ruth Gilbert-Whitner were regular visitors to the Select Board during budget season, but she said that is missing now.
Board member Ed Heal noted the voters’ confusion about the ballot question.
“Most people believe the question is moot after Town Meeting,” he said.
FitzGerald-Kemmett said Town Meeting isn’t voting a dollar amount, but decides the dollar amount, and the ballot question decides if it will be paid via a proposition 2 ½ override.
“In this case, you could have something weird happen,” she said. If an override fails at Town Meeting, but passes on the ballot, the opportunity opens for more options next year.

HANOVER – A project to build a new South Shore Tech building, in order to meet the educational and workplace needs of this century, is ready to take the next step forward.
The Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA), at its April 24 Board of Directors meeting, voted to authorize the South Shore Regional Vocational School District to move to the next phase of its high school construction project. The district now officially enters the Schematic Design phase, where its project team will continue to develop detailed plans for a proposed new 900 student building at 476 Webster St., Hanover.
“We’re very excited the MSBA invited us to go onto the next step in the process, which is preferred schematic design,” Superintendent-Director Dr. Thomas J. Hickey said this week. “It’s basically a six-month window [during which] our architect, working with our project team to refine and develop designs for the school.”
Those designs will be reviewed by MSBA on Oct. 30 for the decision on what the project is valued at and how much MSBA will reimburse the district. Bringing Marshfield into the district – even with increased enrollment – should help each member town’s cost share, Hickey said.
Approved in February by the SST Building and School committees, the design being reviewed had been referred to as “New Construction 2.0” for 900 students.
The district’s homework assignment between now and August, according to Hickey, is to start refining numbers during the design refinement phase.
“Right after we selected the design, and the enrollment number, the design team has been [doing] some preliminary work,” Hickey said.
“While there is never a perfect financial time for such projects, South Shore has served students since 1962 and it is the second oldest regional vocational school in Massachusetts. Its infrastructure and systems need attention,” said School Building Committee Chair Bob Heywood, who also serves as Hanover’s representative to the SST School Committee. “We have a waiting list that is only growing, and we have expanded our district to include the town of Marshfield in an effort to share costs. We look forward to having a quality design ready for further review by the MSBA in the fall.”
The district will be hiring a construction manager in May to help with the final schematic design. A construction manager will provide suggestions for more cost-effective ways to construct the building.
The MSBA, meanwhile, is beginning to interview participants in the school’s shops as well as academic departments, facilities and administration personnel to “zoom in” on what is now a “very rough, conceptual plan,” as Hickey described it.
“We know what the shell is going to look like and how the different spaces are going to be laid out,” he said. “We make shop number estimates.”
From there, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s (DESE) minimum recommended square footage guidelines based on employers’ stated need and projected enrollment.
Hickey said a lot of SST’s programs fit that description, especially the manufacturing shop, which has a lot of new equipment, so – even if there were no more students enrolled, that shop has a need for more space for the machinery used.
New program plans would also be reviewed by DESE.
“It’s not an overreach,” he said. “We have a sense of what our demand is right now, we have a sense of what shops would take more kids if there was more space. … I know which programs have waiting lists. I also know which programs are very tight for space.”
The district also has to submit viability documentation to DESE, to verify the need for programs either enlarged or added. SST is planning to add veterinary science and plumbing with the construction of a new school. Hickey said that, without a new school, veterinary science could not be offered and plumbing could only be offered as a small add-on to the HVAC program.
“It’s showing the need for it and also validating that what we’re currently offering gives kids a job or post-secondary pathway after graduation,” Hickey said. “We should not be running programs for career pathways that don’t lead anywhere in our region.”
Industry data also shows that, while a given industry might not be growing, some might be “graying out,” needing new people to fill retirements.
“While the industry’s not expanding, who’s taking these jobs?” he said. “I think that message is resonating, and people are in fact, at a younger level, seeing this as an alternative for their high school experience. All the while, it doesn’t mean that they can’t go to college.”
Refined decisions on the placement of instructional spaces, safety and security measures, landscaping of fields and parking will be made over the next four months.
The hiring of a construction manager this month will help make a more affordable plan by advising architects as they create the final design. That position will be paid for under already earmarked feasibility study funds.
The district is also committed to providing preliminary tax impact projections for member towns, and while the amounts won’t be finalized until Fall 2024 officials are prioritizing the importance of informing taxpayers on impacts at the town and household level early in the process, Hickey noted.
So, where does the project go from here?
● April-August 2024: The designers will complete the Schematic Design phase, making revisions along the way and submitting the proposed design and budget in late August
● August-October 2024: MSBA reviews Schematic Design Submission
● October 30, 2024: MSBA Board approval, if on track, will include final total project budget and precise amounts of the MSBA grant for the project.
● January 25, 2025: District-wide ballot question to determine local support for the project. “District-wide” means that all the votes are tallied and combined from each town and the total number of yes and total number of no votes are compared to determine the outcome.
In terms of how district communities will fund the project if approved in January 2025, Hickey points out: “Each town will determine how to fund the project. My sense is that most of our communities will suggest a debt exclusion approach, but that is a local decision. We stand ready to provide information as often as we need to keep residents in our district towns fully informed.”
As of now, the project is estimated at $283.6 million, with about $107 million in state subsidy expected, bringing the anticipated local share to around $176.6 million. Using these preliminary projections, it would put the first year of interest-only borrowing, FY26, at about $700,000 shared between the nine towns.
The amounts will increase for FY27-FY29 when entering the construction phase, with about 60 percent bonding in FY27, 90 percent bonding in FY28, and 100 percent bonding in FY29. If this all goes to plan the new South Shore Tech would open for the 2028-2029 school year.
Separate from this MSBA process, and prior to a project vote in January 2025, the district School Committee is making plans to bring a regional agreement amendment to the member towns in Fall 2024 to change how debt shares are apportioned, moving from a fixed amount to a four-year rolling average based on actual student enrollment. “The idea is that a ‘pay as you go model’ reflecting gradual changes in enrollment is a more fair system of apportioning debt shares over a 30 year period,” Hickey said.

Whitman’s Select Board voted on Tuesday, April 23 to close the warrant for Town Meeting after removing two articles deemed unnecessary. The warrant includes dual budget to present to the annual Town Meeting to fund town departments while offering an override to close a $509,212 gap in the W-H Regional School District assessment.
Vice Chair Dan Salvucci attended the meeting virtually by phone.
Select Boards in both towns again reviewed their warrants in preparation for the Monday, May 6 town meetings. Hanson’s Select Board, which had already closed the warrant, held its annual run-through of the warrant at it’s meeting Tuesday night.
One side of Whitman’s budget is marked recommended by the Select Board with an override, including a 5 percent increase over last year’s assessment for the W-H Regional School District. The balance of the certified district assessment of $509,212 included in a warrant article for an override.
The second column of the dual budget includes Select Board recommendation without an override, which would include the district’s full certified assessment of 7.87 percent over last year, however reductions in staff in several departments were necessary in order to balance that budget without an override.
“The budget, in both scenarios, do not include any one-time funds to balance the budget,” said Town Administrator Mary Beth Carter. “As many of you know, the use of one-time funds to balance the budget is not recommended.”
The amount to be placed on the override, if it is voted at Town Meeting and the Town Election is $509,212 and the estimated tax increase, based on the current average residential single-family home with an assessed value of $470,190 is $95.38 a year, Carter said.
Board member Shawn Kain also provided an updated financial outlook for the town.
“For some of us, who have been living the budget over the last couple of months, we’ve been trying to stay in tune with this, but we know for an everyday person this stuff can be overwhelming,” he said.
With the permission of the moderator, the board is planning to discuss the override question first at Town Meeting, Kain outlined.
“What we decide at the very beginning of Town Meeting will kind of set our course of action for the rest of Town Meeting,” he said. “We want people to vote yes [on the override question]. That’s formally our recommendation. We want people to vote yes to put the override on the ballot. If you agree with the override or not, we want it to go to the ballot.”
If it is approved at the May 18 town elections, then the appropriation if the full 7.87 percent, with $509,212 coming from new revenue. If it fails at the ballot, “We basically reject the school assessment,” Kain said. It then sends it back to the School Committee, which can lead to some “complex scenarios.”
Chair Dr. Carl Kowalski said, if Hanson voted not to support the override, it would have the same effect.
If Town Meeting votes against placing the override on the ballot, the school assessment would be funded at the full 7.87 percent, however, Kain said, warning that in order to balance the budget at that point, it would have to be taken from other town services.
He also provided some background on how the town got here and “what to expect, moving forward.”
The town should also be proud of the way it has funded education since fiscal 2012. There are more teachers and a better student-to-teacher ratio with a better per-pupil funding level. But enrollment, which is directly connected to state funding, is down.
Current fiscal policy also prioritizes the school department and the budget process will keep the town on sound financial ground while the School Committee unanimously agreed with the plan and leadership in Hanson is on board, he said.
“So an override will be presented to support the school department, but the key point to remember is this – whether you agree with the override or not, we need to support it at Town Meeting and send it to the ballot,” Kain said. “Doing so would ensure we collectively move forward in a way that is financially sound.”
Carter also noted that, if the override failed on Town Meeting floor, it will still be on the ballot – and absentee ballots now going out include it – and the ballot question passes, the town has 90 days to hold another special Town Meeting.
“We’re hoping for sure that this article moves to the ballot,” Carter said. “And that’s all that the article is doing: putting it in front of all the taxpayers to decide.”
“If the override passes, no one-time money is in the budget. If the override fails, no one-time money is in the budget,” Kain said. “That’s why it keeps us on sound financial ground.”
Article 54, which the Select Board proposed to appropriate a sum of money from available free cash to reduce the amount to be raised through taxes in fiscal year 2025, but was not recommended by a unanimous vote of the Finance Committee was left to Town Meeting. An opioid settlement article, deemed unnecessary was also removed from the warrant
“This was a placeholder a couple of months ago,” Carter said of Article 54. “As I was working on the budget, there was a deficit of over $100,000, so I put this in just in case we needed to use free cash.”
She didn’t want to end up in that position because using free cash for that purpose is not recommended as a sound budgeting practice and revenues and additional cuts had not yet been reviewed at that time.
“The budget we have now is a level-funded budget, so this article is not needed for budgeting purposes, for the reason I put it on there, however the Finance Committee is not for the override, [and are] looking for a different way,” Carter said. They have suggested using a different funding source and she was unsure if the article was needed for their overall plans.
“I just wanted to be honest on everything,” she said. “I put it on there because we had a deficit, and we don’t have a deficit.”
While Carter made no recommendations on whether or not to take Article 54 off the warrant, Select Board members Shawn Kain made a motion to remove it.
While Kain said the Finance Committee had good intentions in their vote, he said he argued their vote against recommending Article 54 puts town departments at risk.
He said he likes and is proud of the budget that Carter and Assistant Town Administrator Kathleen Keefe put together and feels strongly that the town should be presented with that plan and make decisions based on that.
“I think what the Finance Committee is doing is undermining that,” he said.
Carter later explained that it was the lack of a specific dollar amount that prompted the Finance Committee’s action.
Kowalski said it also undermines the relationship that the schools and Select Board reached a few weeks ago when the chairs of both town select boards met with Superintended of Schools Jeff Szymaniak and School Committee Chair Beth Stafford.
“They came back toward us and they reduced their assessment with the knowledge that what we woud try to do is to provide for the difference in an override election and they were all for that,” Kowalski said, agreeing that Article 54 should be removed from the warrant. “It was kind of a surprise that the Finance Committee did not support it.”
Board member Laura Howe agreed and commended Carter for the work she has done on the budget and the solid footing she is providing for the town.
“I think we have to give credit to the School Department and to Beth Stafford for approaching us to try to close that divide we were developing between the town and the schools,” Kowalski said. “What the Finance Committee is doing doesn’t help that at all.”
The schools are visibly supporting the override to get the towns through the year.
“I think that the only way the override passes in both towns is if it’s very clear that both [select boards] and the schools agree that this is the right path forward,” Board member Justin Evans said. “Doing anything else doesn’t make sense to achieve what they’re trying to achieve.”
Evans questioned what the Finance Committee’s vote meant.
“They need it to meet their plan, but they’re not recommending it?” he asked.
The previous night, when meeting with the Finance Committee, Carter said she told them that, where the town has a balanced budget, the Select Board may find Article 54 is not needed.
“[Finance Chair] Rick Anderson said, ‘that’s fine, whatever you decide,’” she reported. “They always just vote against the articles if it just says ‘a sum of money’ … until a number is inserted.” Then they give their final recommendations on Town Meeting floor.
“I still think we want this article,” Evans said. “Not for the thing the Finance Committee’s attempting to pull off but because this is our safety net.”
Salvucci also counseled for removing the article.
“We’re taking away the choices of Town Meeting and the public,” he said. “If they want to fund the schools through an override, I think we should leave it on there so they can make that decision.”

WHITMAN – The Select Board, in a brief remote meeting Thursday, April 11, voted 4-0 to place an override question for an additional $509,212 in real estate and personal property taxes on the May 18 Town Election ballot. The override would fund a portion of the fiscal 2025 Whitman-Hanson Regional School District operating expense assessment.
Select Board member Laura Howe was unable to attend.
The cost to the average taxpayer would be $95.38 annually.
Chair Dr. Carl Kowalski said he spoke to both Superintendent of Schools Jeff Szymaniak and School Committee Chair Beth Stafford that morning and “they are definitely supporting this override that we want to place on the ballot.”
“They know that the Board of Selectmen will be, in the town warrant, be asking to place this on the ballot, and they are fully in favor of that,” he said.
The move came after the School Committee certified the $62,930,345 compromise budget – representing – on Monday, April 8 and announced the special remote meeting on Thursday.
The board also voted 4-0 to place a question on the Town Election ballot asking residents to vote on whether the elected treasurer-collector position should become an appointed one.
The present treasurer-collector is in favor of the change.
Town Administrator Mary Beth Carter said Treasurer-Collector Kenneth Litel “wants to speak on this on Town Meeting floor” on May 6.
“He is very much in favor of this,” she said. “Last time this was before the town, it did pass at Town Meeting, it did not pass at the ballot.”
During its regular meeting on Tuesday, April 9 meeting, the Select Board welcomed funds coming into the town coffers as representatives of Plymouth County Commissioners returned to Whitman to make a presentation of $34,000 in ARPA funds for the purchase of a new ambulance for the Fire Department. They had been to a Whitman Select Board meeting only a month or so ago to present $2.2 million in ARPA funds for a water/sewer project.
Commissioner Jared Valanzola, state Sen. Mike Brady and state Rep. Alyson Sullivan-Almeida attended the meeting for what Valanzola said was “for the moment” the final check presentation to Whitman.
“We want to thank Town Administrator Mary Beth Carter for working diligently to secure these funds,” he said. Whitman is the fourth town to reach its allocation cap, according to the commissioners.
“That’s not saying there won’t be more, depending on what other counties do, but you are the fourth town to cross the finish line, in terms of using all these funds,” Valanzola said, repeating his goal that none of the funds be returned to Washington, D.C.
While, he noted there had been some consternation about the county’s potential ability to efficiently handle CARES Act funds the commissioners handled it quicker, cheaper and faster than other counties.
“So far, we’ve done ARPA quicker, cheaper and more effectively,” he said. “We’re currently averaging 1 percent administrative costs, currently the national average is 7 to 10 percent.”
Brady agreed that Plymouth County did an excellent job.
“I know that the administration at the state level at the time didn’t want the county to control the money,” Brady said, adding he and Sullivan had supported the county in administering it.
Sullivan-Almeida thanked the Select Board, in turn, for its hard work.
“I know it’s not easy trying to find initiatives to use the money for, and I think it’s going to be a great thing for the town,” she said, noting she sees a lot of posts on Facebook when an ambulance is not available in town, either because one is out of service or out of town.
“I think this is going to be a tremendous impact for … our residents on the whole, so I want to thank the chief and everyone who’s had a part and parcel on getting the funds,” she said. “I’m very disappointed because I was trying to find more ways to get more money, but unfortunately, we reached that cap. Fingers crossed that we get more money.”
Select Board Vice Chair Dan Salvucci lauded the commissioner’s work.
“You know your county,” he said. “You know the state. You know who you need to contact and we just work so close together. Thank you.”
In other business, both Carter and Kowalski commented on an issue surrounding a letter from Sullivan-Almeida about Senate bill 2628: an Act Validating Results of the Town Election in Whitman of May 20, 2023.
Carter said bond counsel said the special legislation was needed to validate the election result to receive a “green light letter” which allows the town to proceed with borrowing for the DPW building.
Her April 2 letter sought to update the board on the legislation filed by Gov. Maura Healey on March 7 and referred to the Committee on Election Laws. On March 11 the committee began accepting written testimony and Sullivan-Almeida sent a letter of support asking for a favorable vote, which was achieved on March 28 and sent to the Joint Committee on House Steering and Policy Scheduling and on April 1 was reported by that committee for the matter to be placed on the orders of the day for the next sitting of the House of Representatives.
Sulivan-Almeida’s letter continued, saying that she is urging the bill’s passage.
“I would also like to correct the record regarding recent comments by some of the members of the Finance Committee, incorrectly claiming that I had incorrectly filed this bill,” she wrote. “The original legislation, Act 2516, was filed in the Senate by Sen. Brady and was not filed by me.”
She stressed that both she and Brady understood the request for a home rule petition could be filed by either of them and, when Brady did so, they both believed it was filed correctly.
It wasn’t until S2516 when the House was on its third reading of that bill, that Sullivan-Aleida was informed the governor would have to file the bill and that both the House and Senate had to vote on it. She quickly updated Brady and advised the town and, along with Brady, reached out to Gov. Healey’s office on getting the legislation filed.
The bill needed to be filed as a home rule amendment, not a home rule petition and for that reason had to be filed by the governor, instead, Carter said.
“The important thing is the governor actually filed 2628, I believe on the morning of the seventh of March,” Kowalski said. “That is the day after, on March 6 that our Finance Committee voted on sending a letter to the governor asking for action kind of suggesting that action was belated.”
Kowalski said the important consideration is that Sullivan-Almeida and Brady have worked diligently on this since they knew what had to happen.
“We have had unbelievable service from both our senator and our representative,” Kowalski said. “Rep. Sullivan-Almeida has been incredible in the way that she has given us information on a timely basis and pushing to get this done.”
Carter also said she was hopeful to see the issue conclude, noting she had sent the request after the project was approved by the Oct.30,2023 special Town Meeting and received additional funding for the DPW building. She sent a letter requesting the special Town Meeting to both Brady and Sullivan-Alemeida, including backup documentation.
Carter agreed that both legislators have been very helpful.

Within some 26 hours Monday and Tuesday, April 8 and 9, the School Committee certified a $62,930,345 compromise budget that includes some contract non-renewals, retirements, and $250,000 taken from excess and deficiency as well as using $100,000 in Circuit Breaker funds to close the budget gap. Then Whitman and Hanson officials then moved to fill the rest of the budget gap with override questions at town meetings and on the May annual town election ballots.
The two select boards met Tuesday, April 9, with Whitman Select Board planning to meet again today [April 11] on the matter. Voters in each community will take it from there next month.
The scenario was one of the budget-trimming proposals Superintendent of Schools Jeff Szymaniak had put before the School Committee last month.
“We’re not asking for an 11 percent increase here,” Chair Beth Stafford said in her board’s meeting on Monday, April 8. “The 11 percent is the assessment, not the budget increase.”
Stafford added that the assessment to towns increased because the state did not provide the district the increase that they should have.
“It was a very low increase – $100,000 doesn’t go very far, as you know,” she said.
The School Committee voted 9-0 to approve the compromise, which would increase the operating budget by 4.04 percent. David Forth was absent from the meeting.
“Instead of being well over $1 million for both towns, if we kept the assessment as it is, it would be down to about $509,212 for Whitman and [$372,141 for Hanson],” Stafford said. “In looking at their towns, [the officials] felt those would have a better chance at passing because it would be a smaller amount. … We know it’s a Band-Aid. I know the towns are thinking about larger overrides or doing something else, we can also look at other things we can do [in the future].”
Hanson’s override would ask the voters to support a $372,141 or 2.68 percent over the 5 percent that town’s officials had indicated was feasible, and Whitman’s override would be $509,212 or 3.87 percent over the 5-percent assessment increase town officials had planned for. The Hanson Select Board voted 4-1 – member Ed Heal was unable to attend because he was traveling – to place the article and ballot question but voted to refer the issue to Town Meeting rather than make a recommendation one way or the other.
“It’s their tax money,” Hanson Select Board Vice Chair Joe Weeks said. “I want them to figure out what is the best use of their tax money. I refuse to cut any operating jobs, positions or line items to fund this. … I don’t think we should be influencing them in any way.”
Hanson’s 7.68-percent assessment increase represents $14,974,736. Based on the average home assessed value of $470,190 in fiscal 2024, Whitman taxpayers would see an annual tax increase of $95.38, according to Carter.
Hanson taxpayer would see an annual increase of $94.98 annually based on an average home assessed value of about $499,000 in fiscal 2024 to fund the override there. Hanson has plotted out the tax impact for a range of home values on the town website, hanson-ma.gov.
The original assessment increase for Whitman had been 11.3 percent and Hanson’s had been close to 10.2 percent.
The Whitman Select Board, meeting the same night, heard Town Administrator Mary Beth Carter announce that the board would meet virtually at 12:30 p.m., today [Thursday, April 11] to vote on the question pertaining to the override article being placed on Whitman’s Town Meeting warrant and on the Town Election ballot. Whitman’s 7.787 percent assessment total is $19,135,687.
Whitman FinComm opposes move
The Whitman Finance Committee, also meeting Tuesday, unanimously voted not to support the school budget as Chair Rick Anderson termed it a lose-lose proposition for the schools.
“They came down a little over $900,000,” said Hanson Select Chair Laura FitzGerald-Kemmett during her board’s meeting Tuesday night. She repeated Szymaniak’s admonition that the budget would not negatively affect educational outcomes, but that they “needed to dig in in the interest of trying to meet everybody halfway.”
“It’s not our job to vote the assessment or even approve the assessment that is handed to us by the School Committee,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “But we do need to decide how we fund it, if voters want to do that. … This [budget scenario] was always on the table.”
She noted that the board had not wanted to make dire cuts to town personnel, so in order to do that, they have been talking about an override that is specifically for the schools, presenting it in the warrant as 5 percent being what the town can afford, and the budget for the schools would include an override.
“I don’t think anyone is leaving feeling victorious, but I do think it’s definitely better than it was a week ago.
Stafford outlined the meeting she and Superintendent of Schools Jeff Szymaniak had on Monday, April 1 with town administrators Mary Beth Carter of Whitman and Lisa Green of Hanson as well as select board chairs Laura FitzGerald Kemmett of Hanson and Dr. Carl Kowalski of Whitman.
“It was a good meeting,” Stafford said of the meeting with administrators and select board chairs. “It went about an hour and a half, almost. I do want to say they were not trying to micromanage us. They were not putting us down. They were understanding of what our concerns were, too.”
She said that she and Szymaniak felt the session was “very collaborative” and that the group tried to come up with something that would work, hopefully, but that such an outcome would depend on what the School Committee decided.
“I would like to remind the board, because some people have said we are going backwards, that we haven’t progressed, that we haven’t had any new progress,” Stafford said. “And I want to remind everybody that we certainly have. We’ve seen that in the last couple of months with all the data on the students’ progress alone. We’ve advanced, we’ve come forward.”
Stafford also emphasized that the district has, in fact come forward with new programs, such as Innovation Pathways to prepare students for the outside world in the medical and health as well as business fields. The district has also added curriculum for grades one through 10.
“What I’m going to suggest does not impact any student growth and it, hopefully, might be the best way of getting through this year,” Stafford said. “We have talked with them about more conversations forward with the town, too, and things that they have decided that they need to do, but we all know is that one of the main problems is the state.”
The district received “a little over $100,000” from the state for fiscal 2025, Stafford said, adding that representatives in the General Court must do more. She also reminded the public that the district is like it’s own municipality, with it’s own health insurance, maintenance and facilities costs – as any community does.
“We knew both sides couldn’t do much of anything without an override,” she said. “The issue was, if we’re going to do an override – what size?”
Budget impact on learning
“This was a level-service budget,” Stafford said. “This did not include anything else.”
Szymaniak had presented the different budget tiers and the assessment costs they carried last month. The tier voted on Monday was the first on that list, which gave back about $900,000 and calls for not filling non-renewals of some contracts and retirements.
“These positions would not affect student scores, would not affect the young students’ class sizes that everybody was so concerned about,” Stafford said. “It would be a loss of positions, but positions that Jeff felt could be absorbed.”
Stafford also alluded to questions from the public on whether the interventionists hired to help students transition back to classrooms after the isolation and remote learning during the COVID pandemic were necessary.
“I think that everybody could see that the interventionists made a difference,” she said. “All our scores went up and they continue to go up. That would put us backwards if we couldn’t have them anymore.”
Residents have also questioned recent hires.
Seven of the positions recently filled by the school district are now required by the state, including English Language Learners (ELL) teachers or tutors and the district also has to retain E&D and Circuit Breaker funds for midyear special education student enrollments or placements.
School Committee Vice Chair Christopher Scriven said Monday that he was interested in hearing what some of the discussions held during the meeting with town officials on April 1 about the future.
“How does this not put us right back in the same position next year?” he asked. “I’m curious to know what, if any, plans are in the works for the future?”
Stafford said Hanson Town Administrator Lisa Green has discussed her town’s consideration of a $5 million operational override next year as recommended by their Madden Report. While Carter has not specifically stated her town’s plan, there is also “discussion ongoing with them.”
Stafford also said she did not think a large override would pass this year and could cost upwards of 20 positions if it should fail.
“The real problem is coming from the state,” Scriven said. “We’re not doing anything to move forward here.”
He asked if there was any push back from the towns on whether the shortfall is due to anything other than a failure of the state to adequately fund schools and asked what the towns’ legislative team was doing to push the state to adequately fund schools, especially regional districts.
“If we look at the 5 percent assessment that the town’s kind of lock us into, we’re never going to get out of this with a .0001-percent increase from the state every year,” Szymaniak said. “We’re just not. It’s not going to happen.”
Whitman Select Board member Shawn Kain argued that, to say the state does not adequately fund schools is something of a misconception, however.
“Through their eyes, they’re giving us too much state aid, and they’ve given us too much state aid for the last period of time,” he said. “Once we come out of the hold-harmless situation, then we get back into the typical scenario and they start to fund us with state aid that’s proportional to our budget.”
Both Scriven and Fred Small acknowledged that the current budget practices are putting an undo burden on taxpayers, especially those on fixed incomes. Small again advocated for a five-year plan to better demonstrate the need to taxpayers.
Hillary Kniffen reminded the board they have already done that and agreed the problem is the state funding and a misunderstanding among local taxpayers that the schools are overspending.
Member Dawn Byers asserted there is more of a revenue collection problem on the part of the towns than a budgeting problem with the schools.
“To recognize the concerns about the taxpayers, we’re only doing them a further disservice by using E&D of $250,000,” she said. “Because when you go to borrow for a middle school building, that interest rate’s going to go up because the district has used E&D.”
She also said, while it’s comforting that education won’t be impacted, she is still concerned about what positions will be cut.
Stafford also said residents do not realize that $600,000 of the money taken out of E&D last year went toward helping the district recover from a damaging data breach the year before, on which recovery work is still being done. That was done so the amount not covered by insurance was not billed to the towns.
“We’re not unique,” said Committee member Glen DiGravio, attending remotely. “This is happening all over the state. Every town’s going to be voting on an override, pretty much… I think this is a fair compromise proposal. I think the motion before us is something that gets us through.”
He said he knows the Committee wants to fix next year and the next five years, but they have to fix this year first.
“If an override is going to happen, no matter what, I think making it as painless as possible is what we should be doing now,” he said, advocating Szymaniak’s proposal.
Hanson’s questions
In Hanson, Weeks asked a question many residents have been wondering about: What happens if the override fails?
Hanson Town Counsel Kate Feodoroff said if either town rejected the budget while the other approves it, that is considered a rejection and the School Committee may decide not to accept that, which would force another town meeting. If Hanson, for example, were to approve only the lesser amount and Whitman approves the greater amount, School Committee may opt to accept the lesser amount and adjust Whitman’s portion accordingly, Feodoroff said.
The Committee is, however, also able to force a Super Town Meeting, attended by residents, and would have to work within a 1/12 budget until it is settled.
FitzGerald-Kemmett summed up for her board that it seemed that, at the first budget certification vote in March, she felt the School Committee felt that, since the two towns were discussing an override, “We’re going for the gusto, we’re going to go for the maximum,” she said. “I’m not saying that for dramatic effect. I think their feeling was, ‘If they’re going to do an override anyway, and that’s how we’re going to fund this delta between the 5 percent and whatever we vote, then, let’s not cut back on anything and keep as much E&D and Circuit-Breaker money as we can.’ I am not defending this, nor am I trying to condemn them. I’m just stating this is the perspective.”
She also stressed that the School Committee is elected to do the job of advocating for students.
“We’re elected to do a different job,” she said. “That’s why, at budget time, it may feel like we’re at different ends of the spectrum, but they’re doing what they feel they need to do. … We’re trying to balance the town’s budget, and I don’t want to say never the twain shall meet, because I’m eternally hopeful that the twain shall meet at some point.”
FitzGerald-Kemmett also said the forensic audit is also continuing, with a meeting planned for this month perhaps as early as this week.

HANSON – Town and school district officials have been talking, and – while the school budget gulf has not yet been bridged – there is a clearer focus on the budget picture.
As the Select Board reviewed the warrant on Tuesday, April 2, Chair Laura FitzGerald-Kemmett sounded a note of cautious optimism that the gap could be bridged, or an override to span that difference would be needed. Last week the frustration over the school budget was strong [see stroy below].
Vice Chair Joe Weeks, during the warrant articles review, suggested the board not vote on recommending non-financial articles until next week.
“Does it make sense to put off this conversation until we actually know how much money we’re going to have?” he said. “Wouldn’t this conversation be better to have next week once FinCom has gone through their recommendations?”
They proceeded through the review voting only to place several financial articles until the Tuesday, April 9 meeting.
Select Board Chair Laura FitzGerald-Kemmett, noting that “diplomacy is not my forte,” described the meeting she attended with Superintendent of Schools Jeff Szymaniak, School Committee Chair Beth Stafford and Whitman Select Board Chair Dr. Carl Kowalski on Monday, April 1.
“We may be having additional conversations about the school assessment and where that is by next week, which potentially could be at a different place than it is right now,” she said.
Weeks said without a firm number on several articles, “a lot of this is guessing.”
FitzGerald-Kemmett said the board could either place and recommend non-monetary articles, place everything and remove any articles, not supported before the warrant closes. The board did, however, vote to place and recommend an article that increases zoning fines to give them more bite.
The board opted to place everything that had no monetary effect. It was in keeping with a caution sounded by Finance Committee Chair Kevin Sullivan.
“I imagine we’ll be preparing for the worst and stripping a lot of things that we’d like to do out of the articles,” Sullivan said as his committee prepared to review the warrant. “We will not be recommending a large majority of things we can put off.”
FitzGerald-Kemmett asked if the lens they might be looking through is different if the school assessment were to come down or did Sullivan still feel it would be problematic.
“I think we need a safety net, always, so I still think there are things we’re going to not recommend in the articles as well as we’re still going to make cuts to the budget,” Sullivan said. “Not enough to overcome the deficit, but enough to trim things out of the current budget that are ‘nice to haves.’”
The board voted to place the article but has not yet voted on whether to recommend it.
Balancing the budget, on paper, will take using $858,000 in free cash and keeping the schools at a 5-percent increase Kinsherf said. There would be $248,000 left in free cash if that scenario proves accurate.
“We can balance the budget as we currently have it,” he said. “The thought was that next [thing] we’d be thinking of is an override above the 5 percent that the schools want.”
“We’re not going to recommend paying more than 5 percent,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “We are at 5 percent. We are not moving beyond 5 percent.”
That said, she described the meeting with Whitman and school officials as having created an “understanding among everybody that, really, the towns are in a tough position” and can’t go above the 5 percent assessment increase without a school override.
“It would still be more of a partnership and much appreciated if the School Committee could take another look at the assessment that they’ve given to the towns and they have taken that under advisement and they will take it back to their School Committee,” she said. “It was a cordial conversation, everybody understood where everybody else was coming from [and] we basically said 5 percent is where it’s at.”
During that conversation, FitzGerald-Kemmett recalled that Szymaniak made a good point that “our 5 percent increase on their assessment really translates to a 3.8 percent increase” to the schools because the assessment is only a portion of the budget.
“Regardless of what we hear back from the School Committee, unless they say, ‘We’re going to go straight 5 percent, which I’m not anticipating is going to happen,” … we’re going to have a school override for the delta between the 5 percent and whatever the assessment is,” she said. “Whitman is doing the same thing.”
While she is hoping that the override is reduced and would go a long way toward helping people feel that at least some work has been done and “some ownership and mutual respect has been exhibited by everybody trying to work together on this.”
“It truly is a math problem,” she said. “Nobody was able to commit, I didn’t commit to anything, we just talked.”
Select Board member Ed Heal asked if they had to know how an override would look and if anything was being drafted.
Language for the article is preliminary according to Green who added it would be reorganized after the school district’s decision.
“Until a vote is taken by the School Committee, we ought not to be putting anything into our [warrant],” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “I don’t think we should have a dollar amount at all in this. We know, if it’s anything in excess of 5 percent, whatever that dollar amount is will be in here.”
The choice is sticking to 5 percent or doing a school override for the delta between the two numbers, she said.
Schools are far from the only budget the Select Board is concerned about.
Town Administrator Lisa Green said the town also has, within the articles for the special Town Meeting Warrant, the ability to use ARPA funds for an $85,000 pond management study, for example, which could be tabled until October. The board agreed to delete that article from the May Town Meeting warrant.
Other financial
articles
The board also placed and recommended the Camp Kiwanee budget article, which largely shifts funds from retained earnings to the budget plan, according to Camp Kiwanee Commission Chair Frank Milisi. Town Accountant Eric Kinsherf echoed that by noting $50,000 would be transferred from receipts and the remainder from retained earnings.
“At the end of the day, we will have the side-by-side comparison of what the [Select Board] recommends and what FinCom recommended,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said.
The board had to cut the $15,000 article for an animal shelter renovation that was planned in addition to boosting the animal control officer to a full-time position. The board has discussed in depth earlier this year that the ACO has driven animals to the Lakeville shelter, which takes upwards of 40 minutes for a round-trip or brings animals, especially livestock, to his own property.
Weeks concerned about the potential liability of the ACO taking animals home.
“To me, I would like to see this handled as a project plan,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “I feel it needs flushing out.”
She tasked Green with doing more research to obtain solid numbers on the cost in light of Select Board member Ann Rein’s comment that she had toured Hanson’s shelter that day and determined it would likely cost much more than $15,000 to renovate.
“Bring it back in October with a little more meat on the bone,” she said.

WHITMAN – Zero raises, layoffs, closing departments, and using more free cash to balance the town budget could be the cost to Whitman of a failure to reach accord on a school budget, according to Town Administrator Mary Beth Carter.
“As I really got into it, I didn’t think that I would have to hit every single one of those to reach the number,” she said. “I had to decimate the budget and the only reason is because of the difference the School [Committee] certified from 5 to 11 percent. Call it what you want, but had they come in at 5 percent I would not be suggesting an override this year.”
She told the Select Board on Tuesday, March 26 that everything is on the table as the town seeks to balance the budget following the School Committee’s vote to certify a $63.5 million level-service budget last week. The Select Board has to vote on whether to place an override on the Town Election ballot at its next meeting, Tuesday, April 9.
“These reductions in the budget are drastic and debilitating to the town if an override is not put forth at the May annual Town Meeting,” Carter said during a joint meeting between the Select Board and the Finance Committee on Tuesday, March 26, as she listed the cuts she had to make as she worked all weekend to balance the fiscal 2025 budget.
“We’re here to listen,” said Finance Chair Rick Anderson, who said his committee had completed its meetings with budget managers of all departments and had scheduled meetings with town boards that night. “I know Mary Beth and [Assistant Town Administrator] Kathy [Keefe] are working very diligently on a challenging budget.”
Carter began by emphasizing her connection and commitment to Whitman schools – and that of her family, from her six siblings to her three children and three grandchildren, who “are or will be attending schools in the district.”
“Four of my siblings have spent their careers in education and administrators at the grade school level, the middle school level and the high school level,” she said. “I’ve always been pro-schools and pro-education, so for anyone to think otherwise, they would be mistaken.”
She said, however, that she is “disheartened” because the efforts of her office to hold meetings between the town and the school district earlier than in past years, failed to have a more positive and collaborative certified operational assessment for Whitman.
“I am only speaking for myself and not for the [Select Board], when I say that I feel that this year and every year going forward, that the district should certify their budget understanding that any amount that the district certifies each year over 5 percent, will need to be placed on an annual Town Meeting warrant as an override article and a subsequent ballot question at the annual Town Election for an operational override for the schools,” she said. “It would simplify the budget process each year for everyone.”
She added it would leave the question of increasing funding for the district up to the voters.
“The town has worked very hard to reduce all department budget requests for fiscal 2025 to ensure that an operational override is not put forth to our taxpayers his year,” Carter said. “I feel that there is, however, some light at the end of the tunnel.”
That light takes the form of an unfunded pension liability the town has been funding through Plymouth County Retirement, expected to be retired in 2029. The expected new annual amount will be “significantly lower than the assessments currently budgeted,” she explained.
In fiscal 2025, however, that assessment is $3,208,051. But by fiscal 2030, Carter hopes $1.5 million of $2.5 million saved will be put toward Whitman’s OPEB liability, allowing the remainder to be used to fund town departments.
But for this year, she painted a bleaker picture.
While the School Committee is charged with putting forth a budget for the district, I am charged with putting forth a budget for the [Select Board] that is balanced and meets the needs of all departments,” she said. That charge takes the shape of two warrant articles for the May Town Meeting.
The budget certified by the School Committee on March 20 with an assessment increase of 11.03 percent to Whitman, Carter said she has been tasked to present a dual budget to Town Meeting – the 5 percent projected increase the town anticipated as a school assessment as a “TA budget” and an 11.03 percent assessment increase offered as an “alternate budget,” reflecting the budget certified by the School Committee.
The alternate budget reflects the “potential impacts and reductions necessary if the district’s certified budget increase is put forth without an override,” Carter said, providing a stark breakdown of what that might mean.
Those cuts would mean “all non-union employee raises were eliminated for fiscal 2025, we laid off the following positions: three police officers, three firefighters, one DPW employee, one employee in the clerk’s office, one employee in the treasurer-collector’s office, one employee in the assessor’s office, two part-time [Council on Aging] employees, our technology specialist, we’ve also added in closing the library,” Carter said. “We also included in that budget, shutting down the Recreation Department.”
Three other full-time town employees would see their jobs cut to part-time hours.
Closing the library would also carry the financial sting of lost state aid as the town would lose its library certification and would need to operate for a full year on reopening in compliance before being certified again. Whitman is expected to receive $40,817 in library state aid for fiscal 2024.
Chair Dr. Carl Kowalski echoed Carter’s connection to the schools.
“I’ve always been a schools guy, also,” he said. “I’m as concerned as she is about what’s going on this year.” A 14-year past member of the School Committee, Kowalski said a sister and his son had also served on the School Committee.
“We are school people and this is a painful year that we’re looking at right now,” he said.
Select Board member Justin Evans commended Carter’s work, noting she had been working all weekend on the budget.
“To balance a budget in just a couple of days …” he said.
Anderson deferred to Kathleen Ottina for the Finance Committee’s position, noting that she has done a lot of work reviewing the school budget.
“There is money to be found in this school budget that does not affect the quality of education for children,” she said, emphasizing that some examples of non-sustainable small class sizes could be adjusted while leaving the ESSER positions alone.
Ottina expressed dismay that an email she sent to school officials with recommendations on non-mandated busing had, so far, gone unanswered. In the letter she identified two items where costs could be trimmed, one of them being non-mandated busing, citing her service for the past two years as a non-voting member of the Regional Agreement Committee.
“My one goal was to have the transportation language in the RA amended to reflect working that would more fairly assess Whitman for non-mandated busing,” she said. “Right now, the School Committee has the ability to just vote busing – mandated or non-mandated – and split it 60-40.”
They could also split it out and bill the towns for their non-mandated busing costs. The current configuration costs Whitman at least $40,000 – or $80,000 in fiscal 2025.
She said that, while considering herself a school advocate, she was disheartened by last Wednesday’s certification vote.
“They didn’t touch a penny,” Ottina said. “They didn’t touch a single item, knowing that both towns are in trouble.”
She likened it almost to a game of “chicken” to see which side blinks first.
“I don’t think we can call for a school override,” she said. “It’s not within our purview. … It’s time to call someone’s bluff.”
She said she could not support the budget as presented by the School Committee.
“They have some work to do,” Ottina said. “If we go to Town Meeting prepared to defend the budgets that our town departments need, and they haven’t made any work to get to the table and negotiate, then I don’t know what happens. … It’s a disaster.”
Select Board member Shawn Kain said it is a difficult conversation.
“Honestly, I think communities are judged by how well they have difficult conversations,” he said. “We’re talking numbers and accounting, but behind those numbers are people.”
His viewpoint was that the School Committee was saying if an override is needed, why not seek a level-service override. He didn’t see it as a way to get a budget passed at the expense of the towns.
“If we just clearly discuss our perspective and lay out what we’re trying to do, it’s a reasonable plan and I’m hoping they get on board with that,” Kain said.
Carter said the only reason she feels an operational override would be needed this year is because of the difference in the 5 percent operating assessment and the 11.03 percent put forward.
“I did what the schools did as well,” she said. “I took everybody who would be laid off or had their positions reduced and I added in [$400,000 in] unemployment costs.”
Carter also asked what departments could do to increase fees. The Fire Department is raising ALS 1 fees, the treasuer/collector is increasing demand fees to $25 from $25, she also asked the Select Board office and Police Department to increase fees as well.